here's the wiki http://sketchyphysics.wikia.com/wiki/SketchyPhysicsWiki and curbs tutorial ([SP2]Basic Tutorial Posted (Moved & Improved) 5/11/08) that's on the top of the sketchyphysics page

Thats OK...

Well Cris Fullmer said he'd try to fix it. But if you want to create a plugin in the mean time you can.

Here's the sketchyphysics wiki: http://sketchyphysics.wikia.com/wiki/SketchyPhysicsWiki Go to tutorials and click on ruby for all the controls. Have fun.

Hi Phy, How are you... Thanks for the tips. it helped me. i am working on it to get more detail. Thanks, Vijay

Kinda depends on how you did it. Then again, convex hulls are pretty tempermental...

Well, I don't think anyone simulates with a realistic number of molecules. The least realistic fluid animations use a particle emitter, where the particles use a 'blobby' algorithm to simulate a fluid surface. A single particle looks like a polygon-sphere, a droplet. A tight line of particles looks almost like a true fluid stream. The major downfall is that the particles don't have any expression of 'surface tension' or volume, so they freely scatter and also can flow to a single small spot. Scriptable particles have partially overcome even that drawback, if you can script in a kind of attraction that has a min. standoff distance, and still incorporates friction between objects, damping, and so on. True fluid simulators that do all the work internally still operate on a mesh that you produce which has a relatively small number of vertices. Just like Finite Element Analysis (FEA) used to simulate the failure of a given part design that uses a given material, such as acrylic plastic or a certain aluminum alloy. The part model, usually created in software like Solidworks, is broken up into elements, small blocks, so that the part looks like it is made of tiles, like the space shuttle. (It also has a resemblance to a quad-only polygonal model where all the quads are the same square area.) But the tiles are blocks, and the entire solid has been 'blockified'. Then the expected 'force' is applied to the part in a specified vector, and based on the material selected, an analysis is performed and a report is produced that details the amount of force that produces deflection and ultimately failure of the part. Usually an image is generated that shows which areas of the part are stressed the most, allowing the designer to rework it to improve his design. The point is that these sims usually work on mere hundreds of elements, maybe several thousand at the most, not tens of thousands, and certainly not millions. You might be able to make something that looks like flowing sand or wheat, or maybe even 'like' a fluid, if some more advanced physics scripting is added. But since SU doesn't do any special rendering, the best is could probably look like is 'watery particles'.

Hard to tell what to start with without knowing the skill level of the people you are teaching. If beginners, then basic grouping etc.. as Wacov said; then add basic coding and get as far as you can with that. Just what Wacov said plus basic coding is a weeks worth of class alone! Wish I could be there for the coding part of it...

That particular script sends the servo into a progressive death spin, however the @myPos should prove very useful.

Would love to see stronger joins in the next release.

If you need square root, this is my suggestion: x**0.5

Jay, there's a version on the warehouse at http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=8b02334bbd1681ac6cd8ad826e9017b8&prevstart=0 that can be fired with space. Basically, I used two objects, making up the arrow, to get the vector for the ray. The start point uses the hidden sphere (I realise now that wasn't needed). There's a hash variable, @@thruster... so, object [1] has @@thruster[1] tied to it by name. When the ray hits an object, it retrieves the object's name (so, [1]), and activates @@thruster[1]. Inside each object is a small thruster, that always faces the gun; this is what pushes the object when @@thruster is activated. There's also an @@obj variable, which doesn't do anything (I can't remember why I thought I needed it )

Thats right. The 3rd party slider control I use doesn't correctly show the initial position of the slider. Click somewhere and it will snap to the actual value. One more reason to get rid of webdialogs.

Cant do it with the current version. In the next version you should (I havent actually done it yet) be able to adjust any of the parameters on a joint and then that kind of braking would be possible.

Thanks, I forgot about that site.

Well since googles products are mostly innovative,simple and based on intuition their products work like awesome.One thing which most of the physics engine don't do is: Say in a physics engine I make body move over a surface from point A to Point B with just a simple command "Move body M from point A(x1,y1,z1) to B(x2,y2,z2).But there isn't a feature which dynamically shows the free body diagram of the body with the forces working on it.Phiilips,if one can incorporate such a feature where in the force vectors are indicated by a solid translucent arrow whose orientation and length shows the forces acting on the body qualitatively then it would improve the visualization of the physics happening in there and this would also help the person better study the model.I feel it would be simply awesome

If •BTM interpreted it right, then you just have to move the plugin into the plugins folder in sketchup.

I got a model I can upload if you want, It's not so very good though.

Okay! Thanks!

I use " cos... well, that's better. "..." is a string variable (text), so using " lets me put ' inside it. I show people the joy("...") command because that's the future syntax... it might help stop confusion whenever the switchover is. Also, to me at least, it makes it slightly easier to read, and it makes more sense.