how to make right physics

[KateChu4834]

hi,i am new player.

i try to make a house.

I made a mesh and its physics

they are same size in 3ds max why is different in game?

it become small and wrong place.

:(:(:(:(

 

[ChinRey]

3 hours ago, KateChu4834 said:

hi,i am new player.

Welcome to SL and the forums, Kate!

 

3 hours ago, KateChu4834 said:

they are same size in 3ds max why is different in game?

Check for loose vertices. The uploader will autoamtically scale all LoD models and the physics model to the same overall size as the main one. But when ti calculates the size of each model, it takes everything in the dae file into account, including any isolated vertices that may have accidentallyended up far away from the actual model.

[OptimoMaximo]

Hi Kate and welcome =)

to me your issue could be due to the scene scale in Max, it should be set to meters by default, check whether that's the case. If all is good, you could double check whether your objects  have non uniform xform: translate and rotate values should be all zeroes and your scale at 1 for all objects. I just checked and it has the same name as it does in Maya: Freeze Transformations https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/3ds-max-forum/freeze-transforma-tions/td-p/5475442

1 hour ago, ChinRey said:

Check for loose vertices. The uploader will autoamtically scale all LoD models and the physics model to the same overall size as the main one. But when ti calculates the size of each model, it takes everything in the dae file into account, including any isolated vertices that may have accidentallyended up far away from the actual model.

That would make the bounding box bigger, from the picture, instead, i gather that her physics models are being shifted away and scaled smaller than intended. Moreover, both Maya and 3DSMax don't allow floating (unconnected to a shape) vertices like Blender does, so it couldn't be the case anyway. The minimum for some geometry to be unconnected to a shape is a triangle.

[ChinRey]

42 minutes ago, OptimoMaximo said:

Hi Kate and welcome =)

to me your issue could be due to the scene scale in Max, it should be set to meters by default, check whether that's the case. If all is good, you could double check whether your objects  have non uniform xform: translate and rotate values should be all zeroes and your scale at 1 for all objects.

Interesting. The uploader is supposed to handle those issues. But if Max is smart enough not to leave stray vertices in the scene, yes that must be the answer.

It opens up for some really interesting options for having LoD and physics models in sizes different from the main model too. That may be useful some day...

Edited January 10, 2018 by ChinRey

[OptimoMaximo]

4 minutes ago, ChinRey said:

Interesting. The uploader is supposed to handle those issues.

It does, but when that happened to me from my Maya scenes, freezing transforms solved the issue for me, as wel as the scene scale. Maya defaults to centimeters in all instances, and internally keeps thinking in centimeters even if you set your scene to meters. In the past, with previous Maya versions, i was forced to keep the scene in centimeters to keep the scale right because changing to meters always gave me a centimeter scale object, very very small, like at export it set the scale to cm as default, and writing down the meter scale scene unit value as they were, and not recomputed to fit a meters-to-cm scale scene conversion. Now i work in centimeters by habit, if ever need a different scale i just change the grid settings but for me, 3 meters length will always display as 300 units (cm). I never tested the scene scale again since then (2011). But working in cm has its advantages, at least for me

[ChinRey]

Just now, OptimoMaximo said:

It does, but when that happened to me from my Maya scenes, freezing transforms solved the issue for me, as wel as the scene scale.

So, the search for The One Thing the Second Life Mesh Uploader Does Well still goes on then. Will there be a prize if somebody ever finds it?

[OptimoMaximo]

They are software engineers... the science behind engineering isn't the search of the absolutely perfect. For engineers, the "good enough" works and so that be

[arton Rotaru]

5 hours ago, KateChu4834 said:

it become small and wrong place.

Is your house made of multiple mesh objects, exported as a single DAE file? But your physics mesh is only a single object? If that's the case you need to include the same number of physics objects, as there are visual objects. And you will have to follow a specific naming convention, which can be found there:

 

[Aquila Kytori]

You didn't say if your house is a single mesh object or a linkset of many different objects.

This can happen if you are uploading several mesh objects together but provide only one Physics mesh for them all :

 

 

Each mesh Object needs to have its own corresponding physics mesh.

If uploading linksets then you should follow the correct naming convention : see artons first reply here

 

 

[arton Rotaru]

1 hour ago, OptimoMaximo said:

Moreover, both Maya and 3DSMax don't allow floating (unconnected to a shape) vertices like Blender does, so it couldn't be the case anyway. The minimum for some geometry to be unconnected to a shape is a triangle.

I can have stray vertices in Max, no problem. They can be used to enlarge the bounding in SL as well. They only need to be at the beginning of the vertex list in the collada file to make that work.

 

 

[OptimoMaximo]

1 minute ago, arton Rotaru said:

I can have stray vertices in Max, no problem.

Really? I thought this was a shared feature in the two softwares. Maya impedes that instead

[arton Rotaru]

6 minutes ago, OptimoMaximo said:

Really?

Yup.

[OptimoMaximo]

As soon as a unconnected face gets less than 3 vertices, Maya deletes them all. The bounding box offset in Maya is achieved using triangles. 

[NaomiLocket]

On 1/11/2018 at 4:36 AM, OptimoMaximo said:

Really? I thought this was a shared feature in the two softwares. Maya impedes that instead

I don't know how much things have changed by now, but Max typically had better poly cutting tools out of the box that impeded less too.

[OptimoMaximo]

7 hours ago, NaomiLocket said:

I don't know how much things have changed by now, but Max typically had better poly cutting tools out of the box that impeded less too.

The impediment isn't in the cutting, Maya impedes the formation of "left over" geometry if that geometry doesn't make a face.

[NaomiLocket]

13 hours ago, OptimoMaximo said:

The impediment isn't in the cutting, Maya impedes the formation of "left over" geometry if that geometry doesn't make a face.

Ah, I am guessing that very impediment and lack of it sits before the differences in cutting then. Being able to have that leftover geometry and manipulate or correct it is an intermediary step. I always liked the feeling of being able to cut anywhere and make a face anywhere at any time.

[OptimoMaximo]

10 hours ago, NaomiLocket said:

Ah, I am guessing that very impediment and lack of it sits before the differences in cutting then. Being able to have that leftover geometry and manipulate or correct it is an intermediary step. I always liked the feeling of being able to cut anywhere and make a face anywhere at any time.

Indeed, i'm saying that if the geometry doesn't make a face, Maya impedes its creation or permanence. Of course i can create as many faces in as many disconnected places i want.