| |
|
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Q: Does the Reachin API follow a certain graphics standard?
A: The API architecture is built upon the VRML standard and uses OpenGL for the graphics rendering. By providing haptic extensions, or nodes, to the VRML standard the Reachin API provides a powerful development environment for haptic enabled applications.
Q: What is the main difference between Reachin API and HaptX?
A: Reachin API provides a comprehensive development environment, including graphics, sound, and haptics. Reachin API is built upon the VRML standard. HaptX is a pure haptics engine, which is designed for easy integration into any kind of host application, whether it is a computer game engine or a plug-in for a medical application.
Q: What hardware does HaptX support?
A: Novint Falcon and Sensable 3DOF devices.
Q: Does HaptX run on Windows Vista?
A: HaptX runs on Windows Vista and Windows XP.
Q: My company uses a proprietary visualization engine written in C++ which uses DirectX for all the rendering. Would it be possible to integrate HaptX without having to rewrite the graphics engine?
A: HaptX utilizes the same model and texture resources as the graphics engine and can be integrated into both OpenGL and DirectX applications. Integrating the HaptX engine is therefore a straight forward process. HaptX provides the developer with a clear interface and thorough documentation. There are also OpenGL and DirectX examples bundled in the HaptX installation which minimize the initial learning step.
Q: What language is HaptX written in?
A: HaptX is written in C++.
Q: I am planning to integrate a commercial quality physics engine in my game engine. Is it possible to combine the interaction of physical objects with HaptX, that is, touch objects which are moving?
A: Yes, when using HaptX it is possible to combine physics engines and the interaction of Touch Controllers. In fact, there are code examples included in the product which show how to combine physics engines and HaptX.
Q: What performance penalty could I expect when integrating HaptX in my game engine?
A: Rendering ForceModels is very cheap, while HaptX SurfaceModels require a little bit more CPU time. Depending on what the real application bottlenecks are (which very seldom is HaptX), we usually say that HaptX lowers the application framerate with about 2-7 percent.
Q: I work in product design. It would be valuable for me to be able to visualize the product in terms of shape, material and texture, and show it to my boss before I make an expensive, real, prototype. I work with high-resolution models, approx 20 000 polygons. Can HaptX handle this many polygons?
A: Yes, the HaptX Engine is very efficient. HaptX has been used to touch-enable models consisting of over 500 000 polys without losing realtime framerates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
