• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
pizza123

How to find closest points between two moving circles?

9 posts in this topic

Hi,

 

I'm trying to find the time of impact between two moving circles. Right now I was finding the closest distance between the circles (like if you just draw a line between their centres), however if the two circles are moving then the actual closest points (& distance) for impact are different. I was wondering what would be the easiest way to find those points?

 

Thank you

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Use coordinates where one of the circles is not moving. If the circles were moving in straight lines, now you'll see only one circle moving in a straight line. Finding the shortest distance between a segment and a point is easy enough.

 

Does that help?

Edited by Álvaro
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the reply, but I don't quite understand what you mean by using coordinates where one of the circle is not moving? Like find relative velocity or relative position? And for finding the shortest distance between a segment and a point, what would be the segment and what would be the point? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you can think of what I am saying as using relative velocity and position. The segment is the path of the center of the circle that moves and the point is the path of the center of the circle that doesn't move.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for the reply, but I don't quite understand what you mean by using coordinates where one of the circle is not moving? Like find relative velocity or relative position? And for finding the shortest distance between a segment and a point, what would be the segment and what would be the point? 

 

If you subtract the velocity of sphere 1 (s1) from both sphere 1 and sphere 2 (s2), now you have a single non-moving sphere (s1) and a moving one (s2).  Now the problem is much easier, because you can just determine the closest approach of s2 to the center of s1.  Then you can compare that distance to the combined radius (D_min = s1.radius + s2.radius).  If the distance is less than D_min, then a collision will occur.  After that you have to calculate where it occurred.

 

Anyway, I dont have time to go through the math of how to do all this, just saying why you want to simplify the problem by making one non-moving.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given two circles c1 and c2 with velocity vectors v1 and v2, it would seem as though what you need to do really is calculate intersection points between two pairs of lines.  

 

This would be my mindset in solving this:

[attachment=13114:circlecollide.gif]

 

I'm not the best at math so I'm taking a shot in the dark without verifying this.   But I'd probably do something to this effect for each circle:

 

1. normalize v1

2. find the perpendicular of v1, let's call it perp_v1

 

If we move away from the center of c1 distance +/- r (radius) we actually have two points still on circle c1.   Something like.. c1.location + perp_v1 * radius

 

You can just use those two points and the normalized v1 to create the two lines shown in red for each circle.  Then it's just a matter of finding the points where the equations for those lines are equal.   There should be four total (circled in blue).   The first intersection point on a circle edge is going to end up being the one closest to both c1 and c2.  Hopefully someone can expand on this.. I'm up later than I should be and my brain in shutting down.  =P

 

Hope this gets things moving a little more.

Edited by Michael Tanczos
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Michael Tanczos' timestamp='1357539864' post='5018474']
Given two circles c1 and c2 with velocity vectors v1 and v2, it would seem as though what you need to do really is calculate intersection points between two pairs of lines.  
[/quote]

 

I don't think that solves anything. The two circles might get to the intersection region at different times, and then they won't collide.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Find the distance between the circle centres as a function of time. Solve for it being equal to the sum of the radii (it's a quadratic).

The quadratic will have no roots if the circles do not collide, otherwise two roots and you want the smallest, if they are both positive.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given two circles c1 and c2 with velocity vectors v1 and v2, it would seem as though what you need to do really is calculate intersection points between two pairs of lines.  

 

 

I don't think that solves anything. The two circles might get to the intersection region at different times, and then they won't collide.

 

1AM me says my solution makes perfect sense - 7AM me says 1AM me should have went to bed.  

Edited by Michael Tanczos
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies, I did it the quadratic way and it worked, but I might try the other ways later. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0