How about a frame of reference situation?
Children of a parent will be in the same frame of reference, so they inherit the intial velocities of their parents, plus their own initial velocity.
In the case of the truck that starts from a rest, the child dominoes inherit an initial vel of 0, so they will fall as a result of their parent frame accelerating.
The case of the truck already in motion would have the child dominoes inherit that same initial velocity, so they don't fall until the truck hits a bump. Perhaps the bump is the cat that tried to knock down the dominoes before. :-p
-Brad
> -------Original Message-------
> hmmm, I am not sure I agree. What is happening in real life if the truck
> has a constant speed?
>
> The dominos will stand straigth and move with the truck. When the dominos
> eventually fall ( I forgot to tell you, there is cat running around...)
> the dominos should not fall straight to the world floor, they have
> momentum. Either you want to use this momentum in the sim (real life) or
> you want to ignore the momentum but keep the parent motion of the truck,
> I don't see why the dominos would ignore the truck motion when collisions
> start.
>
>
> Again I have no idea about how hard this is, therefore you maybe right
> about ploting. I just hope there is a better solution, ploting 6 curves
> for a 1000 objects for a 1000 frames is not fun.
>
>
> As for the solution (b). Why don't you set your passive objects to active
> if you want them to behave like active objects. I may make a mistake here
> but (a) seems more powerful because you can get true passive behavior in
> a hierarchy.
>
>
> syl
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> FROM: [LINK: mailto:aloys.baillet(at)gmail.com] Aloys Baillet
>
> TO: [LINK: mailto:XSI(at)Softimage.COM] XSI(at)Softimage.COM
>
> SENT: Thursday, November 03, 2005 10:52 PM
>
> SUBJECT: Re: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
>
>
> Hi Sylvain,
>
> Simulation systems try to emulate real-life events.
> In real life, your dominos will fall when the truck will start, because
> of the acceleration of the truck, and the friction of the dominos on the
> table.
> If you want to fake the real-life events, you can plot the simulation
> outside the truck, and then apply your animation inside.
> I don't think any simulation framework should support local kinematics.
> However, the inital state defined in local space are really good, we are
> using them for a spring system I wrote here, and it makes things really
> easy to use.
> My 2 cents...
>
> Aloys
>
> PS: Ronald, you can count my vote on the solution b!
>
>
> On 04/11/05, SYLVAIN MOREAU <[LINK: mailto:sylvain.moreau(at)videotron.ca]
> sylvain.moreau(at)videotron.ca> wrote:
> - create a table with dominos falling on it
> - put the table in a truck
> - run the truck around
>
> We should be able to do that right?
> Transforming the initial state is good, you can put the table in the
> truck.
> But to run the truck with the domino table inside you need something
> more. I
> frankly have no idea how it can be done. I just know the dominos are in
> the
> truck.
>
> syl
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ronald Beirouti" < [LINK: mailto:rbeirou(at)Softimage.COM]
> rbeirou(at)Softimage.COM>
> To: <[LINK: mailto:XSI(at)Softimage.COM] XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
> Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 7:44 PM
> Subject: RE: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
>
>
> > It's not about inheriting transformation really. Rigid body dynamics
> is
> > global by definition. Two bodies that intercollide, for example, will
> have
> > to break their parenting transformation constraint.
> >
> > The problem you are describing about moving the simulation over is
> about
> > the initial states being expressed in global, and the fact that we
> don't
> > set the initial states of the children when we're moving the parents.
> >
> > Jeff is right and I was wrong regarding parenting and rigid bodies.
> > Unfortunately, I'm playing with a version on my machine with local
> fixes
> > the problems. Given that you also parent the forces under the same
> > hierarchy, I can translate or rotate the root of the hierarchy and
> have
> > the simulation run relative to it.
> >
> > .. Ronald
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
> [mailto:[LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]On
> Behalf
> > Of Sylvain Moreau
> > Posted At: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 6:59 PM
> > Posted To: xsi
> > Conversation: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> > Subject: Re: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >
> >
> > Here is what I get here (XSI v5.0.PopulosVulgarisEdition)
> >
> > - RBDs can be parented
> > - Propagation works for some properties (e.g. geo aprox)
> > - Propagation does not work for transform (e.g. cannot rotate a
> complete
> > sim)
> >
> > The last point is the main problem. RBDs should really be able to work
> in
> > local space or it is impossible to work on a sim then integrate it in
> a
> > scene. Now you must do the integration first and never touch the
> transform
> > again. If you present an animation, everybody likes it, but you are
> asked
> > to
> > rotate the sim a bit, you are screwed.
