Triangulated Surface Mesh Simplification - trying to make mesh A remain close to mesh B during simplification

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Triangulated Surface Mesh Simplification - trying to make mesh A remain close to mesh B during simplification

Audette, Michel A.

Dear CGAL experts, 


I would like to use the Triangulated Surface Mesh Simplification algorithm to modify a triangulated model of the skull base, in a manner that keeps the evolving skull surface in close proximity to a set of triangulated surfaces of the cranial holes (foramina). In other words, if we don't impose this type of constraint, the decimation tends to make these holes arbitrarily big, which is the opposite of what we want. Is there a simple way to use this code, or somehow modify it, to consider the faces of a second surface B (holes) as a constraint for the simplification of surface A (cranial bone)? 


Thanks for your kind support. 


Michel Audette, Ph.D.
Associate Professor,
Department of Modeling, Simulation and Visualization Engineering,
Old Dominion University,
Norfolk, VA.
 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Triangulated Surface Mesh Simplification - trying to make mesh A remain close to mesh B during simplification

Sebastien Loriot (GeometryFactory)
One way to do it would be to build an AABB-tree of the triangles of the
input (or make a copy of the mesh and do an AABB-tree of its faces).

Then you can plug into your cost functor a distance query of the
placement to the AABB-tree (don't forget to call
acceleterate_distance_queries()).
If the placement is further away from your threshold then return an
empty cost. This will not give you a certified distance (like Hausdorff
would do) but at least you'll have the guarantee that all the mesh
points are within a given distance range from the input.

Best,

Sebastien.



On 8/2/19 10:58 PM, Audette, Michel A. wrote:

> Dear CGAL experts,
>
>
> I would like to use the Triangulated Surface Mesh Simplification
> algorithm to modify a triangulated model of the skull base, in a manner
> that keeps the evolving skull surface in close proximity to a set of
> triangulated surfaces of the cranial holes (foramina). In other words,
> if we don't impose this type of constraint, the decimation tends to make
> these holes arbitrarily big, which is the opposite of what we want. Is
> there a simple way to use this code, or somehow modify it, to consider
> the faces of a second surface B (holes) as a constraint for the
> simplification of surface A (cranial bone)?
>
>
> Thanks for your kind support.
>
>
> Michel Audette, Ph.D.
> Associate Professor,
> Department of Modeling, Simulation and Visualization Engineering,
> Old Dominion University,
> Norfolk, VA.

--
You are currently subscribed to cgal-discuss.
To unsubscribe or access the archives, go to
https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/info/cgal-discuss