-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 50
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
Reduce number of vertices in each convex hull #37
Comments
Thanks for bringing up the issue! I'll look into improving it when I have a moment to spare. |
btw you can turn off the pre-processing if your input is manifold |
Thanks for the hint Sarah. Taking some time off now, and will check when back in the office in a couple of weeks. Will the pre processing affect the number of output vertices? Unfortunately, manual re meshing of the input won't be a great option, because we need something that works with little intervention from users. The VHACD has a parameter to specify the maximum number of vertices per convex hull (we use the default 64). Would such a parameter be feasible to have in COACD? |
oh sorry for the late reply. The results are convex hulls of the original mesh so the pre-processing can reduce the output vertices. |
That is great to hear! I think one can live without specifying the exact number of vertices. However, being able to reduce the number of vertices is really crucial to speed up collision-checking, which is a common use of composite convex hulls. |
I was wondering if there is a way to reduce the number of vertices of each convex hull.
Compared to VHACD I get a lot more vertices per convex hull with COACD. Although I am quite impressed with the quality of the decomposition of COACD, the high number of vertices will affect collision checking too just like having too many convex hulls.
Here is an example. Compare for instance the VHACD2 MEDIUM case that has 8 convex hulls with 369 vertices and the COACD LOW case that has a similar 7 convex hulls but with 10 times more vertices:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: