Welcome to od|forum

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

ParticleSkull

Members
  • Content count

    258
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ParticleSkull

  1. Hey guys, I need to fill an object with some FEM spheres but: - I need the spheres to be a copy of the same FEM sphere; - I need it to be generated at the same place on every 10 frames or so (and fall due to gravity); Does it make sense? Here's the basic idea but with 1 sphere only, I'd like to keep generating them until the beaker is full File is attached Cheers, Alvaro beaker.v1a.hiplc
  2. Thx for he file, @loudsubs!! It helped me a lot
  3. Maybe you can use this energy attribute to give more stiffness or drag to those "energized" areas. I think just a multiplication could work. Can't make tests on ir right now but I'll give it a try asap
  4. Hey @Pancho, maybe using the Energy or Quality attributes?
  5. Cool! Yeah, we did something similar at the creation frame parameter as well. Let me know if you achieve something with pop. Cheers, Alvaro
  6. Yeah and, even though the solvers are not seamlessly integrated, i think you can always find a way to "fake" this interaction. On 3ds Max, for example, I don't even have a fluid solver to fake an interaction with a fem solver.
  7. And that's what the tetrahedralize's 2nd input does! I was curious about that input for some time
  8. Thx, i'll update it
  9. Damn dude, are you with verion 16.0.619? Your scene here:
  10. hahahaha I will! In fact the weather is crazy here. It was kinda rainy when I started the sim and sunny at the end... The temperature should have influenced it. Serious now, the file you submitted is really working? Btw, I've decreased the Scale Time to 0.1, increased to 30 substeps (at the dop node, it looks diferent from the fem solver one) + ABE2 and 3 collision passes and it worked! Now i'll dig on it to see if I can improve the simulation tim (it took like 4 hours)
  11. @Farmfield, idk man, there might be something wrong with my houdini. I've downloaded your scene, put it to simulate and got a couple of interpenetrations (horrible ones!) edit: Love the @Alpha = 0.1; thing at flask
  12. Hey Steve, there's some stuff that don't interact natively (like FEM and FLIP for example) but I guess you can only find a way to make it work (because Houdini) In this case I got a "fake interaction" by adding the near particles speed to the fem tets, check it out: I guess every solver/combination does have its own idiosyncrasies and, in some cases, I think it's better to even make diferent simulations for each component.
  13. That's some really useful information! I'm still getting some spheres merging into each other btw, even using your settings. It's looking much better than what I had before though, I think I can solve it increasing the mesh resolution, collision passes or substeps.. and now the overlaping at the creation!
  14. Alright, hahaha substeps at 1 and collision to 3? now I got it! I don't mind about the overlapping when they are created. This should be out of the screen on my final scene
  15. Alright With 1 substep I got the interpenetrations. Now I'm simulating it with 3 substeps + tetrahedralize Sop. Again, thank you very much, Marty. You saved me hours of tests and research that could lead to nothing
  16. Hey Noobini, yes, I did tried the Collision Passes but it didn't help. Thx though Marty, thank you very much! I'm running a sim right now with ABE2 to see how it goes. I wasn't really aware of this. For some reason it was completelly out of my sight! Have you increased the substeps or collision passes?
  17. Yes! Thank you, Marty. I've just decreased the sub steps back to 1. At 100 it took around 8 hours to sim flask.v1e.Odforce.Edit.hiplc
  18. Hey Clive, it's here, check it out. The solution don't use the pop solver but I believe it would totally work for you
  19. Hey Marty, it's happening when the spheres have a lot of pressure from other spheres, check it out This simulation does have a lot of tets and I'm using 100 sub steps, I'm losing my hopes here Guys, is there a way to get the older spheres out of the simulation, make it rigid? Let's say, by age. If the sphere is 24 frames old it becames a static/rigid object? I'll try to think on something else
  20. Good to know! I guess I'll have to go around 100 as well. I'll try some different things and let you guys know about the best result I get
  21. Yeah Arrev, that's what I was looking for!! Thank you Do you know a good way to get rid of these interpenetrations? My scene is a bit faster and I could make it better with a lot of Sub Steps (about 30) but it still having some interpenetration.
  22. simple as hell! Thank's again, Atom!
  23. I've been trying this since yesterday and now that publish it i almost found a solution by myself (it happens ofen when I publish things here) I realised that if I animate the Creation Frame parameter (DOP / Solid Object) I can generate just what I need. Now I just need a way to animate this parameter procedurally. Does anyone have any idea on how to procede? I just need the number to scale up by 10 on every 10 frames. - between 10F and 19F the value must be 10 - between 20F and 29F the value must be 20 - between 30F and 39F the value must be 30 and so on... Any ideas? multiple.fem.v2a.hiplc
  24. Hey guys, I don't have a lot of experience in SHOPs yet so I'd like to see if someone could give me some ideas for this. I'm developing a procedural eye and I'm able to do it's veins procedurally on SOPs but I guess it would be much more useful if I could achieve something in the shader, maybe using some kind of noise. I don't know. I'm kinda stucked in the beggining so I just need any kind of ideas here's a good reference (I like the thickness variation)
  25. That's awesome, Konstantin. Thank you very much!