Concave Meshes

[Xenoprimate]

Hello - what is the best way to represent a concave model in my world? After a little preliminary research I've noticed there are basically three options:

• Decomposing the shape in to multiple convex shapes and representing them using a btCompoundShape
• Using a btGImpactMeshShape
• Using a btBvhTriangleMeshShape

So, my questions are:

1. I understand that a btBvhTriangleMeshShape does not collide with other btBvhTriangleMeshShapes... But if, say, a simple sphere collided with it, would the correct physics response still occur on the sphere? Including incorporation of angular/linear velocity set manually on the btBvhTriangleMeshShape (if any)?
2. Also, it seems that using a btGImpactMeshShape would always be easier than splitting an arbitrary mesh. So what's the tradeoff? Is btCompoundShape more efficient?
3. Considering that all of my concave shapes will be moved manually anyway; is it better to use a btBvhTriangleMeshShape (assuming the answer to #1 is "yes")?

[donggas90]

Reliability : Decomposition(Multiple Convex Hulls) > Bvh > GImpact
Speed(not absolute) : Bvh > GImpact > Decomposition
Limitations :
- Bvh : Cannot move.
- GImpact : Often occur blocking errors with big triangles.
- Decomposition : Cannot apply per triangle materials.

These are my opinion from experience. Not a result of research.