Jump to content

catchyid

Members
  • Content count

    311
  • Donations

    0.00 CAD 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

catchyid last won the day on November 20 2016

catchyid had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

14 Good

1 Follower

About catchyid

  • Rank
    Illusionist

Personal Information

  • Name
    Khaled Abdelhay
  • Location
    Montreal, QC

Recent Profile Visitors

1,029 profile views
  1. thanks, will watch the video
  2. Hmmm..I know I can distribute pyro clusters using HQueue, but since clusters don't communicate with each other, I assumed this is it, meaning if I were to use pyro clusters with HQueue, then I would get these independent sims...but you're right, there might be another way than clustering that does what I am talking about?! Will check the documentation then, OR if anyone can confirm that this feature exists please let me know
  3. Curl Noise

    hello, you gotta start with something easier! that shape looks to me too complex maybe try to have a smoke source with initial velocity noise, sim for couple frames then rasterize as particles...try just to have a simple start and then keep improving it
  4. Houdini FEM stops at frame 800

    have you checked your memory status? maybe you ran out of memory? if your machine hits the swap it will become super slow and could freeze...also check if your CPU is running. Also, simplify the problem and see what happens...
  5. not expert here...I can use pyro clustering to divide sim into smaller/independent containers/clusters. In this case, each cluster runs on a different machine and no communication occurs between clusters (i.e. no transfer of vel/density/... between volume boundaries). However, I find this very limiting because clusters could be intersecting and the same volume could be simulated by different machines! for example: a spherical explosion expands quickly to cover the same volume, so clustering based on fuel source is not really useful My question: Why there is no distributed simulation in Pyro similar to FLIP distributed simulation? meaning: why cannot I divide my container into fixed size volumes such that each volumes communicate with each other to transfer density/vel/temp? I've seen this concept in FumeFX too, so it's technically possible?
  6. Hello, I am wondering if someone has encountered this problem before on Houdini 16.5.268? In summary, I have a pyro cluster setup and it works fine IF Pyro solver "Max Substeps" =1 , however when I increase it two 2, for example, Houdini crashes? As a workaround, I've tried to increase simulation substeps of the parent dop node and it did not work (also a crash), and as a last resort, I've tried to divide the parent dop node Timestep by two (effectively having substeps=2), but it also I get a crashe?! Just a clarification, I need more substeps because I have high initial smoke velocities, so without substeps smoke look "dotty"...
  7. Pyro velocity field question

    thaanks guys
  8. Hi, In regular RBD simulation, you can add a velocity drag (i.e. v= 9.0 v) to slow down moving objects (to simulate air resistance for example). However, in Pyro, I don't find any similar concept for smoke velocity ALTHOUGH smoke slows down automatically in a simulation (i.e. without adding velocity drag node for example, smoke slows down). My question: is there a way to change the rate of this velocity drag behavior? why there is no clear smoke velocity drag parameter like pop or rbd dop networks? Thanks
  9. hey, this is a fun project... have you checked any flip tutorials online? you can find tons of tutorials on sideffects webstie or youtube? If I were you, I would make the project even simpler by just drop an an object into a simple liquid container (i.e. do the cup/liquid intersection later), and focus only on getting a nice splash. Some quick tips: -the default flip settings are good, the only thing that you need to adjust is particle separation to get more details -collision velocity controls how big/small your splash would be -there are solvers in flip, try both and see which one you like more good luck
  10. Pyro workflow question

    Thanks Atom...have not used gastarget before, but the name itself is promising I use low res to iteratre quickly, so I wonder you start with high res as you mentioned, don't you find too slow? thanks for that expression, it will make things more under control....but i am thinking, having a simulation farm will actually solve the problem?! have not tested it, but a company like ILM must have a huge simulation farm that makes very easy to sim *any* thing quickly!?
  11. Hi, This is a general question just to know how other artists tackle this issue. When simulating a pyro shot, i.e. cigarettes buffs, I start with low resolution to get the motion right. Using low resolution guarantees that I can iterate quickly, hence get the initial look/feel I like quickly. However after that, I want to produce more detailed simulation, so I run higher resolution simulation (i.e. smaller voxel size), but the problem now is I usually get different shapes than the original one?! Since it's a higher resolution, iterations are expensive and takes longer and I find it hard to reach my goal in a timely manner! Now, my question: how other artists deal with this problem? Is my workflow right or I need do something different. Thanks,
  12. Hey, thanks for your answer I think my question was not clear I wanted to know how to read/write vel.* in volume vop? I found out one can do that using "parameter" operator in SOP context, OR "bind" operator in DOP context. I am not sure why there are two ways to read it (why not just use bind in all contexts). I will create a sample file to show you what I mean (but I am about to take off now, so most probably will do that on Monday)....Thanks Colton for your quick reply...
  13. Hi, If I have a density volume (i.e. a scalar volume), then I can use volume vop and connect something to output "density" to write to it. However, if I have vel.x, vel.y, vel.z, (i.e. a field volume) then how can I then write to them inside a volume vop? I found out that "parameter" operator will do that, however, I am confused, vel.* is a voxel data and not the "typical" definition of a parameter (which is a value per an operator)? I know it's not that important to know why (as long as it works), however I would appreciate it if someone sheds a light on this logic or maybe different way to write into field volumes (either VDB or native Houdini volumes) Thanks
  14. Alright, really appreciate your help, thanks
×