Geometric Contact Potential

Zizhou Huang, Max Paik, Zachary Ferguson, Daniele Panozzo, Denis Zorin

New York University

ACM Transactions on Graphics (SIGGRAPH 2025)

Comparison showing spurious collision forces in IPC removed by our method
Our method (right) eliminates the spurious collision forces in IPC (left).

Abstract

Barrier potentials gained popularity as a means for robust contact handling in physical modeling and for modeling self-avoiding shapes. The key to the success of these approaches is adherence to geometric constraints, i.e., avoiding intersections, which are the cause of most robustness problems in complex deformation simulation with contact. However, existing barrier-potential methods may lead to spurious forces and imperfect satisfaction of the geometric constraints. They may have strong resolution dependence, requiring careful adaptation of the potential parameters to the object discretizations.

We present a systematic derivation of a continuum potential defined for smooth and piecewise smooth surfaces, starting from identifying a set of natural requirements for contact potentials, including the barrier property, locality, differentiable dependence on shape, and absence of forces in rest configurations. Our potential is formulated independently of surface discretization and addresses the shortcomings of existing potential-based methods while retaining their advantages.

We present a discretization of our potential that is a drop-in replacement for the potential used in IPC, and compare its behavior to other potential formulations, demonstrating that it has the expected behavior. The presented formulation connects existing barrier approaches, as all recent existing methods can be viewed as a variation of the presented potential, and lays a foundation for developing alternative (e.g., higher-order) versions.

Results

Challenging scenes

Our method simulates challenging examples from IPC without any intersection.

Larger contact radius

Our method (middle and right) allows a much larger contact radius compared with IPC (left).

Distribution of contact forces for increasing dhat values

Shape optimization

Our simulator is naturally differentiable and supports shape optimization. The larger contact radius lets our method make progress in cases where IPC cannot.

Shape optimization of a plier geometry

Fewer spurious forces

Our method does not exhibit the horizontal spurious force in IPC that causes the block to rotate.

IPC
Ours

The collision force of our method is more concentrated where the force is necessary, compared with IPC and convergent IPC.

Force concentration comparison on an hourglass scene

Friction forces

Our method naturally supports IPC-style friction.

IPC
Ours

Convergence

Because a large contact radius is admissible, our method converges faster and takes less time to simulate.

IPC
Ours