Since you asked, I will bore everyone. :) I already know I'm not
comparing apples to apples and this is extremely high level, but here
are some performance numbers given an identical 3d STL model:
https://github.com/area515/Photonic3D/issues/283
If you want to get my initial opinion, it's going to be difficult to
reach JMonkey's performance numbers and the efficiency for which they
store their data structures(simple nio buffers).
The bad news for JMonkey is that I don't see how their JBullet physics
engine is going to provide the specific geometry I'm looking for. I
haven't dug into their API yet, but it feels like I'll need to interpret
collision vectors rather than having an intersection mesh and I'm really
not sure where that would take me. I haven't been able to easily
reproduce the intersection geometry that the Apache PolyhedronsSet seems
to give.
Analysis has basically just begun. Next I need to look more at the API
for JMonkey's implementation of the JBullet Physics engine.
Thanks,
Wes G.
On 11/9/2016 12:06 PM, Gilles wrote:
Hi.
Please keep us informed of your findings...
Best regards,
Gilles
On Sat, 5 Nov 2016 22:40:10 -0500, Wes Gilster wrote:
I really appreciate the quick response. Even though I believe this
API has the functionality I need, I'm not really sure I can easily
tune the performance. I need to check out a few other APIs to
determine if they will be a better fit, and if I can't find anything
that fits, I'll probably see what I can do with this geom package.
Thanks again for being so upfront about the state of the project.
Thanks,
Wes G.
On 11/5/2016 11:03 AM, Gilles wrote:
Hello.
On Fri, 4 Nov 2016 23:57:48 -0500, Wes Gilster wrote:
I've been using the commons math geometry libraries for some simple
2d intersection functions, but I'm now interested in expanding it's
use to include some manipulation of 3d models with polygon counts that
will easily reach 200,000 tris. More specifically I would like to
build physical support structures in 3d models. Given that commons
math geo libraries used BSP trees, I had assumed the performance would
be quite adequate. However I'm having second thoughts as to whether
this is the right API for this modeling. I'm building models from STL
files with this constructor:
org.apache.commons.math3.geometry.euclidean.threed.PolyhedronsSet.PolyhedronsSet(List<Vector3D>,
List<int[]>, double)
It seems there are some quite in-efficient loops in here, and with
models with high polygon counts this function really performs poorly:
org.apache.commons.math3.geometry.euclidean.threed.PolyhedronsSet.buildBoundary(List<Vector3D>,
List<int[]>, double)
It also seems as though this API is going to be quite intolerant of
imperfect geometry.
Below is an example that loads an STL from disk and inserts into this
the PolyhedronsSet:
https://github.com/WesGilster/Photonic3D/blob/master/host/src/main/java/org/area515/resinprinter/supports/ImpossiblePerformance.java
I'm hoping someone with a bit of experience in this API could confirm
this assessment.
I have no good news; there is probably no one listening here who
has more experience than you on using this part of the Commons
Math library.
Many of the more advanced codes (in size and/or complexity) have
been orphaned by a fork last May.
A lot of discussion has arisen about the future of CM (have a look
at the ML archive if you are interested).
Some parts have found new maintainers.
We should certainly welcome people who have expertise with using the
"geometry" package, to improve and maintain it, and eventually
release it as a standalone component.
Best regards,
Gilles
Thanks,
Wes G.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
