Jump to content

Jesper Rahlff

  • Content count

  • Donations

    0.00 CAD 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Jesper Rahlff

  1. Still cooking a pyro after loading bgeo from disk

    have you checked the performance monitor? you can record a change in frames and see which nodes takes the longest time to cook. Also in your network view under the View tab enable the "show if nodes are time dependent". This will give you a little clock icon on the nodes that needs to cook.
  2. if you can share a hipfile it would be a little easier to troubleshoot.
  3. Fixing Normals

    awesome man. Feel free to share progress
  4. Fixing Normals

    there is two things you need to do: - in your polyframe node untick tangent and tick Bitangent and set that to N - in your transform node called "flatten" put 90 in rotate.x so that your geo is pointing along Z axis cool model
  5. Pack primitive after for looping has different pack points

    any chance you can share the file?
  6. maybe try a restart of your machhine.. then reinstall houdini if it didnt make a difference, and then contact sidefx. just to be safe
  7. Pack primitive after for looping has different pack points

    try to increase your scatter points in your VDB to sphere node
  8. even when importing your camera abc it renders just fine. However all your indirect AOVS are empty. its only your direct AOVS that holds information. what version of houdini are you on? I am using 16.0.619 edit: just noticed it was in your screenshot.. hmm hard to say what the problem could be. try to update your houdini if you can.
  9. okay here is a few things I want you to try. because I am not getting any errors when rendering this, however I did not have access to your camera so I had to put one down myself. try to put down a camera and render from that rather than your alembic camera.. just to see if its your alembic camera causing problems. Also I see you are using IPR to render, try to render to mplay to see if the issue still persist. this might just be an IPR thingg
  10. can't really render the file without the alembics etc...
  11. let me know if you need me to setup a simple example file @horia747
  12. FEM object Cut

    you are welcome. Feel free to share progress if allowed
  13. if you know that your overall settings in the dopnet for the fire sim will stay the same and all you want to replace is essentially the incoming sources then I would do the following: - setup a source for each of your windows. - pipe that into a switch node with value $WEDGE - amount of wedges = amount of sources. - enjoy time off while computer cranks through all your sims with one button push this of course applies to all your fields you want to source into your sim
  14. Is this normal?

    I second that. update if you can. That version have had multiple problems, one of them trying too display prim color
  15. Noise never decreasing in VEX

    as f1 is saying, you want to use a sop solver, and access the noise information from previous frame, and then manipulate that on current frame as you see fit. You could add the value or clamp to that value etc..
  16. How could I refine this interpenetration??

    none of the less, I am glad we got this cleared up. I learned something and I guess that is the most important thing. Thanks for playing @Noobini
  17. How could I refine this interpenetration??

    right okay, yeah I have that as well. I would personally expect that the strength under the geometry would be the effective strength. Also because there is NO indication (at least to my knowledge) that those two numbers are in fact being multiplied. So unless you already know, how are you gonna get this information? The most confusing part to me is that we in sops set strength = value (and in any other context that means override, not multiply), and not strength *= value. if *= had been the case, then you would know that a multiplication is happening.
  18. How could I refine this interpenetration??

    what do you have selected to see that?
  19. How could I refine this interpenetration??

    this could be true, however that is not very user friendly (and not how it should be), having to remember on your own where and if you applied any multiplication factors outside of the dop. This could result in a lot of wrong information being used throughout at shot in production. the strange thing is that it is displaying the sop strength and not the dop strength. you could argue that importing the sop data into the dop sim with a sop solver or simillar would be reasonable (expecting the spreadsheet only to show the DOP strength by default), but the fact that it is importing the sop strength and not adding the dop strength is strange..
  20. Technique for modeling a wheel

    well done. looks good!
  21. Randomize density on copied pyro cache

  22. How could I refine this interpenetration??

    that seems to be correct.. I tried the following: sop strength = 10 dop strength = 10. I assume the effective strength would be 100 and the shelf not breaking because the impact is only 61 at its highest which is at the end of the framerange. (48). this seems to be correct, as the shelf did not break. now my question is why the spreadsheet does not show the multiplied result of the strength rather than just the sop value? the spreadsheet only shows the strength as being 10 and not the total effective strength. To make sure I did not read the dop strength only, I changed the dop strength to 100 and kept my sop strength at 10... my effective strength becomes 1000 but the spreadsheet still states 10. what gives? am I looking at the wrong spreadsheet data? last test I did I set dop strength to 10 and sop strength to 6, giving me effective strength of 60. and sure enough as soon as impact value reaches 61 it breaks. HOWEVER the spreadsheet still states that my strength is only 6. spreadsheet: rbdpackedobject -> relInaffectors -> constraintnetwork1 -> constraintnetwork -> geometry, under primitives you find strength along with impact and constraint name etc. @f1480187 maybe you know?
  23. How could I refine this interpenetration??

    I am not saying you are setting it to =* What I am saying is that I thought that IF one were to set strength *= 1 THEN it would act as a multiplier to the value in DOPS. - it is not. so my conclusion: sops is overriding dops. You can confirm in the spreadsheet.
  24. How could I refine this interpenetration??

    its easy enough to see actually. if you go to geometry spreadsheet, under rbdpackedobject1 -> relInAffectors -> constrainnetwork1 -> constraintnetwork -> geometry you can see your current strength on each frame. As long as you set your strength in sops that dictates the "effective" strength independently from the dop. if you however set strength in sops to be *= then it becomes invalid an return 0.0. edit: you have to have the dopnet selected or be inside the dopnet
  25. How could I refine this interpenetration??

    but if it overrides then you should be able to set strength = 1000000 in sops and then 1 in dops and it should not break? edit: and it does not break.. so I guess it is an override. what puzzles me though is, why if I do f@strength *= value , it still overrides and does not multiply as it should..