[Bf-committers] Some Some doubt and ideas
geko.pua at gmail.com
Sun Oct 20 20:42:56 CEST 2013
For me there two level in this issue, the first level is the way to
organize the object. One possible structure for the object could be:
One object could be:
* Inanimated (default)
** Pasive (default) interact with other objects
** Active :
Maybe I could be clearer for the user.
The other is about to join some of the "active" object making another
more generic, but I see this much more difficult and not so important.
;) Thank for your time.
2013/10/19 Sergej Reich <sergej.reich at googlemail.com>:
> In the case of the rigid body simulation we actually already simplify
> We cannot really avoid having active and passive objects, since knowing
> that an object won't be simulated dynamically allows for optimizations
> that improve performance and stability.
> As for "Collisions", in many ways rigid bodies are more part of the
> animation system than the other simulations. So when you want to combine
> them with the other simulations you have to treat them like animated
> objects and add a collision modifier if you want them to collide.
> The way this works right now is unfortunate. There are different ways we
> could try to integrate the different simulations together, all of which
> require bigger changes.
> Regards, Sergej.
> Am Samstag, den 19.10.2013, 15:59 +0200 schrieb Brecht Van Lommel:
>> It's true that there is some confusing functionality here. One issue
>> we have is that we have different physics systems for rigid body,
>> particles, cloth, etc, and this means that there is some duplication.
>> Integrating those physics systems more would simplify things for users
>> but it's also a difficult task.
>> I'm not too familiar with the rigid body system, maybe some
>> simplification is possible there by itself but I don't know.
>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:16 PM, GeKo <geko.pua at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi guys, this is my first message in this list, so sorry If I make a
>> > mistake writing it in wrong place. First of all I have to said that I
>> > want to write code for this program in the future because I am fall in
>> > love of it, you are doing a great job.
>> > Now my doubts, I am specially interested in physics simulation, I am a
>> > little bit confused with "rigid body", "active", "pasive", "softboy",
>> > "cloth", "collisions", I saw in this concept some duplicity and
>> > inconsistent. For example rigid body object don't interact with
>> > collision.
>> > ¿Could be possible consider rigid body like one special kind of rigid
>> > body deleting one of the concept passive or collision?
>> > Pleased accept my apologize, thank you for Blender ;)
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Bf-committers mailing list
>> > Bf-committers at blender.org
>> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> Bf-committers at blender.org
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
More information about the Bf-committers