> >
> > Dealing with the propagation from active to passive bodies (#6) is not
> > really important compared to that.
> >
> > syl
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jeffrey Smith" <[LINK: mailto:jeffreys(at)Softimage.COM]
> jeffreys(at)Softimage.COM>
> > To: <[LINK: mailto:XSI(at)Softimage.COM] XSI(at)Softimage.COM >
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 5:28 PM
> > Subject: RE: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >
> >
> >>I think Ronald is using the version of XSI that we use internally,
> which
> >>has
> >> no bugs. We always add a few breaks and crashes before release so
> you
> >> guys
> >> will keep paying maintenance.
> >>
> >> -je
> >>
> >> P.S. Kim, please don't let this information get out or I'll get fired
> for
> >> telling our secrets!
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
> [mailto:[LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]On
> Behalf
> >> Of kim aldis
> >> Posted At: November 2, 2005 5:10 PM
> >> Posted To: xsi
> >> Conversation: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >> Subject: RE: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >>
> >>
> >> Are you sure? I had problems with a set I was using a couple of
> months
> >> ago
> >> and was warned that they shouldn't be parented at all. Removing all
> the
> >> RBDs
> >> from the root null into the scene root fixed all problems.
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: [LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)softimage.com] owner-xsi(at)softimage.com
> >>> [mailto:[LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)softimage.com]
> owner-xsi(at)softimage.com] On Behalf Of Ronald Beirouti
> >>> Sent: 02-November-2005 21:13
> >>> To: [LINK: mailto:XSI(at)softimage.com] XSI(at)softimage.com
> >>> Subject: RE: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >>>
> >>> Just a clarification about parenting rigid bodies. There
> >>> currently shouldn't be any problems parenting rigid bodies
> >>> under non-RBD objects. Problems occur when a RBD has RBD
> >>> parented under it, directly or further down the hierarchy.
> >>>
> >>> We would like to fix the issue of parenting rigid bodies once
> >>> and for all. However, if you guys have suggestions on the
> >>> expected behaviour of the parenting please let us know.
> >>>
> >>> Here are the combinations:
> >>>
> >>> A1,A2,... = Active rigid bodies
> >>> P1,P2,... = Passive rigid bodies
> >>> O1,O2,... = Not rigid bodies
> >>>
> >>> 1- O1 is parent of A1
> >>> Parenting is enforced only when manipulating. A1 moves
> >>> independently during simulation.
> >>>
> >>> 2- O1 is parent of P1
> >>> The parenting is always enforced, i.e. P1 always follows O1.
> >>>
> >>> 3- A1 is parent of A2.
> >>> Parenting is enforced only when manipulating. Both objects
> >>> move independently during simulation.
> >>>
> >>> 4- P1 is parent of P2
> >>> Parenting is always enforced.
> >>>
> >>> 5- P1 is parent of A1
> >>> Parenting is enforced only when manipulating. A1 moves
> >>> independently during simulation.
> >>>
> >>> 6- A1 is parent of P1.
> >>> The first five cases are straightforward, I think. This is
> >>> the tricky one. Passive RBDs always inherit their motions
> >>> from their animation or their parent's motion. In this case
> >>> it means that P1 will follow A1. However this can cause quite
> >>> some weird results. If A1 and therefore P1 were moving in the
> >>> direction of another RBD P2, P1 and P2 would not collide
> >>> (passive RBDs don't collide together). However A1 and P2
> >>> would. I guess that A1 and P1 should never collide either?
> >>> This is also a nightmare to deal with internally because
> >>> we're dealing with a cyclic dependency.
> >>>
> >>> With this case, i.e. a passive rigid body parented under an
> >>> active rigid body, one possibility would be to treat P1 as an
> >>> additional collision shape for A1. This would allow you to
> >>> parent one or more simple passive rigid bodies under an
> >>> active rigid body with a complex shape to simplify collision
> >>> detection. The engine would "fuse" the passive children to
> >>> the parent active RBD. One could also mute the collisions on
> >>> the parent. In this case the children RBDs would substitute
> >>> the parent's collision shape. This is the possibility Jeff
> >>> alluded to in his earlier mail
> >>>
> >>> Another option would be to force P1 to stay put during
> >>> simulation, even if its parent is moving.
> >>>
> >>> If anyone has an opinion on this issue or other suggested
> >>> solutions, specially the last case, please let us know.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> .. Ronald
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: [LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
> >>> [mailto: [LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]
> owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]On Behalf Of Harry BARDAK
> >>> Posted At: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 6:32 AM Posted To: xsi
> >>> Conversation: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >>> Subject: Re: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> rigid bodies work in global space
> >>>
> >>> michael malinowski a écrit :
> >>>
> >>> > I defiantly agree with that. I have not tried it myself,
> >>> what exactly
> >>> > are the side effect's of parenting rigid bodies? Do rigid
> >>> bodies work
> >>> > from local space, and thus being children of an object
> >>> would obviously
> >>> > adjust's this?
> >>> >
> >>> > _______________
> >>> > Mike Malinowski
> >>> > Character Rigger - Animal Logic
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >> From: "kim aldis" <[LINK: mailto:kim(at)cg-soup.com]
> kim(at)cg-soup.com>
> >>> >> Reply-To: [LINK: mailto:XSI(at)Softimage.COM] XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> >>> >> To: <[LINK: mailto:XSI(at)Softimage.COM] XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
> >>> >> Subject: RE: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >>> >> Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 21:29:48 -0000
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I'm not so bothered about parenting RBDs to each other but I am
> >>> >> bothered about the loss of parenting as both an
> >>> organisation tool and
> >>> >> a positioning tool. The thought of arbitrary objects
> >>> hanging off the
> >>> >> root isn't a pleasant one. It's something I continually
> >>> give people a
> >>> >> hard time about and the thought of dozens, or even
> >>> hundreds at this
> >>> >> level is horrifying.
> >>> >> Parenting
> >>> >> things up for ease of selection, collapsing to keep the explorer
>
> >>> >> tidy, inheritance of properties, etc, is so fundamental to
> everday
> >>> >> workflow that I was a bit dumbstruck when I first heard about
> this.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Ideally, I guess, I can't see a need to have RBDs parented to
> RBDs
> >>> >> but I would like to be able to parent them to a null and have
> them
> >>> >> move when I move the null, just like any other animated object.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >>> >> > From: [LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]
> owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
> >>> >> > [mailto:[LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]
> owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Smith
> >>> >> > Sent: 01-November-2005 20:53
> >>> >> > To: [LINK: mailto:XSI(at)Softimage.COM] XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> >>> >> > Subject: RE: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > So, in the future, what sort of behavior would you expect if
> you
> >>> >> > parented rigid bodies under one another? Specifically,
> >>> what would
> >>> >> > you expect if you parented a passive rigid body under an active
> >>> >> > one? Or vice versa? What about a rigid body parented
> >>> under a rigid
> >>> >> > body parented under another, and so on?
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Do you use parenting for organization? If parenting rigid
> bodies
> >>> >> > did something to their behavior (for example, created
> compound
> >>> >> > bodies) would this cheese you off because you could no
> >>> longer use
> >>> >> > heirarchies as organizing groups?
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Just curious for no specific reason...
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > -jeff
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >>> >> > From: [LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]
> owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
> >>> >> > [mailto:[LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]
> owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]On Behalf Of Harry BARDAK Posted
> >>> >> > At: October 29, 2005 8:38 AM Posted To: xsi
> >>> >> > Conversation: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >>> >> > Subject: Re: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > yeah this make me laugh too !
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > kim aldis a écrit :
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > >Also - and this one made me laugh. Or cry ;) - don't parent
> >>> >> > your rigid
> >>> >> > >bodies. It really messes with them.
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >>-----Original Message-----
> >>> >> > >>From: [LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]
> owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
> >>> >> > >>[mailto:[LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]
> owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM ] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Smith
> >>> >> > >>Sent: 28-October-2005 17:46
> >>> >> > >>To: [LINK: mailto:XSI(at)Softimage.COM] XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> >>> >> > >>Subject: RE: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>Sylvain has the right idea here. Actual shape collisions
> >>> >> > like rich,
> >>> >> > >>dense tesselations, so upping the subdivision is always a
> >>> >> > good start.
> >>> >> > >>Also, the detail level rarely needs to be set above
> "medium."
