Get closest mesh point to actor? - unreal-blueprint

My player has a collision sphere to detect any static mesh that gets close to it.
I need to find the closest point on the static meshes that are colliding with it.
I think I could use "Get Actor Bounds" to get the mesh boundaries and then use them to find the closest point but I'm not sure how to do it.
I also thought about using a trace but I would need to cast many of them in order to find the right one, and I would need a way to make the trace hit only the meshes I care about.
Right now I'm simply using the "Get Actor Location" but that gives me the center of the static mesh.
How should I approach the problem?

The straight forward method to get a closest point, is to compare the distance for each vertex and your point.
A simple for loop and a minimum test of the distance.
Accessing mesh vertices can be a bit tricky in Unreal especially for StaticMesh. Because vertices are stored in GPU and so you have to make huge conversions. And I don't recommend to iterate over vertices if you want a real time game.
To avoid iterating over every mesh vertex, you could also check for the function :
https://docs.unrealengine.com/4.26/en-US/BlueprintAPI/Collision/GetClosestPointonCollision/
By the way you could use a multiple trace with a bug sphere and iterate over every collider location. But I am not sure if the location of the break hit result is always the closest of the object.

Related

Surface mesh to volume mesh

I have a closed surface mesh generated using Meshlab from point clouds. I need to get a volume mesh for that so that it is not a hollow object. I can't figure it out. I need to get an *.stl file for printing. Can anyone help me to get a volume mesh? (I would prefer an easy solution rather than a complex algorithm).
Given an oriented watertight surface mesh, an oracle function can be derived that determines whether a query line segment intersects the surface (and where): shoot a ray from one end-point and use the even-odd rule (after having spatially indexed the faces of the mesh).
Volumetric meshing algorithms can then be applied using this oracle function to tessellate the interior, typically variants of Marching Cubes or Delaunay-based approaches (see 3D Surface Mesh Generation in the CGAL documentation). The initial surface will however not be exactly preserved.
To my knowledge, MeshLab supports only surface meshes, so it is unlikely to provide a ready-to-use filter for this. Volume mesher packages should however offer this functionality (e.g. TetGen).
The question is not perfectly clear. I try to give a different interpretation. According to your last sentence:
I need to get an *.stl file for printing
It means that you need a 3D model that is ok for being fabricated using a 3D printer, i.e. you need a watertight mesh. A watertight mesh is a mesh that define in a unambiguous way the interior of a volume and corresponds to a mesh that is closed (no boundary), 2-manifold (mainly that each edge is shared exactly by two face), and without self intersections.
MeshLab provide tools for both visualizing boundaries, non manifold and self-intersection. Correcting them is possible in many different ways (deletion of non manifoldness and hole filling or drastic remeshing).

how to display many polygons with shared vertices in cesium

I would like to display 100,000 or more polygons in Cesium. The polygons have a lot of shared boundaries --- they are essentially like US zip code polygons but smaller, so there are more of them --- so I'd like to use a representation that takes advantage of this and is "aware" of the topology of shared boundaries and only stores each vertex once.
I'm fairly new to programming with Cesium (but familiar with 3D graphics in general); I've scanned the tutorials and docs and don't immediately see a way to create a polygon collection with shared vertices. I have my polygons in a topojson file and tried loading it using code like what is in the topojson example:
var promise = Cesium.GeoJsonDataSource.load('./polygons.topojson');
promise.then(function(dataSource) {
viewer.dataSources.add(dataSource);
...
});
But
this doesn't take advantage of the shared vertices because the GeoJsonDataSource converts each individual polygon to a GeoJson object, and
it crashes my browser, presumably because 100,000 separate GeoJson objects is more than it can handle.
I feel fairly sure (and hopeful) that there is a way to do this in Cesium, but I haven't found it yet. Can someone tell me what the most effective approach would be, in particular what primitives / loader utilities should I be looking at?
Ultimately, by the way, the application I want to write will never actually render all 100,000 polygons at the same time --- it will choose which ones to render based on the mouse position, and at any one time it will only render a few thousand of them. But I want to load them all into memory ahead of time, so that I can change which ones are being rendered in real time as the cursor moves around.

Detect intersection without causing bodies to collide

I want to detect the intersection of two objects (sprites) in my scene. I don't want the object geometric intersection to cause a collision between the bodies in the scene.
I've created PhysicalBody for both of my object shapes, but I can't find a way to detect the intersection without having both bodies hit each other on impact.
I'm using cocos2d-x 3+ with the default chipmunk engine (which I'd like to stick with for now)
The question is, how do I detect the intersection of elements without having them physically push each other when they intersect.
The answer is very simple (Though it took me 2 days to figure it out)
When contact is detected and onContactBegin() is called, when the relevant shape is being hit returning false will stop the physical interaction.

