0
Research Papers

Contact Prediction Between Moving Objects Bounded by Curved Surfaces

[+] Author and Article Information
Abdulmohsen Al Bedah, John J. Uicker

 King Saud University, Ridya, Saudi Arabia e-mail: albedah@ksu.edu.sa University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706 e-mail: uicker@engr.wisc.edu

For further information on the use of transformation matrices for the representation of motion see Ref. [23].

We say theoretically because, in reality, sharp edges and corners are usually rounded; if this is the situation, then we will have only the face-face case.

Divergence is declared when the number of iterations exceeds a prescribed number before satisfying Eqs. 27.

J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng 12(1), 011003 (Dec 21, 2011) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4005453 History: Received October 04, 2011; Revised October 09, 2011; Published December 21, 2011; Online December 21, 2011

This paper presents an algorithm for exact contact prediction between moving objects bounded by curved surfaces. The algorithm uses hierarchies of oriented bounding boxes (HOBBs) and local numerical methods for finding contact. Objects need not be convex and are described using the B-rep scheme. The bounding faces are represented by nonuniform rational B-splines (NURBS). The collision time is sought in short time intervals during the motion, during which time is one of the problem variables. HOBBs are based on curvature regions of the surfaces. This criterion ensures that local numerical methods will converge to the contact points if they exist. The patches enclosed in overlapping leaf nodes are tested for contact by solving a system of nonlinear equations, based on the type of collision expected. The types of collision studied are cusp–cusp, cusp–ridge, cusp– face, ridge–ridge, ridge–face, and face–face collisions. The current algorithm is implemented and compared to an efficient polyhedral collision package, and results appear promising.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Example 3. Initial position of the objects: perspective view (left) and front view (right). Lower view shows objects at the time of contact with the contact point highlighted by a circle.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Types of contact between curved surfaces: (a) cusp–cusp, (b) cusp–ridge, (c) cusp–face, (d) ridge–ridge, (e) ridge–face, and (f) face–face

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Geometric interpretation of Newton method

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Chord length to radius of curvature relationship

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Estimation of angles in the u and v directions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

(a) Using only minimum distance as the merging criterion. BV4 which encloses both BV1 and BV3 contains a lot of empty space. (b) Using minimum distance and adjacency as merging criteria produces BV4 with less empty space.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Efficiency comparison between current algorithm and rapid software

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

The light gray area is where rapid was more efficient. rapid was always more efficient in discovering first intersection only when the number of triangles was≤ 70 or equal 1218, or when the objects were disjoint.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In