 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In anim 6, the structure on the right is falling straight downward. One
corner hits first and imparts lateral velocity to the structure but no spin.
I'm not bothered by the amount of friction but by the lateral thrust. I
find this very counterintuitive, although perhaps I haven't played with a
cubic array of balls.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Greg M. Johnson" wrote:
>
> In anim 6, the structure on the right is falling straight downward. One
> corner hits first and imparts lateral velocity to the structure but no spin.
> I'm not bothered by the amount of friction but by the lateral thrust. I
> find this very counterintuitive, although perhaps I haven't played with a
> cubic array of balls.
I viewed it again and did not find the right 'cube' does not gain enough
spin during the first collision. The lateral thrust does not seem that
unnatural to me. If you let a cube sized rubber (or even a dice) fall on
a flat surface it can jump quite heavily to the side depending on the way
it hits the surface. Of course the sidewards movement is usually slowed
down by friction as soon as it hits the surface a second time.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 05 May. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Fernando Gonzalez del Cueto
Subject: Re: Balls connected (377+500k)
Date: 30 May 2002 13:53:42
Message: <3cf66726@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Taking the friction aside, I don't find it unnatural at all... I like it.
Fernando.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Wow! That's pretty neat. Do you think you could do this with a cubic mesh
instead of cylinders and spheres? I'm curious how that would look...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Okaaaaaaay. Maybe it *is* the friction and I'm imagining a huge amount of
momentum and "normal friction."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tony[B]" wrote:
>
> Wow! That's pretty neat.
Thank you.
> Do you think you could do this with a cubic mesh
> instead of cylinders and spheres? I'm curious how that would look...
I will either have to make the spheres very small or it would need to be
rounded, something like in:
Subject: Concave shapes (43KB)
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 17:07:40 +0200
Newsgroups: povray.binaries.images
From: Tor Olav Kristensen <tto### [at] online no>
news://news.povray.org/39DC993C.5D889A93@online.no
http://news.povray.org/39DC993C.5D889A93@online.no
I have a look.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 05 May. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Fernando Gonzalez del Cueto wrote:
>
> Taking the friction aside, I don't find it unnatural at all... I like it.
>
Thanks.
There is another factor limiting realism: The mass distribution is not
like it would be in a solid cube, therefore the movement will be
different. Adding another sphere in the center of the cube should be able
to compensate this of course.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 05 May. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I made another similar animation with higher stiffness of the
connections. The number of integration steps is increased to 60 per
frame, damping is fairly low.
It probably looks somewhat strange since stiff materials with such low
internal damping are not very common, especially not in the form of cubes.
You can also see in the end that there is no collision detection between
the cubes yet. Just calculating the sphere-sphere collisions would not be
very useful, therefore i left it out for speed reasons.
http://www-public.tu-bs.de:8080/~y0013390/files/ball_sim8.mpg
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 05 May. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I like it, but if I'm not mistaken I can see some unstable behaviour: one of
the cubes suddenly starts spinning faster.
--
Apache
POV-Ray Cloth experiments: http://geitenkaas.dns2go.com/experiments/
Email: apa### [at] yahoocom
ICQ: 146690431
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Apache wrote:
>
> I like it, but if I'm not mistaken I can see some unstable behaviour: one of
> the cubes suddenly starts spinning faster.
There is nothing wrong about a cube changing the rotation speed in general
as long as the total sum of energies is constant or decreasing. But it
could be that despite 60 integration steps per frame simulation
inaccuracies have a quite strong influence in this case.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 05 May. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
