intersection of two triangle meshes - geometry

Currently I am looking for an efficient algorithm to compute the intersection of two triangle meshes. I have searched over the internet, but haven't found valuable materials. The book Real-Time Collision Detection is a helpful book but is too complex for my task. I also found the post:Triangle to triangle collision detection in 3D. However I hope to find a detailed description about the algorithm.
Regards
Jogging

Well it depends on meshes size, testing each triangle in each mesh against the other is only valid in small meshes since it has n^2 complexity.
To work around that most algorithms use
Spatial portioning
first to subdivide the space into smaller ones and then tackles each one separately.
For spatial portioning most algorithms use
OcTrees
or BSPTrees however if you don't need to complicate things you can just subdivide the space into n boxes then check triangle triangle intersection in each box

Related

Finding a non-convex hull around regularly-spaced scatter points [duplicate]

I am currently trying to construct the area covered by a device over an operating period.
The first step in this process appears to be constructing a polygon of the covered area.
Since the pattern is not a standard shape, convex hulls overstate the covered area by jumping to the largest coverage area possible.
I have found a paper that appears to cover the concept of non-convex hull generation, but no discussions on how to implement this within a high level language.
http://www.geosensor.net/papers/duckham08.PR.pdf
Has anyone seen a straight forward algorithm for constructing a non-convex hull or concave hull or perhaps any python code to achieve the same result?
I have tried convex hulls mainly qhull, with a limited edge size with limited success.
Also I have noticed some licensed libraries that will not be able to be distributed, so unfortunately thats off the table.
Any better ideas or cookbooks?
You might try looking into Alpha Shapes. The CGAL library can compute them.
Edit: I see that the paper you linked references alpha shapes, and also has an algorithm listing. Is that not high level enough for you? Since you listed python as a tag, I'm sure there are Delaunay triangulation libraries in Python, which I think is the hardest part of implementing the algorithm; you just need to make sure you can modify the resulting triangulation output. The boundary query functions can probably be implemented with associative arrays.

Algorithm for cutting a mesh using another mesh

I am looking for an algorithm that given two meshes could clip one using another.
The simplest form of this is clipping a mesh using a plane. I've already implemented that by following something similar to what is described here.
What it does is basically inspecting all mesh vertices and triangles with respect to the plane (the plane's normal and point are given). If the triangle is completely above the plane, it is left untouched. If it falls completely below the plane, it is discarded. If some of the edges of the triangle intersect with the plane, the intersecting points with the plane are calculated and added as the new vertices. Finally a cap is generated for the hole on the place the mesh was cut.
The problem is that the algorithm assumes that the plane is unlimited, therefore whatever is in its path is clipped. In the simplest form, I need an extension of this without the assumption of a plane of "infinite" size.
To clarify, imagine that we have a 3D model of a desk with 2 boxes on it. The boxes are adjacent (but not touching or stacked). The user will define a cutting plane of a limited width and height underneath the first box and performs the cut. We end up with a desk model (mesh) with a box on it and another box (mesh) that can be freely moved around/manipulated.
In the general form, I'd like the user to be able to define a bounding box for the box he/she wants to separate from the desk model and perform the cut using that bounding box.
If I could extend the algorithm I already have to an algorithm with limited-sized planes, that would be great for now.
What you're looking for are constructive solid geometry/boolean algorithms with arbitrary meshes. It's considerably more complex than slicing meshes by an infinite plane.
Among the earliest and simplest research in this area, and a good starting point, is Constructive Solid Geometry for Polyhedral Objects by Trumbore and Hughes.
http://cs.brown.edu/~jfh/papers/Laidlaw-CSG-1986/main.htm
From the original paper:
More elaborate solutions extend upon this subject with a variety of data structures.
The real complexity of the operation lies in the slicing algorithm to slice one triangle against another. The nightmare of implementing robust CSG lies in numerical precision. It's easy when you involve objects far more complex than a cube to run into cases where a slice is made just barely next to a vertex (at which point you have the tough decision of merging the new split vertex or not prior to carrying out more splits), where polygons are coplanar (or almost), etc.
So I suggest initially erring on the side of using very high-precision floating point numbers, possibly even higher than double precision to focus on getting something working correctly and robustly. You can optimize later (first pass should be to use an accelerator like an octree/kd-tree/bvh), but you'll avoid many headaches this way in your first iteration.
This is vastly simpler to implement at render time if you're focusing on a raytracer rather than a modeling software, e.g. With raytracers, all you have to do to do this kind of arbitrary clipping is pretend that an object used to subtract from another has its polygons flipped in the culling process, e.g. It's easy to solve robustly at the ray level, but quite a bit harder to do robustly at the geometric level.
Another thing you can do to make your life so much easier if you can afford it is to voxelize your object, find subtractions/additions/unions of voxels, and then translate the voxels back into a mesh. This is so much easier to make robust, but harder to do efficiently and the voxel->polygon conversion can get quite involved if you want better results than what marching cubes provide.
It's a really tough area to do extremely well and requires perseverance, and thus the reason for the existence of things like this: http://carve-csg.com/about.
If someone is interested, currently there is a solution for this problem in CGAL library. It allows clipping one triangular mesh using another mesh as bounding volume. The usage example can be found here.

Generating coordinates for abstract triangulation

I have a piece of abstract triangulation, made entirely out of equilateral triangles, that describes a curved 2d space. As such, some vertices have for example 7 equilateral triangles attached to them. Now I want to draw this as a terrain.
This has to be done in 3d, so I expect a lot of saddle nodes and some cone-like structures. I am currently trying to find a nice algorithm that does this for me, but as of yet I have come out empty handed. In principle you could 'just' solve a large set of quadratic equations that fixes all the distances, but this is unfeasible. I would be content with an algorithm that gives a best approximation.
Any advice?

Given a polygon and a point in 2D, how can one find the feature (vertex or edge) of the polygon closest to the point?

A naive approach is to find, for each edge in the polygon, the point on that edge closest to the given point, and then take the one that's closest. Is there a faster algorithm? My goal is to implement a 2D Super Mario Galaxy-style platformer.
Apparently this can be done with Voronoi regions, as in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ldh2YKobuWo
However, I can't find any Voronoi algorithms that deal with edges as well as points. Ideas?
Calculate the point-line distance for each of the edges, then pick the shortest one. There is no shortcut. This site has a good explanation and even implementations in various languages.
However, finding "the point on that edge closest to the given point" is a computationally unnecessary intermediate result.
If the polygon is convex, then the overhead of the voronoi calculation far exceeds that of the naive approach.
If this is run many times, and each time the point changes slightly, you only need to check 3 segments (think about it: as you move around, assuming many checks, then the closest edge will only change to an adjacent edge)

Quad mesh generation code

I am looking for some sample code (any language) of quadrilateral mesh generation. However, is seems quite a difficult task!
I am not picky, I'd like to mesh at least polygons with holes, nothing fancy! So, we're talking about 2D planar shapes here.
Any hint?
PS. Of course, if it could even handle curved surfaces, I'd be even happier!
Quadrilateral meshing is by no means easy, especially if the elements should be more or less well-formed. There are no algorithms that can deal with any arbitrary shape without deteriorating element shapes. For a whole lot of problem classes, there are algorithms in applied mathematics and computational science books and papers.

Resources