Jump to content

Physics shape analyzing issues.


BEGOCER Lehmann
 Share

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 2860 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

So I've been having this issue for quite a while.

The quick run down is that I have a block I'm needing to use as a physics barrier for a vehicle I'm making.

The truck rides on suspension struts and needs a physics shape that 'follows' so the vehicle can climb over stuff and won't end up hovering due to a physics bock that doesn't match its suspension shape.

 

Basically this is how I want the end result to be, just like the un-analyzed shape.



But that doesn't work in world as it reacts how it would be as if its analyzed. See below for the analyzed shape:



The hollow areas I want to remain open for phsyical interaction are now closed over with and no settings allow me to change that.

I literally have no idea and past experiments of multiple uploads of the same mesh with custom physics have each given different results.

Any suggestions (or in proven past instances, any obvious reasons that I haven't taken into accordance?)

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I resolved the issue.

Lesson I learned: Firestorm bloody sucks for uploading mesh.

Installed the normal viewer and bam! The Method options and etc actually work and the physics are fine when uploaded.

 

 

I gotta stop just relying on 1 freaking viewer...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


BEGOCER Lehmann wrote:

Lesson I learned: Firestorm bloody sucks for uploading mesh.

Just the 64 bit version of it actually - and the one set up for multiple grids. The reason is that Firestorm can't afford to buy their own HAVOK license (HAVOK is the physics engine used by Second Life and a license for it costs a small fortune) so they have to borrow Linden Lab's. Linden Lab's license is for the 32 bit version only and of course restricted to Second Life.


BEGOCER Lehmann wrote:

I gotta stop just relying on 1 freaking viewer...

That's always good advice anyway. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Analyze" works by converting the mesh it is given into a set of convex hulls, which are handled more efficiently by the physics engine than the triangle mesh (unless the triangles are large). With any viewer, it will often struggle with mesh that have complex concavities and/or holes. One way to get around these problems is to provide a physics mesh that is already a set of convex hulls that don't overlap each other. Then the function doesn't really have to do anything. Here, for example, is a possible physics mesh for your model. It consists of seven convex hulls with 66 total vertices. It will have a physics weight of 2.92. It could be simplified further if that is too high. Any viewer should be able to use this sort of mesh without any problems. Also, you control the shape completely, as the "Analysze" doesn't have to do anything except convert it to the internal convex hull format.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 2860 days.

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...