I'm trying to write a 2D game in Java that uses the Separating Axis Theorem for collision detection. In order to resolve collisions between two polygons, I need to know the Minimum Translation Vector of the collision, and I need to know which direction it points relative to the polygons (so that I can give one polygon a penalty force along that direction and the other a penalty force in the opposite direction). For reference, I'm trying to implement the algorithm here.
I'd like to guarantee that if I call my collision detection function collide(Polygon polygon1, Polygon polygon2) and it detects a collision, the returned MTV will always point away from polygon1, toward polygon2. In order to do this, I need to guarantee that the separating axes that I generate, which are the normals of the polygon edges, always point away from the polygon that generated them. (That way, I know to negate any axis from polygon2 before using it as the MTV).
Unfortunately, it seems that whether or not the normal I generate for a polygon edge points towards the interior of the polygon or the exterior depends on whether the polygon's points are declared in clockwise or counterclockwise order. I'm using the algorithm described here to generate normals, and assuming that I pick (x, y) => (y, -x) for the "perpendicular" method, the resulting normals will only point away from the polygon if I iterate over the vertices in clockwise order.
Given that I can't force the client to declare the points of the polygon in clockwise order (I'm using java.awt.Polygon, which just exposes two arrays for x and y coordinates), is there a mathematical way to guarantee that the direction of the normal vectors I generate is toward the exterior of the polygon? I'm not very good at vector math, so there may be an obvious solution to this that I'm missing. Most Internet resources about the SAT just assume that you can always iterate over the vertices of a polygon in clockwise order.
You can just calculate which direction each polygon is ordered, using, for example, the answer to this question, and then multiply your normal by -1 if the two polygons have different orders.
You could also check each polygon passed to your algorithm to see if it is ordered incorrectly, again using the algorithm above, and reverse the vertex order if necessary.
Note that when calculating the vertex order, some algorithms will work for all polygons and some just for convex polygons.
I finally figured it out, but the one answer posted was not the complete solution so I'm not going to accept it. I was able to determine the ordering of the polygon using the basic algorithm described in this SO answer (also described less clearly in David Norman's link), which is:
for each edge in polygon:
sum += (x2 - x1) * (y2 + y1)
However, there's an important caveat which none of these answers mention. Normally, you can decide that the polygon's vertices are clockwise if this sum is positive, and counterclockwise if the sum is negative. But the comparison is inverted in Java's 2D graphics system, and in fact in many graphics systems, because the positive y axis points downward. So in a normal, mathematical coordinate system, you can say
if sum > 0 then polygon is clockwise
but in a graphics coordinate system with an inverted y-axis, it's actually
if sum < 0 then polygon is clockwise
My actual code, using Java's Polygon, looked something like this:
//First, find the normals as if the polygon was clockwise
int sum = 0;
for(int i = 0; i < polygon.npoints; i++) {
int nextI = (i + 1 == polygon.npoints ? 0 : i + 1);
sum += (polygon.xpoints[nextI] - polygon.xpoints[i]) *
(polygon.ypoints[nextI] + polygon.ypoints[i]);
}
if(sum > 0) {
//reverse all the normals (multiply them by -1)
}
Related
I am implementing collision detection in my game, and am having a bit of trouble understanding how to calculate the vector to fix my shape overlap upon collision.
Say for example, I have two squares. squareA and squareB. For both of them, I know their xCo, yCo, width and height. squareA is moving however, so he has a velocity magnitude, and a velocity angle. Let's pretend I update the game once a second. I have illustrated the situation below.
Now, I need a formula to get the vector to fix the overlap. If I apply this vector onto the red square (squareA), they should not be overlapping anymore. This is what I am looking to achieve.
Can anyone help me figure out the formula to calculate the vector?
Bonus points if constructed in Java.
Bonus bonus points if you type out the answer instead of linking to a collision detection tutorial.
Thanks guys!
Also, how do I calculate the new velocity magnitude and angle? I would like sqaureA to continue moving along the x axis (sliding along the top of the blue square)
I had an function that looked something like this:
Position calculateValidPosition(Position start, Position end)
Position middlePoint = (start + end) /2
if (middlePoint == start || middlePoint == end)
return start
if( isColliding(middlePont) )
return calculateValidPosition(start, middlePoint)
else
return calculate(middlePoint, end)
I just made this code on the fly, so there would be a lot of room for improvements... starting by not making it recursive.
This function would be called when a collision is detected, passing as a parameter the last valid position of the object, and the current invalid position.
On each iteration, the first parameter is always valid (no collition), and the second one is invalid (there is collition).
But I think this can give you an idea of a possible solution, so you can adapt it to your needs.
Your question as stated requires an answer that is your entire application. But a simple answer is easy enough to provide.
You need to partition your space with quad-trees
You seem to indicate that only one object will be displaced when a collision is detected. (For the case of multiple interpenetrating objects, simply correct each pair of objects in the set until none are overlapping.)
Neither an elastic nor an inelastic collision is the desired behavior. You want a simple projection of the horizontal velocity (of square A), so Vx(t-1) = Vx(t+1), Vy(t-1) is irrelevant and Vy(t+1)=0. Here t is the time of collision.
