MSPhysics 1.0.3 (16 October 2017)

Ahmed0007

please update for SU2019

Anton_S

My sketchup is hiding the objects, when I press start emulation (about 10 seconds). What is happening?

This happens because some objects, like hidden objects fall too far down to the point where your view is clipped. Ensure to assign an Ignore state to the that objects that should not be a part of simulation.

Anton_S

@fokys said:

Please tell me how to configure the plugin

I will try to make the slider joint more useful by the next release. Thank you for your report!

Anton_S

@ahmed0007 said:

please update for SU2019

I am on it!

Ahmed0007

@anton_s said:

@ahmed0007 said:

please update for SU2019

I am on it!

Thank you so much

faust07

Sounds good. This could be a reason to purchase SketchUp 2019...

steambuf

been looking for an animator for some time and have looked at this plugin with Sketchup 2017 Make to keep the costs down to zero. The new version of Free Sketchup is on line only so no use to me.
I cannot get the joints to remain located exactly and the objects drift apart after a short period of time.
I also downloaded a steam beam engine model with full animation. this worked fine for a couple of iterations and then proceeded to disintegrate due to drifting of the joints.
Is this just me of is this an ongoing problem with this plug in?

If I could get it to work it would be a terrific program. everything seems to work except this drifting of the joints. pity I've spent quite a bit of time trying to make it work.

Anton_S

@steambuf Yes, joints are a problem. I wm hoping that an updated version of nrwton dynamics physics engine addresses the problem. In the meantime, joint stiffness is best, if all connected bodies are of the same mass and solver model is set to itetative 64 passes. To change the mass of a body, use the UI.

steambuf

Thanks for the reply.
Much appreciated!!
Will play with it a bit more and try your suggestions. I really love what you are doing to keep the fun in programming and sharing your knowledge and skill with others.
I'm now retired and trying to keep my brain active and you are helping me do that.
Thanks again and would love to see an update to the non sticky joints???
Cheers Peter

WronskiKamil

Hi,
Will it be possible to export the animation to vray in the future? Maybe in the next version;)?

jeep906

Dear author! I apologize for my English, I translate Google translator.
Is it possible to save the properties of individual objects defined in the MSPhysics UI tool when combining these objects into a common group?
if there is no such possibility in this plugin, I am ready to pay for writing a new one, where there is such an opportunity. Please help me!

tayyab2224

As far as i know , it is not possible in this version, anton_s might be busy anywhere else .

Anton_S

@jeep906 said:

Dear author! I apologize for my English, I translate Google translator.
Is it possible to save the properties of individual objects defined in the MSPhysics UI tool when combining these objects into a common group?
if there is no such possibility in this plugin, I am ready to pay for writing a new one, where there is such an opportunity. Please help me!

With the current version, it is not possible to assign properties to internal groups. The new version, that I am developing, will support this functionality.

@tayyab2224 said:

As far as i know , it is not possible in this version, anton_s might be busy anywhere else .

I am honestly working on the project, just not as actively. I have been focused on other things. NewtonDynamics, the physics engine used by MSPhysics, has become much more stable and robust with joints than before. We will no longer experience the weird behavior of those flexible and wandering joints and have much better experience with developing robotics. I am driven to develop the new version. Thanks for your interest in the project!

faust07

Thanks for the information on the further development of MSPhysics. That sounds great. Will the old models be compatible with the new version?

Anton_S

@faust07 said:

Thanks for the information on the further development of MSPhysics. That sounds great. Will the old models be compatible with the new version?

Unfortunately MSPhysics 2 won't be compatible with current models. This time, any object intended for simulation will have to be marked explicitly, rather than excluding unwanted with the Ignore option. Scripting docs is going to be different as well. My intention is to focus on usability and tutorials with this one.

Hza

Hello Anton, thanks for the great extension! Please, when we can expect release of the MSPhysics 2?
thanks again!
Hza

@anton_s said:

@faust07 said:

Thanks for the information on the further development of MSPhysics. That sounds great. Will the old models be compatible with the new version?

Unfortunately MSPhysics 2 won't be compatible with current models. This time, any object intended for simulation will have to be marked explicitly, rather than excluding unwanted with the Ignore option. Scripting docs is going to be different as well. My intention is to focus on usability and tutorials with this one.

Anton_S

@hza said:

Hello Anton, thanks for the great extension! Please, when we can expect release of the MSPhysics 2?
thanks again!
Hza

The first beta version should be ready in a few months.

jumpjack

Does it exist a library of mechanisms for MSP? I can find only a dozen models on warehouse.

kaoru_komine

I am commenting for the first time.
Thanks to the author for the great plugin.
I'm looking forward to the new version of "MSPhysics".

Now, I have a question about "MSPhysics2".
I use Ruby scripts that can be input from the UI to control the 3D model in the current "MSPhysics".Is it possible to do the same thing with "MSPhysics2"?

Anton_S

@kaoru_komine said:

I use Ruby scripts that can be input from the UI to control the 3D model in the current "MSPhysics".Is it possible to do the same thing with "MSPhysics2"?

Yes, scripting will still be available with MSPhysics2. The scripting API will be different, however.