 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002 10:19:15 +0200, Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmx de>
wrote:
> With all 33 balls it takes about about 7 seconds per frame for the
> simulation.
Well, if you expect some comment: where are photons ?
;-)
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Perfect, except perhaps they should lose energy a bit more quickly.
"Christoph Hormann" <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3D58C103.6C2E1BD0@gmx.de...
> It uses 800 integration steps per frame,
Ah, I never went this far with some of my old simulations. Perhaps that was
the problemo.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Also impressive - especially the render time.
You said it yourself - damping.. Another idea would be to make the balls
jelly so they change their scales when hit. Would that be possible?
Regards,
Hugo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
> It uses
> 800 integration steps per frame, still first order integration method
> (euler).
Why use Euler? Using backward-Euler should let you use much larger time
steps.
/ Martin
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Christoph Hormann
Subject: Re: mechanics simulation 2 (1051k)
Date: 15 Aug 2002 14:43:40
Message: <3D5BF659.43D7C318@gmx.de>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Martin Magnusson wrote:
>
> Why use Euler? Using backward-Euler should let you use much larger time
> steps.
Because i did not have the time to implement anything else. Besides
simulation time is hardly an issue with these relatively small
simulations.
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I have a link to a very effiecnt 5th order Runge-Kutta with adaptive step
size which you may like to try :)
http://www.ulib.org/webRoot/Books/Numerical_Recipes/bookcpdf.html
and scroll down to "16 Integration of Ordinary Differential Equations"
jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Great simulation.
It gives me the idea of computer-programms of near future.
When computergraphic can do these things in real-time, we will have a
generaly new category on "real-world" like computer-games and application
software.
With Balls and Lego-pieces to solve problems.
Boring static mathematics ?
Architects can simulate statics for houses & bridges
by putting an "vitual" big iron ball on the modell of the house (on screen).
Very intresting !
Maybe you can include that in POV-Ray V. 4.00 ?
Then objects get additional Parameters like "hardness", "specific weight",
"roughness" & ( german: Dichte) :-).
And new overall parameters are time & gravity :-) ....
--Theo
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Distributed Network-Rendering or Local SMP-Rendering on all CPU's you have.
With SMPOV und POV-Ray 3.5. * Download free at:
http://www.it-berater.org/smpov.htm
"Christoph Hormann" <chr### [at] gmxde> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3D58C103.6C2E1BD0@gmx.de...
>
> This time with moving balls, damping should probably be stronger. It uses
> 800 integration steps per frame, still first order integration method
> (euler).
>
> With all 33 balls it takes about about 7 seconds per frame for the
> simulation.
>
> 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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
