Ashasekayi Ra Posted June 12, 2011 Share Posted June 12, 2011 Ok, so I have an arch that I have uploaded with a file I want to use for the physics cage. If I skip Step 1: Analysis and Step 2: Simplification in the physics tab, I can upload the model just fine, set the physics type to "prim" and walk through my arch as expected.However, if I do try to use Step 1 in the physics tab of the uploader, it immediately closes the opening in the arch. Is this expected behavior? Under Step 1, I have "surface" listed as the Method and "normal" in the Quality setting. Smooth is the default 0%. I do not have Close Holes selected. Changing the method and other settings seemed to have no effect. My other question is ... do I need to use Step 1 and Step 2 if the physics mesh that I created is low poly to begin with? (In this arch example, the physics mesh had 16 triangles.) Does the hull generated after Step 1 and 2 somehow make the physics shape more efficient? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maeve Balfour Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I am also having the same problems (currently using release 2.7.3 (232686) - Jun 11 2011 15:48:29 (Project Viewer - Mesh)). I have a test building with multiple doorways, which prior to this, worked fine when uploaded. Now, when I upload the same mesh, the doorways and small openings appear to be closed in the physics hull. Larger openings, for example 8m x 8m or so, appear fine - so it appears mayhaps smaller openings are automatically being closed? Also, I noticed a couple of smaller surfaces of floorspace (about 1m x 3m) appear to have become phantom (I fall through them), whereas previously they were solid (these are located immediately adjacent to doorways which have been affected by the physics issue). I used the same process as I have previously for the physics aspect - the highest LOD of the mesh for the physics (I haven't made a proper physics mesh yet for this build); in step one I use Method-Surface and Quality-High (I didn't use close holes this time around, although previously this worked fine without affecting the doorways; and step 2 for simplification I select Retain%. When rezzed, I set Physics Shape Type as Prim. As far as I can tell, this is possibly a new bug in the uploader? .... UPDATE: Currently I am not able to relog to test further - damned video driver issue keeps crashing me out again (grrrr!). So much for me hoping this latest viewer update fixed my video issues :matte-motes-confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feynt Mistral Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I would guess it depends on the nature of your model, but even if it were a doughnut I would expect the same behavior with a basic enough shape. The physics engine hates concave surfaces. Holes or curved surfaces (no matter how deep, like an archway) in models you would walk through are concave surfaces (unless broken down to simpler parts). Thus the physics assignment process would make it a non-concave surface. I do know that the importer used to do a good job of breaking down a shape, but it's possible that because your archway is so low poly it cannot be broken down further. Try applying a subsurf or multi-res modifier to it and make it two or three times as complex and then see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drongle McMahon Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Ah. You are using Simplify. I find that will nearly always close openings, even with very lax settings. Provided you make a physics mesh that is as simple as it can be, there is no need to simplify. If you use a more complex mesh, such as one of your LOD meshes, so that you need to simplify, then it's very hard to keep openings clear. That is one reason I nearly always use purpose-made physics meshes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashasekayi Ra Posted June 13, 2011 Author Share Posted June 13, 2011 Yea, after some tedious testing, I was able to get it to work when I used seperate planes joined into one object and then decomposed it. And you're right, simplify closed everything and made 1 hull. After all that, I found that my simple low poly LOD cost less when I didn't decompose it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drongle McMahon Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I have found the same thing quite often recently ... the undecomposed costing less. I think something in the calculation may have changed. We really need that physics cost in the upload dialog to start working! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashasekayi Ra Posted June 14, 2011 Author Share Posted June 14, 2011 Agreed! But, I guess we need to be patient. Sooo hard to do though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodzette Coignet Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 @Maeve: Try turning the graphics quality down a bit and turning off shadows and lighting. Not ideal but it lets me log in and upload stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now