This builds upon a question I recently asked here:
Unity3D Leap Motion - Put hand in static pose (SetTransform causes Hand to spin crazy)
However, the code suggested in the only response given does not work. I have been using the 'SetTransform' method and while it does allow me to move the hand to my desired position, the rotation is crazy. The hand continuously spins and despite spending the best part of four days on it, I can't find the solution.
In short all I am trying to do it set the hand to a fixed pose (a fist for example) but have it move and rotate with the live hand data. I created a method (detailed in previous question) that would manually recalculate the positions of the joints to put the hand in the pose as the SetTransform was causing this crazy rotation. However, I still ended up with crazy rotation from having to transform the hand to rotate it, so I have switched back to the SetTransform method for ease.
posedHand = PoseManager.LoadHandPose(mhd.LeftHand, int.Parse("2"), transform);
Hand h = new Hand();
if(posedHand != null)
{
h.CopyFrom(posedHand);
h.SetTransform(LiveData.LeftHand.PalmPosition.ToVector3(), LiveData.LeftHand.Rotation.ToQuaternion());
}
All I really want is a method that I can pass two hand objects into (one being the current 'live' hand, the other being the desired pose) and get a hand object returned which I can then render.
Update
As requested here are images of what I am currently getting and what I want to achieve.
Current:
Target:
The target image would display the fixed pose, which in this example is a fist at the current position and rotation of the live hand. Thus meaning I could have my hand 'open' but onscreen I would see a fist moving around. As you can see from the 'current' the SetTransform is giving me the correct pose and position but the rotation is freaking out.
This question has been answere elsewhere. Unity3D Leap Motion - Put hand in static pose (Pose done just can't rotate)
Essentially, i had to create a function that took in the pose hand as a parameter which then used Hands.GetHand(Chiralty) to get the position and rotation from the live data which was then used to 'SetTransform' the posed hand to the new position and rotation
public static Hand TransformHandToLivePosition(Chirality handType, Hand poseHand)
{
Hand sourceHand = Hands.Get(handType);
Hand mimicHand = null;
if (poseHand == null && sourceHand != null && sourceHand.Fingers.Count > 0)
{
//poseHand = PoseManager.LoadHandPose(sourceHand, 2, this.transform, true);
}
if (poseHand != null && sourceHand != null)
{
// Copy data from the tracked hand into the mimic hand.
if (mimicHand == null) { mimicHand = new Hand(); }
mimicHand.CopyFrom(poseHand); //copy the stored pose in the mimic hand
mimicHand.Arm.CopyFrom(poseHand.Arm); // copy the stored pose's arm into the mimic hand
// Use the rotation from the live data
var handRotation = sourceHand.Rotation.ToQuaternion();
// Transform the copied hand so that it's centered on the current hands position and matches it's rotation.
mimicHand.SetTransform(sourceHand.PalmPosition.ToVector3(), handRotation);
}
return mimicHand;
}
Related
So I am kinda stuck on what to do now because as I said I am trying to use Rigidbody.AddTorque to rotate a rigid body towards a certain point, which I was going to use to align a player with a gravitational pull so they can be upright. I have got the input part of the code, I just don't have a way to rotate the player to align with it, without violating the laws of physics with Quaternion.FromToRotation and messing with my character controller too, which I am trying to make entirely physics based rotation wise too to avoid any other problems.
I have experimented with a couple of methods, first I tried adapting my character controller code which used Rigidbody.AddForce to move the player and also dampening unwanted movements, as Rigidbody.AddTorque is basically Rigidbody.AddForce but for rotations, however, it was too weak and just flopping around when I tried it, here's the code for the character controller for calculating the force needed for one axes:
if(projected_speed.x*speed == relative_v.x)
{
applied_speed.x = 0f;
}
else if(Mathf.Sign(projected_speed.x)== -1)
{
applied_speed.x = relative_v.x - Mathf.Abs(projected_speed.x*speed);
}
else if (Mathf.Sign(projected_speed.x) == 1)
{
applied_speed.x = projected_speed.x*speed - relative_v.x;
}
Where projected_speed is the speed the controller wants to be at,relative_v is the relative velocity, and applied_speed is the speed that will be actually applied in Rigidbody.AddForce.
Anyways so maybe I didn't use enough force, as the player is under a gravitational pull, but that would have probably made it flip out or something, anyways so the second thing I tried was a PID controller, and I managed to find a page which explains it pretty well, sadly don't have the link anymore, but when I tried this because you have to tune it, I was stuck doing it, and it just wasn't able to do anything and was just rolling around the floor and sometimes spinning, probably as it couldn't cope with gravity, so that didn't work, so does anyone know how I could finally do this and make my character able to right themselves according to gravity?
