Excellent demo! I have not looked up stats on either of the methods you have shown, but from what I can see the OBB tree method looks most optimal. But concerning speed, would the AABB method be the fastest or the Sphere method?
OBB Trees are more expensive to build than Hierarchies of Spheres or AABB Trees. Also, the implementation is more complex and the overlap tests is expensive.
However, OBB Trees can bound geometry more tightly than AABBTrees and sphere trees, by virtue of their variable orientation. This imply that OBBTrees require symptotically fewer box tests than AABBTrees.
So, i prefer OBBTrees to make detection between polygonal model.
good
MrMohadnan 2 weeks ago
Excellent demo! I have not looked up stats on either of the methods you have shown, but from what I can see the OBB tree method looks most optimal. But concerning speed, would the AABB method be the fastest or the Sphere method?
Mastadex 3 years ago
Thanks...
OBB Trees are more expensive to build than Hierarchies of Spheres or AABB Trees. Also, the implementation is more complex and the overlap tests is expensive.
However, OBB Trees can bound geometry more tightly than AABBTrees and sphere trees, by virtue of their variable orientation. This imply that OBBTrees require symptotically fewer box tests than AABBTrees.
So, i prefer OBBTrees to make detection between polygonal model.
dlmtavar 3 years ago