Hellow !!!!

I 'm writing animation system for games..... and I know a wrong AABB for skin mesh will cause Frustum culling mistake, because AABB must

bigger than actual mesh size.

It's impossible to calculate global position of vertices of skined mesh using the bone matrices and then use the vertices to calculate the global AABB .Is there someone know any effective algorithm to get a approximate result ?

By the way, the animation system is run inside the scene graph(model, joint, mesh are made as nodes), and the update AABB function will be called after global transform matrix has been updated .

However I don't actually use the global transform to render the skin mesh, the formula of computing the BoneFinalMat

is initially be : BoneFinalMat = inverseBindMat * BoneToRoot * RootToMeshNode. and somebody(not me) should pass the global transform matrix of mesh node to shader. But I slim down the formula to BoneFinalMat = inverseBindMat * BoneToRoot, so I just pass a Identity matrix as the world matrix to shader.

Maybe I need a algorithm to compute the global AABB of skin mesh that would have nothing to do with the global transform of mesh node.

Usually the artists also define a worst-case AABB which gets exported with the model. This AABB would fully contain the model in every possible pose. You really don't want to update the AABB at runtime.

A more accurate but still fast method is to have a bounding capsule for each skeleton bone, and per frame calculate bounding box from all capsules.

Fast if the CPU already knows bone transforms, nearly as good as doing per vertex and worth for near / expensive characters.

Dirk's suggestion is probably the most common solution and JoeJ's would be effective. But, if you have need of tighter bounds the manner I've always used is to simply compute the bounds into the animation itself at point of export. It's the same cost as computing an extra joint and you can get accurate bounds. If you are doing blending, you simply take the max bounds of all running animations. It is not quite as performant as a single unified bounds but it is better than the capsule method since you have no traversal involved, but it is not as tight when using blended animations.

At this point, the suggestions should solve whatever you are looking for. The benefits/detriments are:

Unified bounds: No computation overhead. Sloppy so often animating even if not in view.

Capsules: Relatively tight bounds. Requires a hierarchical traversal, can cause cache issues if you have lots of characters.

Animation driven: Perfect for single animation, not as tight as capsules when blending animations, but tighter than unified. Cost is the same as an additional bone in the skeleton and costs no traversal.