Sorry for not indicating that my issue is solved, click here for the answer, credit to Ruzihm.
In my board game, the points are given by throwing 7 sea-shells cowry shell. These shells are dropped onto a sphere in Unity so they get rolled over randomly to different places. Once the rigidbody.isSleeping() returns true, I do a Raycast(from the belly side downwards) to figure out the orientation of the shell. If it is NOT a hit we know the shells belly is turned upside which means a point.
All is good and very realistic when in single player mode. Reason is I just activate the gravity of the shells and they dropped on to sphere, gets rolled randomly and when stopped i get the marks as stated above.
Now the problem is I am making the game multiplayer. In this case, I sent the randomly generated marks from the server and client will have to animate the shells to represent the marks. For example, if server send 3, out of 7 shells, 3 should have it's belly turned upside.
Trying to do this has been a major problem for me. I tried to transform.Rotate() when the velocity is reduced but it was not very reliable and sometimes acts crazy. Rotating afterrigidbody.isSleeping() works but very unrealistic.
I know I am trying to defy physics here, but there may be some ways to achieve what I want with minimum artificial effect.
I actually need some ideas.
Update - 1
After infor I receive below, I did found some information here, some advanced stuff here. Since the latter link had some advanced stuff, I wanted to start small. So I followed the first link and did below test.
I recorded the position, rotation & velocity of the sea shell with autosimulation enabled and logged them to a file. Then i used the Physics.Simulate() for the same scenario and logged the same.
Comparing the two tells me that data in both cases are kind of similar. So seems like for my requirements I need to simulate the sea-shell drop and then apply that sequence to the actual object.
Now my problem is how can I apply the results of physics.simulate() results (position, rotation, velocity etc..) to the actual sea-shell so the animation can be seen. If I set the positions to my gameobject within the simulation loop nothing happens.
public void Simulate()
{
rbdy = GetComponent<Rigidbody>();
rbdy.AddForce(new Vector3(0f, 0f, 10f));
rbdy.useGravity = true;
rbdy.mass = 1f;
//Simulate where it will be in 5 seconds
int i = 0;
while (simulateTime >= Time.fixedDeltaTime)
{
simulateTime -= Time.fixedDeltaTime;
Debug.Log($"position: {rbdy.position.ToString()} rotation: {rbdy.rotation.ToString()} Velocity {rbdy.velocity.magnitude}");
gameObject.transform.position = rbdy.position;
Physics.Simulate(Time.fixedDeltaTime);
}
}
So, how can I get this simulated data applied to actual gameobject in the scene?
Assume Physics are deterministic, just set the velocity and position and let it simulate on each client. Output should be the same. If the output differs slighly, you could adjust it and it may be only barely noticable.
Physics.simulate may be interesting to read, even if it's kind of the opposite of what you want.
You can throw in the client, record the steps in realtime or using physics.simulate (see point 2) and transmit the animation data as binary - then use it in the other clients to play the animation.
I've already tried depthmask shaders and examined some other ideas, but it seems like it doesn't suit me at all.
I'm making an AR game and I have a scene with a house and trees. All these objects are animated and do something like falling from the sky, but not all at once, but in sequence. For example, the house first, then trees, then fence etc.
(Plz, look at my picture for details) http://f2.s.qip.ru/bVqSAgcy.png
If user moves camera too far, he will see all these objects stucking in the air and waiting for their order to start falling, and it is not good. I want to hide this area from all sides (because in AR camera can move around freely) and make all parts visible only when each will start moving (falling down).
(One more screen) http://f3.s.qip.ru/bVqSAgcz.png
I thought about animation events, but there are too many objects (bricks, for example) and I can't handle all of them manually.
I look forward to your great advice ;)
P.S. Sorry for my bad english.
You can disable their(the objects that are gonna fall) mesh renderers and re active them when they are ready to fall.
See here for more details about mesh renderer.
Deactivate your Object. You might use the camera viewport coordinates to get a y position outside the viewport. They start on the bottom left of the screen (0,0) and go to the top right of the screen (1,1). Convert them to worldspace coordinates. Camera.ViewportToWorldPoint
Vector3 outsideCamera = Camera.main.ViewportToWorldPoint(new Vector3(0.5f, 1.2f, 10.0f));
Now you can use the intended x and z positions of your object. Activate it when you want to drop it.
myObject.transform.position = new Vector3(myObject.transform.position.x, outsideCamera.y, myObject.transform.position.z);
Another thing you could additionally do is scaling the object from very small to its intended size when it is falling. This would prevent the object being visible before falling when the users point the camera upwards.
