skip to main content
research-article
Public Access

Medial IPC: accelerated incremental potential contact with medial elastics

Published:19 July 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We propose a framework of efficient nonlinear deformable simulation with both fast continuous collision detection and robust collision resolution. We name this new framework Medial IPC as it integrates the merits from medial elastics, for an efficient and versatile reduced simulation, as well as incremental potential contact, for a robust collision and contact resolution. We leverage medial axis transform to construct a kinematic subspace. Instead of resorting to projective dynamics, we use classic hyperelastics to embrace real-world nonlinear materials. A novel reduced continuous collision detection algorithm is presented based on the medial mesh. Thanks to unique geometric properties of medial axis and medial primitives, we derive closed-form formulations for identifying between-primitive collision within the reduced medial space. In the meantime, the implicit barrier energy that generates necessary repulsion forces for collision resolution is also formulated with the medial coordinate. In other words, Medial IPC exploits a universal reduced coordinate for simulation, continuous self-/collision detection, and IPC-based collision resolution. Continuous collision detection also allows more aggressive time stepping. In addition, we carefully implement our system with a heterogeneous CPU-GPU deployment such that massively parallelizable computations are carried out on the GPU while few sequential computations are on the CPU. Such implementation also frees us from generating training poses for selecting Cubature points and pre-computing their weights. We have tested our method on complicated deformable models and collision-rich simulation scenarios. Due to the reduced nature of our system, the computation is faster than fullspace IPC or other fullspace methods using continuous collision detection by at least one order. The simulation remains high-quality as the medial subspace captures intriguing and local deformations with sufficient realism.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

