MSPhysics 1.0.3 (16 October 2017)
-
Hi, Robin,
I'm glad I could help.
Best regards,
Anton -
Dear Anton,
I just downloaded the plugin to make a simple cinematic / collision check on a folding workbench model, that is basically a deformable parallelogram.
Although I got the basic principle and manage to make singles hinges move as expected, any component is stuck as soon as it's linked to two hinges.There's also a message reading "Requires MSPhysics 0.9.8+" in a corner of the screen, should I understand that it won't work unless I install something else ?
Thanks
Armand -
Hi, Armand,
A hinge with no parent groups will act stationary. In order for the hinge to move, it must have a parent group. What I think is going on in your model is that the hinges are top level groups. If you want a hinge to link two groups together, and still move, simply create a hinge joint within one of the groups andd then, using the joint connection tool, connect it to the other group. That way the hinge joint will have a parent body, which will allow it to move.
Check out this mini clip:
Movable Joints ExampleThe message is there so that people using your model would know that they need MSPhysics in order to run it.
Regards,
Anton -
I think I have some issue with hinge when I link it to a parent:
Mac OSX 10.8.5, SU2015.
-
Hi, gilles,
To fix that, you have to select the joint, open MSPhysics UI, and check the "connected collide" option.
Regards,
Anton -
@anton_s said:
Hi, Robin,
I'm glad I could help.
Best regards,
AntonI made a simple mass/spring damper system as per model, but I get some odd results not like the damped sinusoid
Am I on the right track or have I made some basic errors
Also the block doesn't sit still on the plane but wanders off
I am also having difficulty tying in the UI with real values of spring rate N/m and damping c*velocity Ns/m
Any advice, most appreciated
Cheers
RobinBTW I looked at the Ruby docs but couldnt tie up real units to the constants
-
@anton_s said:
Hi, gilles,
To fix that, you have to select the joint, open MSPhysics UI, and check the "connected collide" option.
Regards,
AntonWorks fine
A lot to dig in, I go back to the mine.
-
Hi, Robin,
The block doesn't sit still probably because you disabled the friction. Enabling the friction checkbox option for the block and for the floor contacting the block will fix the wandering off behavior.
I will add an option to control accel and damp with the SI units in the upcoming release. At the moment, I figured that spring constant is roughly equals to (accel * 7 - damp), when spring joint stiffness is set to 1.0.
Edit: Ensure that both anuglar and linear damping for all bodies are set to zero. This improves the closeness.
Anton
-
Hi Anton
I'm sure I tried every way with the friction coeffs, and it didnt seem to help much, unless Im doing something wrong. If you could get real SI units into the spring damper model this would be fantastic. Classic maths leaves everything in normalised units which is really hard for students to translate into the real world - thats what MS physics is about. I try to encourage my student to abandon th suck-it-and-see approach in favour of understanding what is really happening and calculating the effect. I know that math is a real turn off for most users, but I try
cheers Robin
-
@anton_s said:
Hi, Robin,
The block doesn't sit still probably because you disabled the friction. Enabling the friction checkbox option for the block and for the floor contacting the block will fix the wandering off behavior.
I will add an option to control accel and damp with the SI units in the upcoming release. At the moment, I figured that spring constant is roughly equals to (accel * 7 - damp), when spring joint stiffness is set to 1.0.
Edit: Ensure that both anuglar and linear damping for all bodies are set to zero. This improves the closeness.
Anton
Yes indeed, improved action, I missed the friction box
Herewith a revised model changing block mass from 0 - 0.5 kg gives a displacement of 0 - 1.0 so the spring rate is 2
spring stiff 1 (what does this do?)
Accel 1, damp 1.5 (gives critical damping approx)changing sample rate from 1/60 to 1/240 changes the whole model performance
iterations 16 - improves stability
the plane has a mass of 0.01kg, lowest i could get without instability
So Ive actually got a spring damper that sort of behaves but it seems like the spring has inertial mass - an ideal spring should be zero mass and friction
What do you think? Anything I can do to help (ruby dummy just now)
Cheers
Robin)
-
Hi, Robin,
I just revised the spring joint to base on Hooke's law. Just need to adress a few other things before its ready for the release.
Regards,
Anton -
@anton_s said:
Hi, Robin,
I just revised the spring joint to base on Hooke's law. Just need to adress a few other things before its ready for the release.
Regards,
AntonHi Anton
It occured to me loking at the motor joint, that it would be neat to have control sliders on important coeffs, of spring rate, friction, and damping, help to speed up student experience
BTW just seen some example in Sketchucation, blown away with the talent out there
Hope my little exercises aren' t too dull
Cheers
Robin
-
-
Hi, gilles,
You just need to adjust motor joint properties. So, select the motor joint, open MSPhysics UI, and set Accel to 20, Damp to 10, and uncheck the Free Rotate checkbox option. This should make the motor more stronger.
Anton
-
-
Very clever, gilles!
I'm sure there is a way to improve performance and stiffness of that thing.
Anton
-
Théo Jansen.
-
The peaceful robots!
-
I had issues with MS UI: modifying values, sometimes works sometimes not.
Then I notice this: typing a value +enter or tab does not work.
Typing a value + click outside the input box works…Just for anybody else having the same troubles.
Mac OSX 10.8.5, SU2015.
-
Yeah, I'm working on that. Thanks for the report, gilles!
Advertisement