1- Maybe you can use the Camera far clipping plane property.
Or you can even use 2 Cameras if you need to display let's say the landscape on one (which will not render the house + trees + ...) with a "big" far clipping plane and use a second one with Depth only clear flags rendering only the items (this one can have a smaller far clipping plane from what I understand).
2- Other suggestion I'd give you is adding the scale to your animation:
set the scale to 0 on the beginning of animation
wait for the item to be needed to fall down
set the scale to 1 (with a transition if needed)
make the item fall down
EDIT: the workaround you found is quite just fine too! But tracking only world position should be enough I think (saving a tiny amount of memory).
Hope this helps,
Finally, the solution I chose. I've added this script to each object in composition. It stores object's position (in my case both world and local) at Start() and listening if it changes in Update(). So, if true, stop monitoring and set MeshRenderer in on state.
[RequireComponent(typeof(MeshRenderer))]
public class RenderScript : MonoBehaviour
{
private MeshRenderer mr;
private bool monitoring = true;
private Vector3 posLocal;
private Vector3 posWorld;
// Use this for initialization
void Start()
{
mr = GetComponent<MeshRenderer>();
mr.enabled = false;
posLocal = transform.localPosition;
posWorld = transform.position;
}
// Update is called once per frame
void Update()
{
if (monitoring)
{
if (transform.localPosition != posLocal || transform.position != posWorld)
{
monitoring = false;
mr.enabled = true;
}
}
}
}
Even my funny cheap сhinese smartphone is alive after this, so, I guess, it's OK.
I'm working to let a character push objects around. The problem is that as soon as he touches an object he starts moving it, even when the touch was accidental and the character isn't facing the direction of the object.
What I want to do is get the direction the object when a collision happens, and if the camara is really facing that direction allow the player to move it.
Right now I only managed to get the direction of the object, but I don't know how to compare that with the direction of the camera.
This is what I'm trying now:
void OnCollisionEnter(Collision col) {
float maxOffset = 1f;
if (col.gameObject.name == "Sol") {
// Calculate object direction
Vector3 direction = (col.transform.position - transform.position).normalized;
// Check the offset with the camera rotation (this doesn't work)
Vector3 offset = direccion - Camera.main.transform.rotation.eulerAngles.normalized;
if(offset.x + offset.y + offset.z < maxOffset) {
// Move the object
}
}
You can try to achieve this in several different ways. And it is a bit dependent on how precise you mean facing the box.
You can get events when an object is visible within a certain camera, and when it enters or leaves using the following functions. With these commands from the moment the box gets rendered with that camera (so even if just a edge is visible) your collision will trigger.
OnWillRenderObject, Renderer.isVisible Renderer.OnBecameVisible, OnBecameInvisible
Or you could attempt to calculate whether and objects bounding box falls within the camera's view frustum, there for you could use the following geometry commands
GeometryUtility.CalculateFrustumPlanes, GeometryUtility.TestPlanesAABB
Or if you rather have a very precise facing you could also go for a Physics.Raycast So then you will only trigger the event when the ray is hitting the object.
Hope this helps ya out.
Take a compass obj and align it to ur device sorry object than when you move it you can always know where it points to.
theoretically it should work but maybe your object just moves around because of a bug in your simulator motion engine.
I'm developing a game that you drag and drop objects into boxes and I have no idea what's the best and most efficient way to detect whether my objects are in a box.
I'm well aware of colliders and I'm using BoxColliders and triggers to find out whether my object is touching a box but I want to detect the moment when my object (which we can assume to be sphere for sake of simplicity but later will be a mesh) is completely inside my box trigger/collider.
I read about "Contains" method of colliders but IIRC they just check if one single point inside that collider but I'm interested to know if the whole object is inside the collider.
Thanks in advance folks.
Short answer: If you want 100% accuracy, your algorithm will never be better than O(|V|) (worst case) where V = {all vertices in mesh}, meaning you'd run .Collides() over every vertex and break if you find one that is outside your container.
Longer answer: Several methods exist to subdivide mesh surfaces, examples include: KD-Trees, OcTrees. These are beyond the scope of an SO answer to provide a full implementation, I suggest you see the wiki pages for details.
You could use these methods to divide your mesh up in to smaller sets of vertices. To speed up your algorithm you would start at the root of your subdivision tree and test if that node is contained in your container box. Keep working through the tree until you find a node that is not contained by your box. This will allow your "contains" test to fail faster but ultimately you'll wind up testing every vertex if your box contains your mesh.
Caveat: This solution does not work if your mesh is animated. In that case your best bet is to use the bounds around things like arms, feet, legs, etc and use that information to cull your Contains() tests. Again, you'll end up having to test every vertex if the mesh is fully inside your box.
