Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Border smoothing in isotropic remeshing #7631

Closed
ipadjen opened this issue Aug 2, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #7633
Closed

Border smoothing in isotropic remeshing #7631

ipadjen opened this issue Aug 2, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #7633
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@ipadjen
Copy link
Member

ipadjen commented Aug 2, 2023

Issue Details

The combination of NP relax_constraints(true) and a larger number of tangential smoothing iterations can cause unexpected results along the mesh border:

vs the same case but with relax_constraints(false)

To recreate the results from above, I used Polyhedron demo, nefertiti.off mesh and the following setup:

Screenshot 2023-08-02 at 11 12 22

No feature edges were used.

Environment

  • Operating system (Windows/Mac/Linux, 32/64 bits): Mac
  • Compiler: Apple Clang
  • Release or debug mode: Release
  • Specific flags used (if any):
  • CGAL version: master (2023-08-02)
  • Boost version:
  • Other libraries versions if used (Eigen, TBB, etc.): QT5
@janetournois
Copy link
Member

Thanks @ipadjen for the report.
Did you experience that issue only in the demo or also in a standalone .cpp ?

@ipadjen
Copy link
Member Author

ipadjen commented Aug 2, 2023

I get the same behavior in a standalone .cpp when using the following NPs

CGAL::parameters::number_of_iterations(5)
                 .number_of_relaxation_steps(50)
                 .relax_constraints(true)

It is directly correlated to the number of relaxation steps, i.e. increasing it makes it worse.

@janetournois
Copy link
Member

Thank you

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants