new Physx

Re: new Physx

Postby CybeREX » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 07:09

ikam wrote:1/ I fixed visual artefact bug.
2/ Changed the joint behavior, see example.
3/ No change for now for chains.

For me all example that builded in that file just fall down to the floor
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
CybeREX
Demomaker
Demomaker
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Thursday, 03.April 2014, 07:44

Re: new Physx

Postby Skinnytorus » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 07:26

Is your build up to date? Watch this link to see if there were any commits before you download any examples:
https://github.com/wzman/werkkzeug4CE/commits/master
Skinnytorus
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Monday, 06.February 2012, 17:46

Re: new Physx

Postby ikam » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 07:46

all example files here are obsolete if you don't have exactly the same code version that I used to build them. It's really just for testing stuff, nothing stable yet in this thread
You need to update the code and recompile wz at each modification I send on github to get latest file exemple working, and after some update, previous exemple file may don't work as I changed some stuff.
better way is to get lastest code update (with git software and this command : git pull origin master), compile code, and build examples yourself from scratch, don't use previous operators and don't do copy/paste from old files. An old operator may be not compatible with new ones or produce indesired effects
ikam
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Friday, 14.October 2011, 13:00
Location: France

Re: new Physx

Postby Skinnytorus » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 08:26

ikam
It might also a good idea to set default location for new joints at the top of the RBs (collider's?) local bounding box with some offset (like 0,1 or something like that). Saves some time...

What do you think of that?
Skinnytorus
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Monday, 06.February 2012, 17:46

Re: new Physx

Postby ikam » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 08:50

why top and not left or right ?
ikam
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Friday, 14.October 2011, 13:00
Location: France

Re: new Physx

Postby Skinnytorus » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 08:54

For me it's natural: a Christmas ball hangs with its hook upwards ;)
Skinnytorus
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Monday, 06.February 2012, 17:46

Re: new Physx

Postby ikam » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 09:44

lol. yea why not but i'm not sure you will build a chistmas tree in all your demos :p

I made a version working with joint multiplication. I not guarantee all case, but it should works for basics. Anyway in concrete cases, multiple stacks of nested multiplied joints in tree, become a bit hard to design for the user and it seems uncommon for most of concrete cases.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
ikam
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Friday, 14.October 2011, 13:00
Location: France

Re: new Physx

Postby ikam » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 10:07

and same version with an alternative joint operator, that take only 1 input and search in all tree. maybe more clean to build joints
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
ikam
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Friday, 14.October 2011, 13:00
Location: France

Re: new Physx

Postby Skinnytorus » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 10:14

lol. yea why not but i'm not sure you will build a chistmas tree in all your demos :p

You can add both as an option if you like ;))

physx3.wz4 Yep. Multiply seems to be working as expected. Good job :) I'll take a look into the latest file soon.
Skinnytorus
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Monday, 06.February 2012, 17:46

Re: new Physx

Postby Skinnytorus » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 10:36

I like the basic idea.
1) A drop-down list of all available rigid bodies in both joint operators wouldn't hurt.
2) Have you added any functionality for the situation when multiply is on input of the joint operator?
Skinnytorus
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Monday, 06.February 2012, 17:46

Re: new Physx

Postby ikam » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 10:41

2/ it works if you switch from first to all for instances param
ikam
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Friday, 14.October 2011, 13:00
Location: France

Re: new Physx

Postby Skinnytorus » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 10:56

Both joint ops still don't work with chain properly.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Skinnytorus
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Monday, 06.February 2012, 17:46

Re: new Physx

Postby ikam » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 11:23

yea, chain need a complete review
ikam
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Friday, 14.October 2011, 13:00
Location: France

Re: new Physx

Postby ikam » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 12:55

fixed
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
ikam
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Friday, 14.October 2011, 13:00
Location: France

Re: new Physx

Postby Skinnytorus » Tuesday, 29.July 2014, 15:23

Yeah! Working! Thanks.
1) IMHO JointIndex in Chain must be consistent with RB terminology. Otherwise, it's a problem to understand how it works.
2) Could be cool to randomize the multiplied RB motion a bit in your last example. Any ideas?
Skinnytorus
Operator
Operator
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Monday, 06.February 2012, 17:46


Return to Development and contribution



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron