-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Signed distance calculation against concave triangle meshes #3220
Comments
We have now the capability to load static meshes. You can see a very simple test here. |
Related to #9779 |
Refresh; we're still missing this. Even though we have partial support for One could hack it by registering a zero-radius sphere for the query point. and then calling |
This feature has come up again in the context of #14431, as parts of our collision checking pipeline require point signed distance queries and thus do not currently support mesh geometries. Specifically:
|
We have the functionality to compute unsigned distance from a point to a triangular mesh (that's how we make hydro pressure fields for potentially non-convex meshes) here:
I would like to see |
This is a relevant paper: They use angle-weighted pseudonormals of the closest features (vertex, edge, or triangle) to do in/out tests with the assumption that we have vertex-to-triangle and edge-to-triangle information. (It doesn't work with triangle soups.) |
A feature I'm finding myself in great need of is the ability to call a function that operates like
collisionDetectFromPoints
, but on a concave mesh. Specifically, I need the ability to load in a mesh from a .obj file and query the shortest distance from a point to the surface of the mesh, with the distance having negative sign if the point is inside the mesh. (Having this functionality wrapped up to the level of a RigidBodyTree would be nice but not necessary.)Before I go trying to twist the collision code to try to support this, is this feature in the roadmap / in progress by anyone? Any advice on a minimum-energy way to get this working?
@amcastro-tri maybe?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: