Physics-Based 3D Scene Editing via Constrained Simulation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional 3D modeling tools are time-intensive and inefficient for editing 3D scenes due to the lack of physics-based constraints, leading to overlapping objects and sensitive simulated behaviors that do not allow for natural edits.

Innovation Solution

Integrating a physics engine with 3D modeling tools to perform constrained simulations, damping motion, and preventing object overlap, allowing for intuitive object manipulation by translating user inputs into simulation parameters and applying changes based on physics simulation results.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If conventional 3D modeling tools are used to edit objects manually, then users have full control over position and orientation variables, but the editing process becomes time-intensive and inefficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveediting efficiencyVSAvoidtime required for manual editing
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual mechanical editing operations with automated physics-based simulation. Instead of manually adjusting position and orientation variables, the system uses physics engines to automatically compute and apply transformations that satisfy both user intent and physical constraints, dramatically improving editing efficiency while reducing time investment.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The physics-based simulation system performs self-service by automatically resolving object arrangements, preventing overlaps, and adjusting positions without requiring continuous manual intervention. The simulation autonomously computes valid configurations based on initial user input and physical constraints, eliminating the need for repeated manual editing iterations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Ease of operation

If conventional 3D modeling tools allow free object placement, then users can position objects independently, but objects may overlap and require multiple editing iterations to achieve natural arrangements

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveobject placement flexibilityVSAvoidobject arrangement validity
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces physics constraints as an intermediary layer between user input and final object placement. This intermediary automatically prevents invalid configurations such as object overlaps while still allowing users to place objects freely according to their intent. The physics engine acts as a mediator that resolves conflicts and ensures arrangement validity without restricting user flexibility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies preliminary anti-action by pre-configuring physics constraints that prevent harmful outcomes (object overlaps) before they occur. Instead of allowing objects to overlap and then correcting the error, the constraints proactively block invalid placements, ensuring reliable arrangements from the outset while maintaining ease of operation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #9Preliminary anti-action

3Productivity

If physics simulation is applied to 3D scene editing, then object arrangements become more natural and automatic, but the system complexity increases due to integration of physics engine

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvescene arrangement efficiencyVSAvoidsystem integration complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent achieves universality by designing a physics-based editing system that handles multiple types of object interactions and constraints through a unified framework. The same physics engine and constraint system that prevent overlaps also naturally handle collisions, gravity effects, and spatial relationships, eliminating the need for separate specialized tools for each editing scenario and justifying the integration complexity through multi-functional capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Reliability

If manual editing iterations are performed to prevent object overlap, then users can ensure natural arrangements, but the process requires multiple time-consuming iterations

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvearrangement naturalnessVSAvoidediting speed
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by pre-configuring physics constraints and simulation parameters that encode natural arrangement principles before the editing process begins. These pre-established constraints automatically guide object placements to be natural and non-overlapping, eliminating the need for multiple iterative corrections and significantly improving editing speed while maintaining arrangement quality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS11657588B2Physics based manipulation
Publication Date: 2023.05.23 ADOBE INC
  • US11657588B2 patent drawing
  • US11657588B2 patent drawing
  • US11657588B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems and methods for three-dimensional (3D) modeling are described. Embodiments of the inventive concept are configured to receive manipulation input for editing a scene in a static 3D modeling application, perform a physics simulation based on the manipulation input, wherein the physics simulation comprises a plurality of simulation steps performed based on a set of motion constraints configured for the static 3D modeling application, and apply a change to the scene in the static 3D modeling application based on the physics simulation.