[paneendrakumar0]

Summary of Changes

This PR addresses all items in #729 across the entire Interbotix robot family (px100, px150, rx150, rx200, wx200, wx250, vx300, vx300s, wx250s).

(Note: #739 addressed wx200 individually; this PR provides the complete, uniform resolution across all 9 Interbotix models under #729 with unified test coverage).

Key Modifications

1. Gripper Sub-Assembly Partitioning:

   • Specified gripper_link_name="/ee_arm_link" in URDFRobot.__init__ across all 9 models.
   • Partitions the kinematic tree so that the gripper rotary prop and finger joints are treated as a Gripper sub-assembly rather than arm joints.
   • Sets arm degrees of freedom n correctly:
     • px100: $n = 4$
     • px150, rx150, rx200, wx200, wx250, vx300: $n = 5$
     • vx300s, wx250s: $n = 6$
   • Resolves ambiguous multi-link ee_links down to a single mounting link ['/gripper_link'].

2. Gripper Tool Center Point Transform:

   • Set self.grippers[0].tool to the physical tool center point (/ee_gripper_link):
     • SE3(0.05057, 0, 0) for px100, px150, rx150, rx200, wx200, wx250, wx250s.
     • SE3(0.06437, 0, 0) for vx300, vx300s.

3. In-Limit Ready (qr) and Zero (qz) Configurations:

   • Replaced copied Franka Emika Panda configurations with valid in-limit configurations matching each arm's geometry and joint limits:
     • 4-DoF: qr = np.array([0, -0.3, 0.8, -0.5]), qz = np.zeros(4)
     • 5-DoF: qr = np.array([0, -0.3, 0.8, -0.5, 0]), qz = np.zeros(5)
     • 6-DoF: qr = np.array([0, -0.3, 0.8, 0, -0.5, 0]), qz = np.zeros(6)

4. Unit Tests:

   • Expanded tests/test_models.py for all 9 Interbotix models, validating:
     • Expected n (4, 5, or 6).
     • Exactly one end-effector link (/gripper_link).
     • Exactly one gripper attached.
     • qr and qz configurations are 100% within joint limits (qlim).

---

Verification

• Ran unit tests with pytest:

  pytest tests/test_models.py -v

  Result: 31 passed in 3.02s.

• Ran full test suite:

  pytest tests/ --ignore=tests/test_blocks.py

  Result: 765 passed, 82 skipped, 0 failures.

---

Checklist

• Code follows PEP 8 and project style
• Tested with pytest
• All configurations within joint limits
• No breaking API changes

[codacy-production]

Up to standards ✅

🟢 Issues 0 issues

Results:
0 new issues

View in Codacy

🟢 Metrics 0 complexity · 14 duplication

Metric	Results
Complexity	0
Duplication	14

View in Codacy

_{NEW Get contextual insights on your PRs based on Codacy's metrics, along with PR and Jira context, without leaving GitHub. Enable AI reviewer
TIP This summary will be updated as you push new changes.}

[huxiaoyi-ovo]

Thanks for extending #729 across the full Interbotix family!

I checked the bundled Xacro definitions and noticed two small TCP offset discrepancies:

• "px100", "px150", "rx150", "rx200", "wx200", "wx250", "wx250s": the exact offset is "0.023 + 0.027575 = 0.050575 m", rather than "0.05057".
• "vx300", "vx300s": the exact offset is "0.025875 + 0.0385 = 0.064375 m", rather than "0.06437".

Although the difference is only 5 µm, the default TCP should match the URDF exactly.

I'd also suggest adding a regression test for each model:

nt.assert_allclose(
r.fkine(r.qz).A,
r.fkine(r.qz, end="/ee_gripper_link").A,
atol=1e-10,
)

My earlier focused WX200 PR #739 already includes this FK consistency test and the exact offset. You're welcome to incorporate the test with attribution.

I'm happy to collaborate on consolidating the overlapping WX200 changes into one consistent implementation.

[petercorke]

Thank you for extending this across the Interbotix family. The tool-offset points in the review above are good ones. I'm pausing changes that touch grippers while we decide how they should be modeled, see #884, so I won't merge this now. I'll leave it open and come back to it afterwards.