for the joint of revolute and joint of wheel,they look quite similar,seems we can use
revolute joint do that wheel joint can do?i searched the box2d manual,it is very simple for this section,i also checked the source code of box2d,it just say something like wheel joint is designed for vehicle suspensions.does anybody know what's the difference between them,more specific speaking,what exactly the wheel joint it is?if you can give me a sample of wheel joint(c++ version),i will be very grateful to you.
The revolute joint can be thought of as a hinge, a pin, or an axle. An anchor point is defined on each body, and the bodies will be moved so that these two points are always in the same place, and the relative rotation of the bodies is not restricted.
Revolute joints can be given limits so that the bodies can rotate only to a certain point. They can also be given a motor so that the bodies will try to rotate at a given speed, with a given torque. Common uses for revolute joints include:
wheels or rollers
chains or swingbridges (using multiple revolute joints)
rag-doll joints
rotating doors, catapults, levers
Joints added after v2.1.2:
Wheel - the line joint, renamed
And the line joint can be described as
a combination of revolute and prismatic joints, useful for modelling vehicle suspension
Follow this link on joints. It may make clear the difference between these joints in a better manner.
http://blog.allanbishop.com/box2d-2-1a-tutorial-part-2-joints/
A revolute joint (also called pin joint or hinge joint) is a one-degree-of-freedom kinematic pair used in mechanisms.[1] Revolute joints provide single-axis rotation function used in many places such as door hinges, folding mechanisms, and other uni-axial rotation devices.
Related
TL;DR
I have a quaternion representing the orientation of a sphere (an Earth globe). From the quaternion I wish to derive a latitude/longitude. I can visualize in my mind the process, but am weak with the math (matrices/quaternions) and not much better with the code (still learning OpenGL/GLM). How can I achieve this? This is for use in OpenGL using c++ and the GLM library.
Long Version
I am making a mapping program based on a globe of the Earth - not unlike Google Earth, but for a customized purpose that GE cannot be adapted to.
I'm doing this in C++ using OpenGL with the GLM library.
I have successfully coded the sphere and am using a quaternion directly to represent it's orientation. No Euler angles involved. I can rotate the globe using mouse motions thus rotating the globe on arbitrary axes depending on the current viewpoint and orientation.
However, I would like to get a latitude and longitude of a point on the sphere, not only for the user, but for some internal program use as well.
I can visualize that this MUST be possible. Imagine a sphere in world space with no rotations applied. Assuming OpenGL's right hand rule, the north pole points up the Y axis with the equator parallel on the X/Z plane. The latitude/longitude up the Y axis is thus 90N and something else E/W (degenerate). The prime meridian would be on the +Z axis.
If the globe/sphere is rotated arbitrarily the globe's north pole is now somewhere else. This point can be mapped to a latitude/longitude of the original sphere before rotation. Imagine two overlaying spheres, one the globe which is rotated, and the other a fixed reference.
(Actually, it would be in reverse. The latitude/longitude I seek is the point on the rotated sphere that correlates to the north pole of the unrotated reference sphere)
In my mind it seems that somehow I should be able to get the vector of the Earth globe's orientation axis from it's quaternion and compare it to that of the unrotated sphere. But I just can't seem to grok how to do that. (I guess I still don't fully understand mats and quats and have only blundered into my success so far)
I'm hoping to achieve this without needing a crash course in the deep math. I'm looking for a solution/understanding/guidance from the point of view of being able to use the GLM library to achieve my goal. Ideally a code sample with some general explanation. I learn best from example.
FYI, in my code the rotation of the globe/sphere is totally independent of the camera (which does use Euler angles) so it can be moved independently. So I can't use anything from the camera to determine this.
Maybe you could try to follow that link (ie. use boost ;) ) from that thread Longitude / Latitude to quaternion and then deduct the inverse of that conversion.
Or you could also go add a step by converting your quaternion into Euler angle?
I am building an IOS game in Cocos2d - Chipmunk - Spritebuilder. I need to make a characters orbit around around a point, and I was having quite some difficulty in implementing orbits with real physics.
So far, I have tried two methods, one is creating a distance joint from the player to the planet, and then applying a 90 degree force on the player where an angle is created between the end of the distance joint and an imaginary line drawn at a 90 angle to it. He moves around crazily and this method is not working for me.
I then tried calculating 180 points on the circumference at a radius from the planet (which is the bounds of detecting and implementing its effects on the player) - and then in a scheduled update method [character.physicsbody applyForce:nextCircumferencePoint]; This does not work, as he does not follow the path exactly and is quite far from it. I am thinking that I need to also apply a gravitational force towards the planet which would cause him to circle it. Though I don't know how to calculate that force, apply it, or if it would even help.
A third method which would never work, but was used for testing was to set his position to the next circumference point. He does orbit, but any collision won't work (such as if a piece of space junk goes in his way.) He will simply be positioned right over any other object. This world great if you don't need collisions, are writing your own physics engine. This is not a polished way of doing things, so will avoid it.
Please correct anything I have already done and tell me how it would work, or shed light on other options and how to implement them.
Check out my answer here. It's for box2d, but you can do it with Chipmunk. If bodyA position will change, orbit will be same. You just need to change speed of body movement for your needs, just increase smoothness and slow down your update method.
I am making a simple 3D OpenGL game. At the moment I have four bounding walls, a random distribution of internal walls and a simple quad cube for my player.
I want to set up collision detection between the player and all of the walls. This is easy with the bounding walls as i can just check if the x or z coordinate is less than or greater than a value. The problem is with the interior walls. I have a glGenList which holds small rectangular wall segments, at the initial setup i randomly generate an array of x,z co ordinates and translate these wall segments to this position in the draw scene. I have also added a degree of rotation, either 45 or 90 which complicates the collision detection.