All boxes have a boxCollider. If an object touches the second box, the object must be inside the first box.
This is not a good solution but, maybe it will be usefull.
Use Renderer.bounds property to get bounding box of your object.
Depending on what object you have and how accurate you want to check it to be inside a collider you might than use one of the simple ways to determine that.
for a more refined and cleaner approach. this would be perfect for what you are doing .
you can check the distance between the object you are dragging and the box .
the box has a x,y,z value which represents its position in space.
so when you drag your gameobject it may be just 0.2 on the x,y, or z away from the centere of your box. so just use this method to calculate the distance between your dragged object and the box.
var other :Transform;
function Update()
{
var dist = Vector3.Distance(other.position, transform.position);
// while dragging
if(dist <10)// 10 being on all 3 axiz .
{
//dragged object.position = box position
}
if (dist == 0)
{
print("i am in the centre of the box");
}
}
thus your gameobject will be in the box .
The box within a box solution above is a good option, but if that won't work (due to variably sized/shaped objects) you might be able to accomplish something with Physics.Raycast or Collider.Raycast. I had a similar problem where I needed to test if arbitrary points were contained inside colliders (many of which were unusual blobby concave objects).
The basic idea is a "bed of nails" approach where I cast rays toward the point from multiple directions. If I hit the outside collider on all of the rays, then I can be pretty confident that the point is contained inside the collider (but still not completely certain). Here's a pic:
In this picture, we're trying to see if the blue point is inside the yellow collider. The GREEN arrows represent successful raycasts (the yellow collider is hit), and the PINK one is unsuccessful (the yellow collider is NOT hit).
Here is a code snippet illustrating this:
public static class CollisionUtils {
private static readonly Vector3[] raycastDirections;
// These are the directions that we shoot rays from to check the collider.
static UltrasoundCollisionUtils() {
raycastDirections = new Vector3[5];
raycastDirections[0] = new Vector3(0,1,0);
raycastDirections[1] = new Vector3(0,-1,-0);
raycastDirections[2] = new Vector3(0,0,1);
raycastDirections[3] = new Vector3(-1.41f, 0, -0.5f);
raycastDirections[4] = new Vector3(1.41f, 0, -0.5f);
}
public static bool IsContained (Vector3 targetPoint, Collider collider) {
// A quick check - if the bounds doesn't contain targetPoint, then it definitely can't be contained in the collider
if (!collider.bounds.Contains(targetPoint)) {
return false;
}
// The "100f * direction" is a magic number so that we
// start far enough from the point.
foreach (Vector3 direction in raycastDirections) {
Ray ray = new Ray(targetPoint - 100f * direction, direction);
RaycastHit dummyHit = new RaycastHit();
// dummyHit because collider.Raycast requires a RaycastHit
if (!collider.Raycast(ray, out dummyHit, 100f)) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
}
One way you could adapt this algorithm is rather than use Collider.Raycast, do a Physics.Raycast. If the rays hit anything other than your collider, then you know that your target object isn't entirely in the collider.
Add a BoxCollider which surrounds the whole of the object you are testing for and check its bounds min and max are contained within the BoxCollider its entering ... this may not suit for complex mesh objects but you may be able to get away with it and its cheap
Simply,
You can place a box Collider at the bottom of your container.. If your sphere or whatever object touches that then it is completely inside the container..
There is one method though....not that accurate but will work :
Make four empties with collider(Circle / Box) like four wheels of a car and make the object parent to these empty objects with collider.
Then assign every collider a bool whether it is touched or not....
Count the number of colliders touched along with the actual mesh collider...Roughly estimates the orientation of the overlap. If it is 2 that means touched or overlaped from sideways.
Ex: If two collider + the mesh collider is colliding which means it is overlapped sideways...
I solved it using bounds.contains(vector 3 point).
I placed a single point on the object to be detected, and once it was inside the checking limits, I was able to acknowledge its presence.
public class PointInsideBound : MonoBehaviour
{
public Collider BoundCollider;
private Transform pointToCheck;
private void OnTriggerEnter(Collider other)
{
if (pointToCheck == null)
{
//There is a point on top of the collided object. Getting the reference here.
pointToCheck = other.transform.GetChild(0);
}
}
private void OnTriggerStay(Collider other)
{
if (pointToCheck == null)
{
return;
}
if (BoundCollider.bounds.Contains(pointToCheck.position))
{
Debug.Log(" Point Inside the boxcollider");
BoundCollider.enabled = false;
}
}
}
You should use a collider. This is description. http://docs.unity3d.com/Documentation/ScriptReference/Collider.html