[Hugo]

Dear @nhnhan

I therefore close this topic since our discussion in now pursued in the PR #1745. Anyway, thank you very much for this awesome contributing move!

Best wishes,

Hugo

[Hugo]

great @beichun

It’s really good to hear that. I solve the topic then.
Best wishes,

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hey @mckysd5

You should be able to do as follows:

TriangleCollisionModel* myTModel = new TriangleCollisionModel;
myTModel->setName("myCollisionModelOnTriangles");
myTModel->addGroup(1);

Let me know if this suits you.
Best,

Hugo

[Hugo]

hey @wzdy4444

My earlier suggestion (in the solver) will have as a consequence to add a “state” vector in the MechanicalObject. Thus you could access the previous pos when accessing the Mechanical object.

Your solution could work as well, to save it locally in the Collision pipeline. Using the getContext, you are looking into the node of your BruteForceDetection if you can find a MechanicalState< defaulttype::Vec3Types >. You might instead, define SingleLink so that you could simply indicates which MechanicalObject you would like to access. You can find plenty examples of Link in SOFA, e.g. in TetrahedronHyperelasticityFEMForceField.h.

I hope this helps.
Best wishes,

Hugo

[Hugo]

hey @albanodot

Are you interacting (applying translation or rotation for instance) on your VisualModel with your Python script?
Did you make sure the Exporter has a flag listening = true to listening to events?

Best

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hey @tschuelia

First of all, thank you for your question (and all the software info, version etc!) and sorry for our latency.
Second, did you notice the SOFA V20.12 release including the official integration of the SofaPython3?

To recover the collision information, you can go for a ContactListener. The IDs of the point you will recover are indeed the one from the collision model. Using the map of indices from one model to another one available in the mapping you should be able to recover the IDs in the visual model (collision model –> mechanical –> visual model)

Best

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hey @pasquale94

Indeed, it is homogeneous hyperelasticity for now. It’s lack of time on the developer side. If you feel up to implementing it, it would be most welcome.
Related issues: #134 and #232

Best wishes,

Hugo

[Hugo]

Dear @sayyidabeegam

Welcome on the SOFA forum, and sorry for having you waiting for SOFA long. This start of year was very intense, and the latest SOFA release kept us busy.

Which version of SOFA are you using?
Binary or sources?

This link seems to give some clues.

“It appears that Qt 5 is unsatisfied with the OpenGL on the system and is attempting to load a software-rendering OpenGL DLL that it cannot find.”
We are not shipping the opengl32sw.dll library with SOFA neither, right @guillaumeparan ?

Could you try the latest binary version of SOFA @sayyidabeegam –> https://www.sofa-framework.org/download/
And tell us if you still face the same issue.

Best wishes,

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hi @anoushs

Sorry for my latency. The change I mentioned above is to be done in the includes of the C++ codes in the STLIB plugin. But did you update the STLIB plugin as well? Devs might have updated the plugin according to SOFA changes.

Best wishes,

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hi @twxu,

Have you tried as suggested earlier by @sescaida “try adapting the example pneunet scene to your geometries and see where the bottleneck appears” ?

Could you also share a screenshot of your scene? Especially if collision occurs, you could activate the “Interaction” view option to see where contacts (if any) are located.

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hey @amazier

Sorry for not being responsive. We will be more available now.
Did you update your SOFA master branch since then?
Do you still have this strange message in PluginManager? I guess it prevents your from using any class from the plugin, is it?

Best wishes,

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hey @andrija987

Your approach defining the two input ports as belonging to one overall body/system looks fine to me. Your question here seems more focused on how to define this “spring like” actuator.

Not being a robotic expert makes me unsure of the best approach to follow. I saw some examples of Cable-like constraints in Softrobot.
A documentation page about the CableConstraint and a doc/tutorial shows how to use it

Would this fit your need?
If not, we can organize a joint chat about the topic.
Best wishes,

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hi @twxu

Which contact responsive method are you using:
– penalty method
– or Lagrange-multiplier based resolution ?

Depending on the method, I would point you out two different solution.
(If you are not sure about the method, could you just share your scene file?)

Best

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hi @twxu

You shared the structure of the scene but not the file itself.
Could you share your full scene file? The crashing log would be useful as well.

Could you explain as well the purpose of the stiffLayer node ?

Best wishes,

Hugo

[Hugo]

Dear @daserk

I think I have seen a similar topic discussed for the upcoming v20.12 release.
Could you test the latest v20.12 to see whether you still face the same issue?

Best wishes,

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hey @torri

Did you make some progress on this?
Could you find where does the crash come from (using a debugger maybe)?

Some scene-related question:
– what is the purpose of your “edges” node ?
– are you moving your device using the MechanicalStateController?

Best

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hey @beichun

Maybe a screenshot would help. Or just try to adjust your parameters.
Best,

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hey @beichun

I have not tried this example yet. I will test it and give you feedback.

Which branch of SOFA/SofaPython3 are you using?

Best,

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hey @amazier

Has Fred’ s suggestion helped?

[Hugo]

Hey @amazier

Now SofaMJED works well.
Regarding Pardiso, have you solved your issue?
Otherwise I will compile it on my machine this week-end.

Best

Hugo

[Hugo]

Dear @jacqueline

the SOFA (v20.12_beta branch) and the SofaPython3 (master branch).

It works well now.

Alternative: await for the v20.12 incoming in a few hours/days.

Best,

Hugo

[Hugo]

Dear

What you are aiming at doing is: cutting (topological change) and then solve constraints (contacts) with the cut parts ! It is not trivial. The engineering team from InfinyTech3D works on it, and is almost there. An issue seems to remain if you have contacts not properly updated during the topological change.

Stay tuned on the topology Pull-Requests on the master branch of SOFA!

Best,

Hugo

[Hugo]

Dear @nhnhan

Great then! The best to discuss would be to propose it as a pull-request in SOFA. It would then be discussed within the dev community at the dev meetings.

How does this sound?

Best

Hugo

[Hugo]

These checked were added by @epernod.
Could you confirm us Erik that these errors (see first post) come from issues in the mesh? could you tell us more?

Hugo

[Hugo]

Hey @andrija987

Thanks for the explanation and mostly the drawing it helps understanding.
On your scheme, which part(blue/red/green) is rigid which is deformable?

From what I got blue is deformable, red is a spring along the axis between the two ports and the ports are rigid. Is that correct?

Best

Hugo

[Author]

Posts