Real-Time Physics Simulation Forum

DannyChapman wrote:What's wrong with the btCollisionObject::setAnisotropicFriction function?!

I completely forgot about that

You can always make a ghost shape (same shape you want to test, but doesn't really collide) and see if there's collision. If you don't care too much about exact quality you might even be able to just use broadphase, which will likely be faster

You can try implementing anisotropic friction with a custom collision callback. (http://www.bulletphysics.org/mediawiki- ... d_Triggers)

You might be able to get away using mostly default friction code as your base

Sounds like you're passing in an undefined variable somewhere in your code and the hinge is trying to hit an impossible target.

Construction wise they should be similar, but their motion is going to be very different in one key situation due to sampling differences. Take for instance a cable vibrating with a certain velocity such that nodes rotate opposite of the adjacent nodes. Now imagine that the frequency and vibration s...

The frames are the transformation to the constraint axis in the local coordinates of the bodies involved (frameInA is from A to the axis in terms of A, frameInB is from B to the axis in terms of B)

I think you forgot that the world itself can be used. Physics wise though, you're better off just making a controller that shifts a "driver" left and right to balance it like a real bike, since once you put in real graphics now you'll have a physics controlled driver at zero cost (well, some cost in...

That just looks like a case of m1v1==m2v2 with near zero friction. Basically, if you put your robot on a air hockey table it would do the same thing. Try increasing the ground and body friction components if they don't match physical results, and if the components are already high consider smaller t...

You should start by reading https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/mt228373.aspx and checking the source code. You can see how they deal with cameras and physics for exactly what you want to do. After that, go to a library and try to find "Introduction to Robotics: Mechanics and Contr...

svedach wrote:I could not get. I did as it is written at the link above, but when I call rayTest from multiple threads, the heap error occurs. It's a pity.

Are you sure that your threads are off while stepping the world and only polling the system between steps?

That part is all trig actually, it should be as simple as multiplying out the transform from one to the other. Basically you need to find the "contact" area (really just a close approximation should minimize issues) on the box and then extend the rotation from there to the center of gravity. Another...

The jumping is just physics acting as it should, so what you'll probably need to do is change the "physics". Rather than rotating the box about it's center of gravity, rotate it about the marble's contact point. That should change the angle of the box without changing the position of the box relativ...

None of the 2.83 ones are hardware accelerated last I checked, but you should be able to test on multiple threads just fine. Just watch out for possible internal cache errors.

Quick question, if opencl support is so fragile, why don't we use opengl compute? For one, opengl compute support is even more fragile, having only been added in 4.3 and not really designed for this type of application. So far the only real competitor is CUDA, but that of course requires Nvidia har...

Well, thanks for your reply. I understand the principles of operation of the ultrasonic sensor, I have made a model based on rayTest, but I was not satisfied with the performance. I do not want to use the cone. It does not correctly represent the field of view of the sensor. I use the trapeze. Can ...