Hi everyone, I am currently working on an asset that creates a lsystem tree , and animates it with dops. I am pretty happy with the result so far.
Here is a small example:
http://youtu.be/mECqmnfiOPk [youtu.be]
My question is about handling collisions for such a simulation.
In the example above, there are no collisions at all, whitch is not a problem in that case I think, but in certain situations (e.g stronger wind, denser foliage or weeping branches ) the need for decent collisions is much more obvious.
What is a good strategy for optimizing wire/wire collisions ?
My current system is : a base lsystem that goes for the few first generations, and a bunch of sub-lsytems attached to every end points of that base geometry. With no collisions, obviously, sim times are ok. But as soon as I activate collisions, and up the generations on the tree asset, sim time goes up pretty high.
lsystem tree wire dynamic
3255 6 1- gui2one
- Member
- 101 posts
- Joined: Feb. 2015
- Online
- gui2one
- Member
- 101 posts
- Joined: Feb. 2015
- Online
I found so far that the best results are obtained using “global geometric” method (on the wire solver node). With a low “max collision resolve passes” (also on the wire solver node) ,the param is set to 8 passes in the preview below. Collisions are decent, they play their role. Using “local geometric” method with a far bigger number of samples resulted in crappy collision and deformations.
So for now, global Geometric is the way to go ^^
a preview :
https://youtu.be/FyI91OUXeaY [youtu.be]
So for now, global Geometric is the way to go ^^
a preview :
https://youtu.be/FyI91OUXeaY [youtu.be]
- matthias_k
- Member
- 483 posts
- Joined: Dec. 2006
- Offline
First: Many thanks for the nice tree animations :-)
Hmmm, but both of them (global geometric and local geometric) are not taking the wire width into account, if I'm right, only SDF is doing it (with really high sym times), do you have a workaround?
Hmmm, but both of them (global geometric and local geometric) are not taking the wire width into account, if I'm right, only SDF is doing it (with really high sym times), do you have a workaround?
English is not my native language, sorry in advance for any misunderstanding :-)
- gui2one
- Member
- 101 posts
- Joined: Feb. 2015
- Online
Hmmm, but both of them (global geometric and local geometric) are not taking the wire width into account, if I'm right, only SDF is doing it (with really high sym times), do you have a workaround?
No, unfortunately I don't.
But are you sure SDF method is the only one taking the wire width into account ? It seems strange to me.
- matthias_k
- Member
- 483 posts
- Joined: Dec. 2006
- Offline
- gui2one
- Member
- 101 posts
- Joined: Feb. 2015
- Online
I didn't activate self collisions in my sim. Sim times are already high enough
Looking at another sim I ran, I can tell that, for the other wire affectors, wire width is taken into account. I can see some wheeping branches clearly “coiling” around a bigger branch. It's a little hard to see in these conditions though. I should test this in simpler conditions, but it's Sunday, and I am a little lazy
Looking at another sim I ran, I can tell that, for the other wire affectors, wire width is taken into account. I can see some wheeping branches clearly “coiling” around a bigger branch. It's a little hard to see in these conditions though. I should test this in simpler conditions, but it's Sunday, and I am a little lazy
Edited by - Sept. 6, 2015 04:11:39
- matthias_k
- Member
- 483 posts
- Joined: Dec. 2006
- Offline
-
- Quick Links