AS3 Bullet hitscan

Take a look at this scenario, I have two characters, one shoots two bullets on the direction of the other character, the bullets are fired instantly and travel at infinity speed, how to detect a collision?
Here's an image to illustrate the problem:
The red bullet would clearly miss, but the green bullet would hit, how to perform this kind of collision test?
This type of collision test is called ray casting. Its implementations can vary from simple to very complex, depending on your specific application and how much time you're willing to invest into performance gains. Definitely search online for the topic if you're interested, or pick up a game programming book. It's a common operation for 3d games.
If you know that there will only ever be 2 bullets, then you can solve this with just a distance check between the ray created by the fired bullet and the other bullet. If the distance is less than the summed radius of the bullets then you know they've hit.
If you're making some sort of game engine where many bullets will be moving, then the simplest way that I can think of accomplishing this is to move the bullet along the ray that it is fired from (by normalizing the bullet's movement vector) in small increments (no larger than the bullet's radius) and perform collision checks at each step.
No matter what ray casting method you end up using, it will be tightly integrated with whatever system you're using for spacial partitioning. There's no way to avoid querying many spacial locations when you're ray casting, so be sure that you use an effective space partitioning system for your purposes.

OpenGL Newbie - Best way to move objects about in a scene

I'm new to OpenGL and graphics programming in general, though I've always been interested in the topic so have a grounding in the theory.
What I'd like to do is create a scene in which a set of objects move about. Specifically, they're robotic soccer players on a field. The objects are:
The lighting, field and goals, which don't change
The ball, which is a single mesh which will undergo translation and rotation but not scaling
The players, which are each composed of body parts, each of which are translated and rotated to give the illusion of a connected body
So to my GL novice mind, I'd like to load these objects into the scene and then just move them about. No properties of the vertices will change, either their positioning nor texture/normals/etc. Just the transformation of their 'parent' object as a whole.
Furthermore, the players all have identical bodies. Can I optimise somehow by loading the model into memory once, then painting it multiple times with a different transformation matrix each time?
I'm currently playing with OpenTK which is a lightweight wrapper on top of OpenGL libraries.
So a helpful answer to this question would either be:
What parts of OpenGL give me what I need? Do I have to redraw all the faces every frame? Just those that move? Can I just update some transformation matrices? How simple can I make this using OpenTK? What would psuedocode look like? Or,
Is there a better framework that's free (ideally open source) and provides this level of abstraction?
Note that I require any solution to run in .NET across multiple platforms.
Using so called vertex arrays is probably the surest way to optimize such a scene. Here's a good tutorial:
http://www.songho.ca/opengl/gl_vertexarray.html
A vertex array or more generally, a gl data array holds data like vertex positions, normals, colors. You can also have an array that hold indexes to these buffers to indicate in which order to draw them.
Then you have a few closely related functions which manage these arrays, allocate them, set data to them and paint them. You can perform a rendering of a complex mesh with just a single OpenGL command like glDrawElements()
These arrays generally reside on the host memory, A further optimization is to use vertex buffer objects which are the same concept as regular arrays but reside on the GPU memory and can be somewhat faster. Here's abit about that:
http://www.songho.ca/opengl/gl_vbo.html
Working with buffers as opposed to good old glBegin() .. glEnd() has the advantage of being compatible with OpenGL ES. in OpenGL ES, arrays and buffers are the only way to draw stuff.
--- EDIT
Moving things, rotating them and transforming them in the scene is done using the Model View matrix and does not require any changes to the mesh data. To illustrate:
you have your initialization:
void initGL() {
// create set of arrays to draw a player
// set data in them
// create set of arrays for ball
// set data in them
}
void drawScene {
glMatrixMode(GL_MODEL_VIEW);
glLoadIdentity();
// set up view transformation
gluLookAt(...);
drawPlayingField();
glPushMatrix();
glTranslate( player 1 position );
drawPlayer();
glPopMatrix();
glPushMatrix();
glTranslate( player 2 position );
drawPlayer();
glPopMatrix();
glPushMatix();
glTranslate( ball position );
glRotate( ball rotation );
drawBall();
glPopMatrix();
}
Since you are beginning, I suggest sticking to immediate mode rendering and getting that to work first. If you get more comfortable, you can improve to vertex arrays. If you get even more comfortable, VBOs. And finally, if you get super comfortable, instancing which is the fastest possible solution for your case (no deformations, only whole object transformations).
Unless you're trying to implement something like Fifa 2009, it's best to stick to the simple methods until you have a demonstrable efficiency problem. No need to give yourself headaches prematurely.
For whole object transformations, you typically transform the model view matrix.
glPushMatrix();
// do gl transforms here and render your object
glPopMatrix();
For loading objects, you'll even need to come up with some format or implement something that can load mesh formats (obj is one of the easiest formats to support). There are high-level libraries to simplify this but I recommend going with OpenGL for the experience and control that you'll have.
I'd hoped the OpenGL API might be easy to navigate via the IDE support (intellisense and such). After a few hours it became apparent that some ground rules need to be established. So I stopped typing and RTFM.
http://www.glprogramming.com/red/
Best advice I could give to anyone else who finds this question when finding their OpenGL footing. A long read, but empowering.