> >>> >> > >> Higher settings can capture more intricate details of an
> >>> >> > object, but
> >>> >> > >>won't increase stability noicably.
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>I'd try upping the number of substeps to something like 20,
>
> >>> >> > and see if
> >>> >> > >>that makes a difference. You could also place some of the
> >>> >> > bodies in
> >>> >> > >>different collision layers, so they will not collide with
> >>> >> > each other
> >>> >> > >>at all. Finally, you could use proxies for visualization;
> >>> >> > i.e. scale
> >>> >> > >>down your rigid bodies a bit and then parent slightly
> larger
> >>> >> > >>geometries (not rigid bodies!) underneath them. This way
> >>> >> > it will look
> >>> >> > >>like your geometries interlock tightly, but there will
> >>> actually
> >>> >> > >>be sufficient space between them to prevent explosions.
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>-jeff
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>-----Original Message-----
> >>> >> > >>From: [LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]
> owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
> >>> >> > >>[mailto:[LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]
> owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]On Behalf Of Sylvain Moreau
> >>> >> > Posted At:
> >>> >> > >>October 28, 2005 11:59 AM Posted To: xsi
> >>> >> > >>Conversation: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >>> >> > >>Subject: Re: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>Two parameters you should try:
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>Rigid body properties -> Subdivision level Increase
> >>> this level is
> >>> >> > >>similar to having a high res mesh but is more performant
> >>> >> > than a real
> >>> >> > >>high res mesh. Very useful if you start with low res
> geometry.
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>Modify -> rigid body -> edit simulation properties ->
> >>> simulation
> >>> >> > >>accuracy This is the control for temporal sampling, how
> >>> >> > often do you
> >>> >> > >>calculate the sim state, once every frame, 16 time per
> >>> >> > frame, 100 time
> >>> >> > >>per frame, etc. If you have an explosion and a lot of stuff
>
> >>> >> > >>happens between frames you may need a high value here.
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>Finally don't use the "coffee brake" option. With rigid
> bodies
> >>> >> > >>simulation "longer" is not always "better". If it takes an
> >>> >> > hour every
> >>> >> > >>time you change a parameters you will most likely get bad
> >>> >> > results by
> >>> >> > >>the end of the day. Find a reasonable performance
> >>> level, run many
> >>> >> > >>sims, pick the best one.
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>syl
> >>> >> > >>~~~~~~~~~~
> >>> >> > >>[LINK: http://wotomoro.com] wotomoro.com
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>----- Original Message -----
> >>> >> > >>From: "Harry BARDAK" < [LINK: mailto:harry(at)def2shoot.com]
> harry(at)def2shoot.com>
> >>> >> > >>To: <[LINK: mailto:XSI(at)Softimage.COM] XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
> >>> >> > >>Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 9:54 AM
> >>> >> > >>Subject: Re: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>i was aware about using cube instead of plane. But my
> >>> >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >>problem isn't on this
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>box/plane.
> >>> >> > >>>In fact i would like to know the distance where i should
> >>> >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >>place all my
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>object without to get my object exploding
> >>> >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >>>Rainer Schmidt a écrit :
> >>> >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >>>>Maybe you can make a denser mesh? And I did not use a
> >>> >> > plane in my
> >>> >> > >>>>previous example. Plane's are 'evil'. Always use a box,
> >>> >> > >>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>
> >>> >> > >>regardless how
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>thin it migth be. My stuff always falls through planes
> >>> >> > >>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>
> >>> >> > >>except they are
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>ridiculously dense.
> >>> >> > >>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>Harry BARDAK wrote:
> >>> >> > >>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>If you re read my first mail collision type was set to
> >>> >> > >>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>
> >>> >> > >>Actual shape with
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>high details.
> >>> >> > >>>>>I guess i will get a big headaches tonight !
> >>> >> > >>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>Rainer Schmidt a écrit :
> >>> >> > >>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>Also set the collision shape to the real geometry and
> >>> >> > not to the
> >>> >> > >>>>>>bounding box or the other aproximate shapes. Otherwise
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>you think you do
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>not collide with your geometry but the bounding boxes of
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>your irregular
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>shapes do resulting in a blow out. I had the same
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>problem. I had a
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>plane as colision object, and had the collision shape
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>set to bounding
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>box to do the sim a favor. Then I scattered it and
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>forgot about that
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>setting and fiddled for an hour till I found that
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>setting. And voila...