The repositioning of Square A is simple.
Define Cn as the vector from the centroid of A to the vertex n (where the labeling of the vertices is arbitrary).
Define A(t-1) as the former direction of A.
Define Dn as the dot product of A(t-1) and the vector Cn
Define Rn as the width of A measured along Cn (and extending past the centroid in the opposite direction).
Define Sn as the dilation of B by a radius of Rn.
Let j be the vertex of B with highest y-value.
Let k be the vertex that is most nearly the front corner of A [in the intuitive sense, where the value of Dn indicates that Ck is most nearly parallel to A(t-1)].
Let K be the antipodal edge or vertex of A, relative to k.
Finally, translate A so that k and j are coincident and K is coincident with Sk.
Does anybody know how to find out if a set of coordinates are within a triangle for which you have the coordinates for. i know how to work out length of sides, area and perimeter, but i have no idea where to begin working out the whereabouts within the triangle of other points.
Any advice would be appreciated
You can create a Polygon object.
Polygon triangle = new Polygon();
Add the vertexes of your triangle with the addPoint(int x, int y) method.
And then, you just need to check if the set of coordinates is inside your triangle using contains(double x, double y) method.
Use the contains method of the Polygon class as documented here.
For a solution without using the Polygon-class:
Assume that you have giving three points A,B,C the vertices of your polygon. Let P be the point you want to check. First calculate the vectors representing the edges of your triangle. Let us call them AB, BC, CA. Also calculate the three vectors PA, PB, PC.
Now calculate the cross product between the first two of the vectors from above.
The cross product of the first pair gives you the sin(alpha), where alpha is the angle between AB and PA, multiplied with a vector pendenpicular to AB and PA. Ignore this vector because we are interested in the angle and take a look at the sine (in the case of 2D vectors you can imagine it as the vector standing perpendicular to your screen).
The sine can take values between (let's say for the ease) betwenn 0 and 2*Pi. It's 0 exactly at 0 and Pi. For every value in between the sine is positive and for every value between Pi and 2*Pi it's negative.
So let's say your Point p is on the left hand side of AB, so the sine would be positive.
By taking the cross product of each pair from above, you could easily guess that the point P is on the left hand side of each edge from the triangle. This just means that it has to be inside the triangle.
Of course this method can even be used from calculating whether a point P is in a polygon. Be aware of the fact, that this method only works if the sides of the polygon are directed.
I am studying the following code.
boolean convex(double x1, double y1, double x2, double y2,
double x3, double y3)
{
if (area(x1, y1, x2, y2, x3, y3) < 0)
return true;
else
return false;
}
/* area: determines area of triangle formed by three points
*/
double area(double x1, double y1, double x2, double y2,
double x3, double y3)
{
double areaSum = 0;
areaSum += x1 * (y3 - y2);
areaSum += x2 * (y1 - y3);
areaSum += x3 * (y2 - y1);
/* for actual area, we need to multiple areaSum * 0.5, but we are
* only interested in the sign of the area (+/-)
*/
return areaSum;
}
I do not understand the concept that area being negative.
Shouldn't area be always positive? maybe I am lacking some understanding of terms here.
I tried to contact the original writer but this code is about 8 years old and I have no way to contact the original writer.
This method of determining if the given vertex x2y2 is convex seems really mobile. I really want to understand it.
Any direction or reference to help me understand this piece of code will be appreciated greatly.
Source code : http://cgm.cs.mcgill.ca/~godfried/teaching/cg-projects/97/Ian/applets/BruteForceEarCut.java
The algorithm use a very simple formula with which you can compute twice the area of a triangle.
This formula has two advantages:
it doesn't require any division
it returns a negative area if the point are in the counterclockwise order.
In the code sample, the actual value of the area doesn't matter, only the sign of the result is needed.
The formula can also be used to check if three points are colinear.
You can find more information about this formula on this site : http://www.mathopenref.com/coordtrianglearea.html
This algorithm is basically using the dot product of two vectors and interpreting the results. This is the core of the Gift Wrapping Algorithm used to find convex hulls.
Since a dot b is also equal to |a|*|b|*cos(theta) then if the result is positive, cos of theta must be positive and thus convex. Per a wiki article on cross products...
Because the magnitude of the cross product goes by the sine of the
angle between its arguments, the cross product can be thought of as a
measure of ‘perpendicularity’ in the same way that the dot product is
a measure of ‘parallelism’. Given two unit vectors, their cross
product has a magnitude of 1 if the two are perpendicular and a
magnitude of zero if the two are parallel. The opposite is true for
the dot product of two unit vectors.
The use of "area" is slightly misleading on part of the original coder in my opinion.
You know about how integrals work, right? One way to think of integrals is in terms of the area under the integrated curve. For functions that are strictly positive, that definition works great, but when the function becomes negative at some point, there is a problem because then you have to take the absolute value, right?