Could anyone assist me with how I might go about detecting collisions here. I have the co ordinates for each wall section, the size of each wall section and also the co ordinates of the player.
Would i be looking at a bounded box around the player and walls or is there a better alternative?
I think your question is largely about detecting collision with a wall at an angle, which is essentially the same as "detecting if a point matches a line", which there is an answer for how you do here:
How can I tell if a point belongs to a certain line?
(The code may be C#, but the math behind it applies in any language). You just have to replace the Y in those formulas for Z, since Y appears to not be a factor in your current design.
There has been MANY articles and even books written on how to do "good" collision detection. Part of this, of course, comes down to a "do you want very accurate or very fast code" - for "perfect" simulations, you may sacrifice speed for accuarcy. In most games, of the players body "dents" the wall just a little bit because the player has gone past the wall intersection, that's perhaps acceptable.
It is also useful to "partition the space". The common way for this is "Binary space partitioning", which is nicely described and illustrated here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_space_partition
Books on game programming should cover basic principles of collision detection. There is also PLENTY of articles on the web about it, including an entry in wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collision_detection
Short of making a rigid body physics engine, one could use point to plane distance to see if any of the cubes corner points are less than 0.0f away from the plane (I would use FLT_MIN so the points have a little radius to them). You will need to store a normalized 3d vector (vector of length 1.0f) to represent the normal of the plane. If the dot product between the vector from the center of the plane to the point and the plain normal is less than the radius you have a collision. After that, you can take the velocity (the length of the vector) of the cube, multiply it by 0.7f for some energy absorption and store this as the cubes new velocity. Then reflect the normalized velocity vector of the cube over the normal of the plane, then multiply that by the previously calculated new velocity of the cube.
If you really want to get into game physics, grab a pull from this guys github. I've used his book for a Physics for games class. There are some mistakes in the book so be sure to get all code samples from github. He goes through making a mass aggregate physics engine and a rigid body one. I would also brush up on matrices and tensors.
I'm currently making a 2D pool game where i have to use real physics simulation. I have done the circle collision and elastic collision so far, But I want a formula which can find the collision response velocity, which differs when a ball collides with other at different points thanks in advance.
There are many approaches, but if you can afford to make the balls overlap a bit (that is, to make part of the ball "enter" the other) you can turn it into a spring-damper system and solve with Hooke's law.
Since Hooke's law give you the force, you need to integrate it to find the momentum. Momentum divided by mass is the velocity you're looking for.
Take a look at this excellent intro of spring physics for game development (that also has a link for his intro on numerical integration).
edit: if you're looking for a practical solution I suggest the Box2D physics engine.
Pool collision can be considered as elastic collision throughout the board, with friction slowing down its movement.
Don;t think the collision response in terms of angles to the circle. Using vectors will ease the problem.
The circle-circle collision velocity response is easy:
1. When collision is detected
2. FInd the normal velocity of the balls acting toward the other ball.
3. Interchange the Normal velocity between the two balls
4. Resolve the velocity in x and y direction
A very helpful webiste to find the velocity response in terms of vectors: http://archive.ncsa.illinois.edu/Classes/MATH198/townsend/math.html
I'm developing a game that basically has its entire terrain made out of AABB boxes. I know the verticies, minimum, and maximum of each box. I also set up my camera like this:
glMatrixMode(GL_MODELVIEW);
glLoadIdentity();
glRotatef(Camera.rotx,1,0,0);
glRotatef(Camera.roty,0,1,0);
glRotatef(Camera.rotz,0,0,1);
glTranslatef(-Camera.x,-Camera.y,-Camera.z);
What I'm trying to do is basically find the cube the mouse is on. I thought about giving the mouse position a forward directional vector and simply iterating through until the 'mouse bullet' hits something. However this envolves interating through all objects several times. Is there a way I could do it by only iterating through all the objects once?
Thanks
This is usually referred to as 'picking' This here looks like a good gl based link
If that is tldr, then a basic algorithm you could use
sort objects by z (or keep them sorted by z, or depth buffer tricks etc)
iterate and do a bounds test, stopping when you hit the first one.
This is called Ray Tracing (oops, my mistake, it's actually Ray Casting). Every Physics engine has this functionality. You can look at one of the simplest - ODE, or it's derivative - Bullet. They are open-source so you can take out what you don't need. They both have a handy math library that handles all oftenly needed matrix and vertex operations.
They all have demos on how to do exactly this task.
I suggest you consider looking at this issue from a bigger perspective.
The boxes are just points at a lower resolution. The trick is to reduce the resolution of the mouse to figure out which box it is on.
You may have to perform a 2d to 3d conversion (or vice versa). In most games, the mouse lives in a 2d coordinate world. The stuff "under" the mouse is a 2d projection of a 3d universe.
You want to use a 3D picking algorithm. The idea is that you draw a ray from the user's position in the virtual world in the direction of the click. This blog post explains very clearly how to implement such an algorithm. Essentially your screen coordinates need to be transformed from the screen space to the virtual world space. There's a website that has a very good description about the various transformations involved and I can't post the link due to my rank. Search for book of hook's mouse picking algorithm [I do not own the site and I haven't authored the document].
Once you get a ray in the desired direction, you need to perform tests for intersection with the geometries in the real world. Since you have AABB boxes entirely, you can use simple vector equations to check which geometry intersects the ray. I would say that approximating your boxes as a sphere would make life very easy since there is a very simple sphere-ray intersection test. So, your ray would be described by what you obtain from the first step (the ray drawn in the first step) and then you would need to use an intersection test. If you're ok with using spheres, the center of the sphere would be the point you draw your box and the diameter would be the width of your box.
Good Luck!