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>instant success.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>Good luck!
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>Harry BARDAK wrote:
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>Thanks for your advice.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>i ve taken care to not have doubles objects.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>In fact i don't have really interpenatrated object.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>My object bound stop where the other object start.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>Anyways i moved object to get an offset and to be sure
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>to remove any
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>interpenatration and still have the problem.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>Even with only 2 objects. They are shattered. I used
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>the shatter
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>script that you can find in Netview.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>It's a clever idea to use boxes as reference models
> but
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>i don't think
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>it will work because i have ramdom shapes who doesn't
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>really fit with
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>others boxes. In others word i will still get
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>interpenetration
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>Michael Klein a écrit :
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>I'm sure that interpenetration is the problem.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>Try to modify all objects that they have no
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>interpenetration and use
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>those
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>for the simulation.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>But I would use those objects as a hidden root for
> >>> >> > the perfect
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>matching but interpenetrating ones.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>Sounds probably a bit complicated because of double
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>objects in your
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>scene
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>but I had the same problem with the sim engine in 4.2
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>- which is not
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>comparable to the new cool one. At the end I used
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>simple bounding
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>boxes as
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>reference models for the simulation of an explosion
> of
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>those pieces
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>and used
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>the boxes as hiddem roots for my complex ones.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>That worked well because there was no complex
> >>> obstacle stuff.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>president
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>From: [LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]
> owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>[mailto: [LINK: mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]
> owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>Behalf Of
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>Harry BARDAK
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 12:07 PM
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>To: [LINK: mailto:XSI(at)Softimage.COM] XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>Subject: Rigids bodies and intercollision.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>Hi everyone.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>I'm a bit stuck with Rigid bodies and i'm new with.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>I have shattered an object who should explode.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>I guess there are some interpenetration because when
>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>i run the
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>simulation
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>everything explode at the 1st frame.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>I set the collision to actual shape and even with the
> >>> >> > accuracy
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>"coffee break". I still get this problem.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>In new features video on the site of softimage,
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>interpenetration
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>doesn't
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>seem to be a problem.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>May be i should change my approach but in this case
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>what is the best
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>strategies to explode a ground ?
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>Thanks by advance.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>Harry.
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>---
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK:
> mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM] Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>following text in
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>body:
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>---
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK:
> mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM] Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>following text in
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>body:
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>---
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>following text in
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>body:
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>---
> >>> >> > >>>>>>Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>following text in
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>body:
> >>> >> > >>>>>>unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>---
> >>> >> > >>>>>Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
> >>> >> > >>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>
> >>> >> > >>following text in
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>>body:
> >>> >> > >>>>>unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >> > >>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>---
> >>> >> > >>>>Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
> >>> >> > >>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>
> >>> >> > >>following text in
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>>body:
> >>> >> > >>>>unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >> > >>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>
> >>> >> > >>>>
> >>> >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >>>---
> >>> >> > >>>Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
> >>> >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >>following text in body:
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>>unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >>>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>---
> >>> >> > >>Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
> >>> >> > following text in
> >>> >> > >>body:
> >>> >> > >>unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>---
> >>> >> > >>Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
> >>> >> > following text in
> >>> >> > >>body:
> >>> >> > >>unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >>
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >---
> >>> >> > >Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following
> >>> >> > text in body:
> >>> >> > >unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > ---
> >>> >> > Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
> >>> following text
> >>> >> > in body:
> >>> >> > unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > ---
> >>> >> > Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
> >>> following text
> >>> >> > in body:
> >>> >> > unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> ---
> >>> >> Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
> >>> following text in
> >>> >> body:
> >>> >> unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > ---
> >>> > Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in
> >>> > body:
> >>> > unsubscribe xsi
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>> Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following
> >>> text in body:
> >>> unsubscribe xsi
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>> Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following
> >>> text in body:
> >>> unsubscribe xsi
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---
> >> Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in
> >> body:
> >> unsubscribe xsi
> >>
> >> ---
> >> Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in
> >> body:
> >> unsubscribe xsi
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
> > unsubscribe xsi
> >
> > ---
> > Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
> > unsubscribe xsi
>
>
> ---
> Unsubscribe? Mail [LINK: mailto:Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM]
> Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
> unsubscribe xsi
>
>
> --
> Aloys Baillet - XSI Technical Director
> Character Dpt - Animal Logic
> --
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
