 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Very impressive.
One small criticism: it looks like your bendy object hasn't got smooth shading.
i.e. you can see the polygons as it's falling off.
But anyway, it looks amazing, please post some more renders :)
--
Tek
http://www.evilsuperbrain.com
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmx de> wrote in message
news:3D57C3F7.E501BA7F@gmx.de...
>
> I have started implementing my mechanics simulation system as a POV-Ray
> patch, here is one of the first results.
>
> The bar is modelled with point masses and springs just like in previous
> simulations, the integration is simple euler method (i did not yet
> implement anything else).
>
> The nice thing is that it is quite fast, 15 minutes for the whole
> animation while other tasks were running on the machine. The actual
> simulation was just about 1 second per frame (i did not yet implement
> statistics for it either).
>
> See povray.unofficial.patches for some more information how the patch will
> be working.
>
> Christoph
>
> --
> POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
> TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
> Last updated 03 Aug. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tek wrote:
>
> Very impressive.
>
> One small criticism: it looks like your bendy object hasn't got smooth shading.
> i.e. you can see the polygons as it's falling off.
Yes, that's a problem, but it's difficult to fix in a general way. The
corners should remain sharp so smoothing the whole mesh isn't an option.
I would have to save additional topology data.
An alternative would be to trigger smoothing if the angle between
triangles is below a certain threshold. If anyone has ability and time to
implement this that would be great.
> But anyway, it looks amazing, please post some more renders :)
>
Thanks.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 03 Aug. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'd just like to say, I very much like this animation and the fact that
you're programming this as a patch, and it's fast.. I can't wait to see a
real implementation in POV.. ;o) This is probably going to be an important
part of POV, in the future.
Regards,
Hugo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Impressive. :)
But as much as these type of simulations are very fun and impressive,
I'm still hoping to see mechanics simulations of object that are *not*
like jelly. (Is that what is called rigid body dynamics?) While I can
think of tons of scenarios where mechanics between solid object would be
useful, I practically can't think of any where these jelly type of
objects can be used. Of course, that might just be me.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
rune|vision: http://runevision.com (updated July 12)
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hugo wrote:
>
> I'd just like to say, I very much like this animation and the fact that
> you're programming this as a patch, and it's fast.. I can't wait to see a
> real implementation in POV.. ;o) This is probably going to be an important
> part of POV, in the future.
Maybe. Right now it's just the previous system implemented in c, a few
parts (like buoyancy and drag) are still missing.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 03 Aug. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune wrote:
>
> Impressive. :)
Thanks.
>
> But as much as these type of simulations are very fun and impressive,
> I'm still hoping to see mechanics simulations of object that are *not*
> like jelly. (Is that what is called rigid body dynamics?) While I can
> think of tons of scenarios where mechanics between solid object would be
> useful, I practically can't think of any where these jelly type of
> objects can be used. Of course, that might just be me.
Well, rigid body dynamics is not what this is all about. While it is
perfectly possible to make things more stiff with appropriate integration
methods and small stepsizes it is not possible to make things completely
hard since the used methods depend on the deformations to calculate the
forces.
The main reasons why the bar is that soft are that i did not yet implement
higher order integration methods and less stiff systems are better for
testing things because these are less likely to cause problems with the
numerics.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 03 Aug. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Beautiful! I hope you continue to do more of this stuff.
It's really great.
Fernando.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
>Well, rigid body dynamics is not what this is all about. While it is
>perfectly possible to make things more stiff with appropriate integration
>methods and small stepsizes it is not possible to make things completely
>hard since the used methods depend on the deformations to calculate the
>forces.
>
>The main reasons why the bar is that soft are that i did not yet implement
>higher order integration methods and less stiff systems are better for
>testing things because these are less likely to cause problems with the
>numerics.
>
>Christoph
>
I'm not sure. Check this one:
http://www.progressive.hu/gero/drum.m1v
This is one of the first animations I made using springs. Maybe it's
accidental, or maybe it's because it is very simple, but it looks quite OK
to me, and it is almost totally rigid. I used euler too, and maybe 20
steps/frame.
BTW, I'm glad you are making this patch, I'm just sorry it's not ME who is
doing it. :) I would be probably doing something similat if I wasn't so
lazy to learn C some more. :) Oh, did I mention the anim is amazing? Will
the source be available?
Gergely
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gergely Vandor wrote:
>
> >The main reasons why the bar is that soft are that i did not yet implement
> >higher order integration methods and less stiff systems are better for
> >testing things because these are less likely to cause problems with the
> >numerics.
> >
>
> I'm not sure. Check this one:
> http://www.progressive.hu/gero/drum.m1v
>
> This is one of the first animations I made using springs. Maybe it's
> accidental, or maybe it's because it is very simple, but it looks quite OK
> to me, and it is almost totally rigid. I used euler too, and maybe 20
> steps/frame.
You seem to use quite strong overall damping (and not just damping
parallel to the springs) which usually weakens the problems with large
time steps. Try turning off the damping and you will probably see how
everything explodes.
I also suppose you are using collision equations for the the interaction
with the environment which is insensitive towards large time steps.
> BTW, I'm glad you are making this patch, I'm just sorry it's not ME who is
> doing it. :) I would be probably doing something similat if I wasn't so
> lazy to learn C some more. :) Oh, did I mention the anim is amazing? Will
> the source be available?
Yes, once i have time to get it in a publishable state with documentation
and sample scenes.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 13 Aug. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
>
>You seem to use quite strong overall damping (and not just damping
>parallel to the springs) which usually weakens the problems with large
>time steps. Try turning off the damping and you will probably see how
>everything explodes.
Maybe I'll check if I find the pov file.
>
>I also suppose you are using collision equations for the the interaction
>with the environment which is insensitive towards large time steps.
>
I really don't know what you mean by this, so I can't tell. :(
>> BTW, I'm glad you are making this patch, I'm just sorry it's not ME who is
>> doing it. :) I would be probably doing something similat if I wasn't so
>> lazy to learn C some more. :) Oh, did I mention the anim is amazing? Will
>> the source be available?
>
>Yes, once i have time to get it in a publishable state with documentation
>and sample scenes.
Great! Any plans for fluids? Some time ago I made a basic anim with van der
Waals forces and 50 "atoms". I believe that a similar system is used in
fluid dynamics programs like RealFlow (with much more particles and
probably many tweaks). It was pretty easy to modify my spring scenes to
this:
http://www.progressive.hu/gero/small.mpg
(Sorry if you've alredy seen it, and it's 1.5 MB.)
Gergely
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
