Subject:
|
Re: Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 Apr 2002 15:09:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
739 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Steve Bliss writes:
> My point was, marking up the LDraw part files for volume decomposition
> would either:
>
> a) Be low-effort, but result in very inefficient decompositions
> b) Be high-effort, and give efficient volumes, but would essentially be
> a separate definition of the parts (ie, it would not be based on the
> existing lines and polygons).
"marking up" would be better done by machine algorithm, and would encompass
the Connection Point proposal at the same time. It would indeed yield a
separate definition of the parts.
A lot of high-end CAD programs read polygons (like we have) and cleverly
construct solids. These programs buy their solids-based engine wholesale
(IGES for one.)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Parts as volumes (instead of surfaces)
|
| (...) Maybe I'm missing a technical distinction, but it seems he used bounding boxes *for* collision detection, as opposed to using exact volumes. (...) True. My point was, marking up the LDraw part files for volume decomposition would either: a) Be (...) (23 years ago, 11-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
