On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 13:33:57 +0200, Nicolas Calimet wrote:
>> > Possibly.  This implementation of solid meshes has some problems, as
>> > you can see.
>> 
>> Just an idea, but could it help to test multiple times with different
>> vectors to avoid these errors? Just use the result that the majority of
>> vectors produce.
>
>	Would be more expensive... but also more safe.
>	Maybe the "inside" test could be simplified... For instance, instead
>of counting the odd/even number of triangles that the test-ray hits, why
>not to test the surface normal of the FIRST intersected triangle ? I'm
>not sure, but I guess the dot product of the ray and this normal will be
>positive if inside the mesh, negative if not (whatever is the mesh shape).
>Anything wrong ?

Yes.  The normals are not constrained to be consistent within the mesh.
However, with a little work, they could be made consistent, at which point
such a scheme would work.  It's just a matter of writing the code...

-- 
Ron Parker   http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
My opinions.  Mine.  Not anyone else's.

Post a reply to this message