That is not always so, actually, and it can be quite useful in some contexts to leave the curve negative. Think back to what was said earlier: the area under the curve. All that space between negative infinity and our function. Clearly, that is absurd, right? A better way to think of it is as the difference between the area under the curve, and the area under the x axis. That way, when the function is positive, our curve is gaining more area, and when it is negative, it is gaining less than the x axis.
The same thing applies to plane figures that are not strict functions. In order to really determine this, we have to define which direction our edge is going as it travels around the figure. We can define it so that all the area on the right of our curve is inside the region, and all the area to the left is outside (or we can define it the other way around, but I will use the first way).
So our figure includes all the area from there to the edge at infinity of the plane that is directly to our right. Regions enclosed clockwise really include their conventional interior twice. Regions enclosed counterclockwise don't include their conventional interior at all. The area, then, is the difference between our region and the whole plane.
The application of this to concavity is fairly simple, if you understand what it actually means to be concave or convex. The triangle you are given is concave if it is cutting an area out from the plane, and it is convex if you are adding extra area to it. That is the exact same thing we were doing to determine the our area, so positive area corresponds to a convex shape, and negative area corresponds to a concave shape.
You can also do other weird things with this conceptual model. For instance, you can turn a region 'inside out' by reversing the edge direction.
I'm sorry if this has been a little hard to follow, but this is the actual way I understand negative area.
How to find if a point exists in which given set of polygons ?
I have coordinates like
polygonA = 1(0,0),2(0,5),3(3,4),4(3,5),5( 2,2)
polygonB = 1(10,10),2(10,15),3(13,14),4(13,15),5(12,12)
I have a point as (6,4) now want to search if this point is in any of this polygon or in both or nearest to which polygon.
How to store such data (polygon) ? is there a system / database / algorithm to do this search ?
Update : Thanks all for such fast response...I think i need to be more specific...
How to search = Yes...got list of algorithms and library for the same.
How to store = based on my research SQL and NoSQL db have their solutions.
NoSQL = MongoDb seems closest what i needed. But issue is I can query like "db.places.find({ "loc" : { "$within" : { "$polygon" : polygonB } } })" But cant make query like db.places.find({ "loc" : { "$within" : { } } })
SQL checked postgre and openGIS for some help. But colud not figureout if its possible.
If someone can help me with that...Thanks in advance.
The basic method (if you have a small number of polygons) is to store all polygons in a collection and loop over the elements to check if a point is inside a polygon.
On the other hand, if you have a considerable number of polygons, I would recommend using an R-tree data structure, which is not available in the standard library. You should check this project, if you want to go with R-tree option: http://sourceforge.net/projects/jsi/.
R-tree allows you to index rectangles (bounding boxes of the polygons in this case). So you can find a small number of candidate polygons very fast using R-tree. Then you can loop over the candidate list to get the final result.
You can use the GeneralPath class to help you with deciding if a point intersects a polygon. First, create a GeneralPath with your coordinates added:
GeneralPath gp = new GeneralPath();
double[] x = ...
double[] y = ...
gp.moveTo(x[0], y[0]);
for (int i =1; i < x.length; i++) {
gp.lineTo(x[i], y[i]);
}
gp.closePath();
if (gp.contains(pointX, pointY)) {
...
}
For the problem of which polygon a point is nearer to, this depends a little on how accurately you need a solution.
For an accurate solution., this amounts (without optimisation) to:
take the shortest distance between the point and each of the lines (segments) connecting the vertices of each of the polygons (Java2D apparently doesn't provide a method for this, but the shortest distance from a point to a line is a fairly simple calculation)
which polygon has the line with the shortest distance to the point?
In practice, you can approximate this process for some applications. For example, you could much more efficiently do this:
take the centre point of the bounding rectangle of each polygon (GeneralPath.getBounds() will give you this)
take the distance between the query point and each of these centre points, and see which is closest.
If you do need an accurate answer, then you can combine these techniques to optimise your search among all the vertices. For example, you could order the polygons by the distance to their "centrepoint" (defined as above). Search from minimum to maximum distance. If the minimum distance to a segment that you have found so far is d, then you can automatically rule out any polygon P where the distance from your query point to its "centrepoint" is d + r, where r is half the length of the diagonal of P's bounding rectangle (in other words, for simplicity, you imagine a bounding circle around that bounding box and check that the distance to that bounding circle is further than the nearest point found so far on other polygons).
I don't quite understand the bit about the database. Your polygons are just defined as a series of points. How you decide to store these in memory/file doesn't essentially make any difference to the algorithm.
I need to calculate the distance from a point [x y z] to the surface of an object (at this stage a simple rectoid, but later an arbitrary shape) along [0 0 1].
I could do this defining the surfaces as planes using unit vectors and then doing a linear algebra calculation to find the distance to all the planes along [0 0 1] but as someone fairly new to coding and Java, I wanted to see if there was a library or a more efficient way of doing this as in the long term I may have complex convex objects, so need to be careful to use standard practices (so I can use something else to generate the planes!)
Thanks,
If you are using Point3D to represent your points then you have a distance method you can use to calculate the distance. So the question is which point on the surface do you want? If you just need any point on the surface you could just pick one of the corner points and use that to calculate the distance.