[ODE] ODE and FreeSOLID

[Pierre Terdiman]

Unless I'm missing something FreeSOLID == Solid 2.0.

So:

- for arbitrary mesh stuff (primitive-vs-mesh, mesh-vs-mesh) Opcode is
better

- for convex meshes it gives you the distance between two objects using GJK

- ...which is useless in a penetration-depth-based engine like ODE. It
doesn't give you a penetration vector (this is only available in Solid 3.5)


And then, even with Solid 3.5 :

- the EPA algorithm out there sometimes fails and makes the sim explode

- when it doesn't, it's still just a single vector, not enough to generate
stable simulations (remember the early box-box code in ODE ?)

- so you still need something else on top of that, to compute a correct
contact manifold out of the penetration vector


All in all.... well, good luck :)

- Pierre


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rodrigo Hernandez" <kwizatz at aeongames.com>
To: <ode at q12.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 4:54 PM
Subject: Re: [ODE] ODE and FreeSOLID


> Tanguy Fautre wrote:
>
> >
> > I've been following this discussion and I was wondering what are the
> > advantages of FreeSOLID over OPCODE.
>
> Well, the GJK algorithm is the feature that was mentioned before in the
> list, here is the FreeSOLID info page:
>
> http://www.win.tue.nl/~gino/solid/
>
> I am not too familiar with OPCODE to be able to tell how much of an
> advantage it would be to use one or the other, but well,
> its not like we'll be dropping OPCODE, just adding the FreeSOLID option
> for those who want it, once implemented we can benchmark both.
>
> besides, the FreeSOLID project has been sitting idle for a year on my
> sourceforge project list, it would be a waste for me not to work on it a
> bit :)
>
> Cheers!
> _______________________________________________
> ODE mailing list
> ODE at q12.org
> http://q12.org/mailman/listinfo/ode
>
>
>