Using three.js, and adapting instructions from West Langley's post provided here: Three.js: Adding and Removing Children of Rotated Objects, I set up a WebGL scene to which five cube meshes are added. Initially, all objects are children of the scene, then, I attach them to the fifth "parentCube" cube and translate it 100 units along the Y-Axis thereby translating the other four cubes and subsequently detach them.
After that, I want to independently translate the "parentCube" cube (previously the parent of the four cubes) back to the origin, however, when I perform that translation, the other four cube meshes also translate with the former parent cube mesh, even when I detached them.
This may be a very basic question, but how can I independently translate "parentCube" without affecting the position of the other cubes considering all of the above details? Where am I going wrong with the detachment? Any help would be appreciated. Thank you :)
Here's the code sample which I use to perform all of the above:
//Create parentCube mesh
var parentCube = new THREE.Mesh(new THREE.CubeGeometry(100, 100, 100, 10, 10, 10), new THREE.MeshBasicMaterial({ color: 0xa1ff11, wireframe: true }));
scene.add(parentCube);
//...create materials for the child cubes....
//create child cube mesh
for(var i = 0; i < 4; i++)
cubeMesh[i] = new THREE.Mesh(new THREE.CubeGeometry(100, 100, 100, 30, 30, 30), materials[i]);
//--> Set child cube world positions before the attachment to parentCube mesh
cubeMesh[0].position.set((100 / 2),(100 / 2),(100 / 2));
cubeMesh[1].position.set(-(100 / 2),(100 / 2),(100 / 2));
cubeMesh[2].position.set(-(100 / 2),-(100 / 2),(100 / 2));
cubeMesh[3].position.set((100 / 2),-(100 / 2),(100 / 2));
//Add child cubes to the scene
for(var i = 0; i < cubeMesh.length; i++)
scene.add(cubeMesh[i]);
//attach child cubeMesh[i] to parentCube mesh
for(var i = 0; i < 4; i++)
THREE.SceneUtils.attach(cubeMesh[i], scene, parentCube);
//--> Set positions of child elements after attachment to parentCube
cubeMesh[0].position.set((100 / 2),(100 / 2),(100 / 2));
cubeMesh[1].position.set(-(100 / 2),(100 / 2),(100 / 2));
cubeMesh[2].position.set(-(100 / 2),(100 / 2),-(100 / 2));
cubeMesh[3].position.set((100 / 2),(100 / 2),-(100 / 2));
//translate parentCube
parentCube.position.set(0,150,0);
parentCube.updateMatrixWorld();
//Attempt to detach child objects from parentCube
//And make them children of the scene
for(var i = 0; i < 4; i++)
{
cubeMesh[i].updateMatrixWorld();
THREE.SceneUtils.detach(cubeMesh[i], parentCube, scene);
}
//Attempt to translate parentCube back to origin
parentCube.position.set(0,0,0);
}
This is an old post but the sake of search engines here are my thoughts about this
Looking at the code for THREE.SceneUtils.attach() it appears to me that the code assumes the object that you want to attach is parented to the scene object. This makes it problematic to work with when your objects are actually nested further down in the scene graph. To address this problem I wrote this function
This allows you to reparent an object from any level of the scene graph to any other level in the scene graph. This dispenses with the need to "Detach" objects. You just reparent them to the scene if thats what you need
your line of code
should be
I have done a demo with your example, and what I believe should be te correct approach.
HTML
JavaScript
Notice specially that I add the children directly to the parent (not the scene), and that I consider them attached from the beginning. After that, detaching and reattaching them works as expected
How could this be used for a Rubik's cube simulation ?
I would just create all the cubes added to the scene.
Then, to perform a move, you have to