a158-lan.mp4
3450626.3459753.mp4

References

  1. Samantha Ainsley, Etienne Vouga, Eitan Grinspun, and Rasmus Tamstorf. 2012. Speculative parallel asynchronous contact mechanics. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 31, 6 (2012), 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Nina Amenta and Marshall Bern. 1999. Surface reconstruction by Voronoi filtering. Discrete & Computational Geometry 22, 4 (1999), 481--504.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Steven S An, Theodore Kim, and Doug L James. 2008. Optimizing cubature for efficient integration of subspace deformations. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 27, 5 (2008), 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. IK Argyros, MA Hernández-Verón, and MJ Rubio. 2019. On the Convergence of SecantLike Methods. In Current Trends in Mathematical Analysis and Its Interdisciplinary Applications. Springer, 141--183.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. David Baraff. 1994. Fast contact force computation for nonpenetrating rigid bodies. In Proceedings of the 21st annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive technique. ACM, 23--34.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Jernej Barbič and Doug L James. 2010. Subspace self-collision culling. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 29, 4 (2010), 81.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Jernej Barbič and Jovan Popović. 2008. Real-time control of physically based simulations using gentle forces. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 27, 5 (2008), 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Jernej Barbič and Doug L James. 2005. Real-time subspace integration for St. Venant-Kirchhoff deformable models. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 24, 3 (2005), 982--990.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Adam W Bargteil and Elaine Cohen. 2014. Animation of deformable bodies with quadratic bézier finite elements. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 33, 3 (2014), 27.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Gino van den Bergen. 1997. Efficient collision detection of complex deformable models using AABB trees. Journal of graphics tools 2, 4 (1997), 1--13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Harry Blum. 1967. A transformation for extracting new descriptors of shape. Models for Perception of Speech and Visual Forms, 1967 (1967), 362--380.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Sofien Bouaziz, Sebastian Martin, Tiantian Liu, Ladislav Kavan, and Mark Pauly. 2014. Projective dynamics: fusing constraint projections for fast simulation. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 33, 4 (2014), 154:1--154:11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Christopher Brandt, Elmar Eisemann, and Klaus Hildebrandt. 2018. Hyper-reduced projective dynamics. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 37, 4 (2018), 1--13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Tyson Brochu, Essex Edwards, and Robert Bridson. 2012. Efficient geometrically exact continuous collision detection. ACM Trans. on Graph. (TOG) 31, 4 (2012), 1--7.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Steve Capell, Seth Green, Brian Curless, Tom Duchamp, and Zoran Popović. 2002. Interactive skeleton-driven dynamic deformations. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 21, 3 (2002), 586--593.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Min Gyu Choi and Hyeong-Seok Ko. 2005. Modal warping: Real-time simulation of large rotational deformation and manipulation. IEEE Trans. on Visualization and Computer Graphics 11, 1 (2005), 91--101.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Dirk Den Hertog. 2012. Interior point approach to linear, quadratic and convex programming: algorithms and complexity. Vol. 277. Springer Science & Business Media.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. JC Ehiwario and SO Aghamie. 2014. Comparative study of bisection, Newton-Raphson and secant methods of root-finding problems. IOSR J. of Engineering 4, 4 (2014), 1--7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Kenny Erleben. 2018. Methodology for assessing mesh-based contact point methods. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 37, 3 (2018), 1--30.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. François Faure, Benjamin Gilles, Guillaume Bousquet, and Dinesh K Pai. 2011. Sparse meshless models of complex deformable solids. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 30, 4 (2011), 73.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Marco Fratarcangeli, Valentina Tibaldo, and Fabio Pellacini. 2016. Vivace: A practical gauss-seidel method for stable soft body dynamics. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 35, 6 (2016), 1--9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Moritz Geilinger, David Hahn, Jonas Zehnder, Moritz Bächer, Bernhard Thomaszewski, and Stelian Coros. 2020. ADD: analytically differentiable dynamics for multi-body systems with frictional contact. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 39, 6 (2020), 1--15.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Benjamin Gilles, Guillaume Bousquet, Francois Faure, and Dinesh K Pai. 2011. Frame-based elastic models. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 30, 2 (2011), 15.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Stefan Gottschalk, Ming C Lin, and Dinesh Manocha. 1996. OBBTree: A hierarchical structure for rapid interference detection. In Proceedings of the 23rd annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques. ACM, 171--180.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Gaël Guennebaud, Benoit Jacob, et al. 2010. Eigen. URl: http://eigen.tuxfamily.org (2010).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. David Harmon, Etienne Vouga, Rasmus Tamstorf, and Eitan Grinspun. 2008. Robust treatment of simultaneous collisions. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 27, 3 (2008), 1--4.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Kris K Hauser, Chen Shen, and James F O'Brien. 2003. Interactive deformation using modal analysis with constraints.. In Graphics Interface, Vol. 3. 16--17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Florian Hecht, Yeon Jin Lee, Jonathan R Shewchuk, and James F O'Brien. 2012. Updated sparse cholesky factors for corotational elastodynamics. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 31, 5 (2012), 123.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Don Herbison-Evans. 1995. Solving quartics and cubics for graphics. In Graphics Gems V. Elsevier, 3--15.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Philip Martyn Hubbard. 1995. Collision detection for interactive graphics applications. IEEE Trans. on Visualization and Computer Graphics 1, 3 (1995), 218--230.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Geoffrey Irving, Joseph Teran, and Ronald Fedkiw. 2004. Invertible finite elements for robust simulation of large deformation. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics symposium on Computer animation. 131--140.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Alec Jacobson, Ilya Baran, Jovan Popovic, and Olga Sorkine. 2011. Bounded biharmonic weights for real-time deformation. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 30, 4 (2011), 78--1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Doug L James, Jernej Barbič, and Christopher D Twigg. 2004. Squashing cubes: Automating deformable model construction for graphics. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2004 Sketches. 38.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Doug L James and Dinesh K Pai. 2004. BD-tree: output-sensitive collision detection for reduced deformable models. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 23, 3 (2004), 393--398.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Theodore Kim and David Eberle. 2020. Dynamic deformables: implementation and production practicalities. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2020 Courses. 1--182.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Theodore Kim and Doug L James. 2009. Skipping steps in deformable simulation with online model reduction. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 28, 5 (2009), 123.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Shankar Krishnan, M Gopi, M Lin, Dinesh Manocha, and A Pattekar. 1998. Rapid and accurate contact determination between spline models using ShellTrees. Computer Graphics Forum 17, 3 (1998), 315--326.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Lei Lan, Ran Luo, Marco Fratarcangeli, Weiwei Xu, Huamin Wang, Xiaohu Guo, Junfeng Yao, and Yin Yang. 2020. Medial elastics: efficient and collision-ready deformation via medial axis transform. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 39, 3 (2020), 1--17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Minchen Li, Zachary Ferguson, Teseo Schneider, Timothy Langlois, Denis Zorin, Daniele Panozzo, Chenfanfu Jiang, and Danny M Kaufman. 2020. Incremental potential contact: intersection-and inversion-free, large-deformation dynamics. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 39, 4 (2020).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Pan Li, Bin Wang, Feng Sun, Xiaohu Guo, Caiming Zhang, and Wenping Wang. 2015. Q-Mat: Computing medial axis transform by quadratic error minimization. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 35, 1 (2015), 8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Tiantian Liu, Adam W. Bargteil, James F. O'Brien, and Ladislav Kavan. 2013. Fast simulation of mass-spring systems. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 32, 6 (2013), 214:1--214:7.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Ran Luo, Weiwei Xu, Huamin Wang, Kun Zhou, and Yin Yang. 2018. Physics-based quadratic deformation using elastic weighting. IEEE Trans. on Visualization and Computer Graphics 24, 12 (2018), 3188--3199.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Miles Macklin, Kenny Erleben, Matthias Müller, Nuttapong Chentanez, Stefan Jeschke, and Tae-Yong Kim. 2020. Primal/dual descent methods for dynamics. Computer Graphics Forum 39, 8 (2020), 89--100.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Miles Macklin, Kenny Erleben, Matthias Müller, Nuttapong Chentanez, Stefan Jeschke, and Viktor Makoviychuk. 2019. Non-smooth newton methods for deformable multi-body dynamics. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 38, 5 (2019), 1--20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Sebastian Martin, Peter Kaufmann, Mario Botsch, Eitan Grinspun, and Markus Gross. 2010. Unified simulation of elastic rods, shells, and solids. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 29, 4 (2010), 39.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Aleka McAdams, Andrew Selle, Rasmus Tamstorf, Joseph Teran, and Eftychios Sifakis. 2011. Computing the singular value decomposition of 3x3 matrices with minimal branching and elementary floating point operations. Technical Report. University of Wisconsin-Madison Department of Computer Sciences.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Matthew Moore and Jane Wilhelms. 1988. Collision detection and response for computer animation. In Proceedings of the 15th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, Vol. 22. ACM, 289--298.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Jean Jacques Moreau. 2011. On unilateral constraints, friction and plasticity. In New variational techniques in mathematical physics. Springer, 171--322.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Matthias Müller, Bruno Heidelberger, Matthias Teschner, and Markus Gross. 2005. Meshless deformations based on shape matching. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 24, 3 (2005), 471--478.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. CUDA Nvidia. 2008. Cublas library. NVIDIA Corporation, Santa Clara, California 15, 27 (2008), 31.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. IFD Oliveira and RHC Takahashi. 2020. An enhancement of the bisection method average performance preserving minmax optimality. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS) 47, 1 (2020), 1--24.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Miguel A Otaduy, Rasmus Tamstorf, Denis Steinemann, and Markus Gross. 2009. Implicit contact handling for deformable objects. Computer Graphics Forum 28, 2 (2009), 559--568.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. Alex Pentland and John Williams. 1989. Good vibrations: Modal dynamics for graphics and animation. In Proceedings of the 16th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, Vol. 23. ACM.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Eftychios Sifakis and Jernej Barbic. 2012. FEM simulation of 3D deformable solids: a practitioner's guide to theory, discretization and model reduction. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2012 Courses. ACM, 20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Breannan Smith, Fernando De Goes, and Theodore Kim. 2018. Stable neo-hookean flesh simulation. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 37, 2 (2018), 1--15.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Feng Sun, Yi-King Choi, Yizhou Yu, and Wenping Wang. 2016. Medial meshes: a compact and accurate representation of medial axis transform. IEEE Trans. on Visualization and Computer Graphics 22, 3 (2016), 1278--1290.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Rasmus Tamstorf, Toby Jones, and Stephen F McCormick. 2015. Smoothed aggregation multigrid for cloth simulation. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 34, 6 (2015), 245.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Huamin Wang and Yin Yang. 2016. Descent methods for elastic body simulation on the GPU. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 35, 6 (2016), 212.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Hongyi Xu, Funshing Sin, Yufeng Zhu, and Jernej Barbič. 2015. Nonlinear material design using principal stretches. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 34, 4 (2015), 1--11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Yin Yang, Dingzeyu Li, Weiwei Xu, Yuan Tian, and Changxi Zheng. 2015. Expediting precomputation for reduced deformable simulation. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 34, 6 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Gabriel Zachmann. 2002. Minimal hierarchical collision detection. In ACM symposium on Virtual reality software and technology. ACM, 121--128.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Gabriel Zachmann and Elmar Langetepe. 2003. Geometric data structures for computer graphics. Eurographics Assoc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Changxi Zheng and Doug L James. 2012. Energy-based self-collision culling for arbitrary mesh deformations. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 31, 4 (2012), 98.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  64. Yongning Zhu, Eftychios Sifakis, Joseph Teran, and Achi Brandt. 2010. An efficient multigrid method for the simulation of high-resolution elastic solids. ACM Trans. Graph. (TOG) 29, 2 (2010), 16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. Olgierd Cecil Zienkiewicz, Robert Leroy Taylor, Olgierd Cecil Zienkiewicz, and Robert Lee Taylor. 1977. The finite element method. Vol. 36. McGraw-hill London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Medial IPC: accelerated incremental potential contact with medial elastics

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM Transactions on Graphics
        ACM Transactions on Graphics  Volume 40, Issue 4
        August 2021
        2170 pages
        ISSN:0730-0301
        EISSN:1557-7368
        DOI:10.1145/3450626
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2021 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 19 July 2021
        Published in tog Volume 40, Issue 4

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader