Add RTX Lidar Sensor

[jtigue-bdai]

Description

This PR creates a sensor based on the RTX Lidar:
Fixes #865

Type of change

• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• This change requires a documentation update

Screenshots

Please attach before and after screenshots of the change if applicable.

Checklist

• I have run the pre-commit checks with ./isaaclab.sh --format
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• My changes generate no new warnings
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• I have updated the changelog and the corresponding version in the extension's config/extension.toml file
• I have added my name to the CONTRIBUTORS.md or my name already exists there

[jtigue-bdai]

@Dhoeller19

[kellyguo11]

would it still make sense to do this call?

[jtigue-bdai]

Not in this case the _update_poses in the camera changes the pose in ._data to use the correct convention. This is unnecessary for lidar assuming the lidar pattern rotates about its Z axis.

[kellyguo11]

@jtigue-bdai will you get a chance to look into this one today? I can also try to get this one merged in.

[jtigue-bdai]

I don't think I will be able to get to it today.

[pascal-roth]

What do you think about including some speed information or at least a warning that the RTXLidar is not batched? If I read the code correctly, then there is an annotator created for each environment instance, which will make it very costly when there are multiple environments, which can lead to confusion as all our other sensors are natively batched and, therefore faster

[jtigue-bdai]

What do you think about including some speed information or at least a warning that the RTXLidar is not batched? If I read the code correctly, then there is an annotator created for each environment instance, which will make it very costly when there are multiple environments, which can lead to confusion as all our other sensors are natively batched and, therefore faster

@pascal-roth I have no problem with a warning but isn't the USD camera setup the same way?

[pascal-roth]

oh true, you are correct, then I remembered that incorrectly, in this case I don't think a warning is necessary. Ignore the comment then