ofer Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 Hello, I have a particle fluid simulation that collides with some small geometry. When surfacing the fluid, I loose the details of the collision geometry, because the particles are close. I should use the "Subtract collision volumes" option, but if I do, the surface becomes very jaggy where it collides with the surface. It isn't a problem most of the time, but my collision geometry is invisible, so the artifacts are visible. Is there anyway to solve this issue? Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 I haven't tried the Subtraction thing mysely yet - so I'll guess that if you just increase the resolution of the Volumes representing your collision objects that you'll get a better result. Just curious: I know that SESI have improved the Particle Fluid Surface SOP quite a bit for H9.1. Are using the 9.1 beta? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johner Posted December 21, 2007 Share Posted December 21, 2007 Hello,I have a particle fluid simulation that collides with some small geometry. When surfacing the fluid, I loose the details of the collision geometry, because the particles are close. I should use the "Subtract collision volumes" option, but if I do, the surface becomes very jaggy where it collides with the surface. It isn't a problem most of the time, but my collision geometry is invisible, so the artifacts are visible. Is there anyway to solve this issue? Thanks. I've found in general a Smooth SOP is a nice thing to add after the ParticleFluidSurface, even with the Filtering options that are in 9.1. Experiment with increasing the iterations. And a Peak SOP with a negative value before the Smooth can yield interesting results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ofer Posted December 22, 2007 Author Share Posted December 22, 2007 Smooth SOP... I knew something like that exists Increasing the the sub-steps in the IsoOffset SOP doesnt help, but I got much better results afters playing the particle size and filtering parameters. I will now try the Smooth SOP. Thanks. BTW. I am using 9.1, and it is much better and much faster. The filtering options are very good also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 BTW. I am using 9.1, and it is much better and much faster. The filtering options are very good also. Cool! It'd be helpful to see a couple of screen grabs of the artifacts you see Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.