Problem with Physics Mesh for my building

[HaensWoerst]

Hey Folks!

 

I made a building in Cinema4D, exported the collada, so far so good. I then went and created a physics mesh (creating physics from the original model does not work I tested that). I used several Objects (Planes) for that to stay as low poly as possible (screens attached).

However if i try to upload my building with the physics mesh I always get the error that the triangles are too small and I need to simplify. I have no idea what else to simplify. I have different sections in my Physics Mesh. In the end I merged them all together into one mesh. If i upload just one section it works. If i merge two sections it doesnt work anymore. I tried to build 1 coherent single mesh Section from two sections from scratch...not working... I tried to explode all polygons into single objects, not merge them and export like that. SL uploads that but the physics are messed up... it detects just a few walls the other ones are not colliding.

Im lost. I have no idea how to get this working. Has anyone please any Tipps? I could also give the files out so that somebody can have a look over it.. I would also pay for it.

Greetings

 

 

[Chic Aeon]

Aquilla is the star but I made a couple of videos on house physics that might help before she shows up (or someone else). I am off to RL company and not a pro at Planes Physics anyway.

https://www.slartist.com/browse-the-tutorial-chic-videos-1-date.html

 

[ChinRey]

1 hour ago, HaensWoerst said:

However if i try to upload my building with the physics mesh I always get the error that the triangles are too small and I need to simplify.

Can you show us a screenshot from the uploader when you get that message? The degenerate triangles will be marked with black in the preview so they should be easy to identify.

[arton Rotaru]

Yeah, it's hard to tell whats wrong, from just the 2 images and your description.

If you have multiple mesh objects exported in a single dae file, lets say 5. The physics dae file will have to contain the same number of mesh objects, 5.
To make sure the right physics mesh goes to the right visual mesh, you have to follow a specific naming convention, by naming the models inside C4D. The naming convention looks like this. (Just in case, to get another source of errors out of the guessing game.)

Quote

 The mesh uploader uses very strict naming rules for these custom LOD files:

• File names ending with "_LOD2" must be used for Medium level of detail
• File names ending with "_LOD1" must be used for Low level of detail
• File names ending with "_LOD0" must be used for Lowest level of detail
• File names ending with "_PHYS" must be used for the model's physics shape

 

[HaensWoerst]

11 hours ago, ChinRey said:

Can you show us a screenshot from the uploader when you get that message? The degenerate triangles will be marked with black in the preview so they should be easy to identify.

Thanks for ur answer. The problem is that in my preview Window my model is just a tiny little object and Im not able to zoom in to get a full overview. Im not sure if thats a scale issue? If I rez the object later on Land it has exactly the scale that I want tho

13 hours ago, Chic Aeon said:

Aquilla is the star but I made a couple of videos on house physics that might help before she shows up (or someone else). I am off to RL company and not a pro at Planes Physics anyway.

https://www.slartist.com/browse-the-tutorial-chic-videos-1-date.html

 

Hey Aeon  .... unfortunately the Link seems to be not working for me?

10 hours ago, arton Rotaru said:

Yeah, it's hard to tell whats wrong, from just the 2 images and your description.

I didnt wanna spam hundreds of screenshots. Like I said if somebody is interested in helping I will give out the obj and dae files so u can have a look at it

anyway good tipp about the naming stuff. I didnt pay attention to that and will try it out.

 

Is there any other important stuff to avoid? Intersection seems to be no problem and so far I didnt find out when a triangle becomes too small for calculation.

Edited August 18, 2017 by HaensWoerst

[Chic Aeon]

2 hours ago, HaensWoerst said:

Hey Aeon  .... unfortunately the Link seems to be not working for me?

Sorry it was working (and a few hours later) when I typed it in. Cert issues again it seems :(.

Meanwhile here is the Youtube link for house physics

https://www.youtube.com/edit?o=U&video_id=g6SJjFc4P_k

 

And stairs

https://www.youtube.com/edit?o=U&video_id=9W3XhkW-igM

Typically the reason your model is SO TINY (hence difficult to see where the problem is) in the uploader window is when you SCALE the size within the uploader (like telling it to be .25 of the actual size of the model). So make sure your model is the correct size in Blender before exporting. There may be other issues when you import from another 3D program; I just never do that :D.

 

The general answer if I learn my lessons from Aquila would be that you have some skinny planes somewhere in your physics model. The uploader doesn't like SKINNY (long and narrow) pieces. So you need to get rid of those.  The other thing that might be helpful would be to uploade the model in SECTIONS rather than as one object (assuming this isn't a linkset which has as mentioned its own way of doing things). 

It is often less problematic to break up the model for the uploader. 

 

Good luck. 

 

 

[HaensWoerst]

Hey chic.. yes i realized that. If I connect two planes (front and backof a wall) in a doorway for example then i get errors. So long narrow planes are bad. However how do I make sure people dont glitch trough the doorway if I cant put planes there. In general this creating aphysics Model process seems a bit outdated or am I wrong there? It creates alot of limitations.

[Rolig Loon]

13 minutes ago, HaensWoerst said:

how do I make sure people dont glitch trough the doorway if I cant put planes there. In general this creating aphysics Model process seems a bit outdated or am I wrong there?

Few people are likely to walk sideways into a door jamb when they enter a room, so that's not much of a problem.,  Besides, unless you have a really fat wall, nobody can walk between the plane on one side and the plane on the other anyway.

[Chic Aeon]

Just a note as noted in the tutorials. When you upload PLANES physic you do NOT analyze. When you upload CUBE physics you do. 

And yes, physics models are sometimes difficult to grasp. Maybe you should try the CUBE version rather than planes and see if that works better for you. 

also depending on your model (and your in one piece IS complex) the uploader could easily go crazy and get confused. You will likely need to use the Linden Viewer to upload CUBE physics (not a problem with planes physics). 

More close up photos will likely help others if they have more advice. All I know pretty much is in those videos.

 

[arton Rotaru]

2 hours ago, HaensWoerst said:

In general this creating aphysics Model process seems a bit outdated or am I wrong there?

What would be outdated with it? It's pretty simple, and straight forward actually. You just have to obey some certain rules.

If you like, you can send me a download link in a PM, and I'll take a look at it.

 

 

[Chic Aeon]

Also a thought --

You MAY have issues with the model rather than or in addition to issues with the physics model -- so uploading the model with just a cube as the physics would be a test of sorts.  There could be OTHER things causing problems and none of us have actually seen enough of your model in close up to spot them. 

[HaensWoerst]

Hi folks,

 

Thanks for all ur advice. Aquila was so nice to have a look and it was indeed the narrow long planes i had in my physics model that caused the errors.

Thank u all for ur quick help I hope I get this done without any problems now

[Aquila Kytori]

 

59 minutes ago, Chic Aeon said:

There could be OTHER things causing problems and none of us have actually seen enough of your model in close up to spot them. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                    . . . . .  lol

 

I feel a bit like I have cheated but getting to see the actual mesh takes all of the guess work out of answering a post like this.

Often, i think, it would make things so much easier easier if more people were willing to make available even an example section of their problematic mesh.