• 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
zonozz

Question About Fluid simulation

5 posts in this topic

Hi, everyone !

 

I'm newer to do fluid simulation, and find that really hard to implement, I try to make that physical theory more clear, so I can do next. Please tell me if I had some comprehension problems :

 

I divide this tech into 2 steps - 1st is physical motion equation solving I called. And 2nd is surface reconstruction. Right ?

 

As learning going, I gradually find that the most difficult for me is step 2 - surface reconstruction. I cant imagine how those particles reconstructed by position data (or something else data ?), a algorithm to find surfaces ? or iso-surface ? 

 

Digression - Are there something can be improved of fluid simulation for movies or games ? (The movies I saw, which had gorgeous fluid effects.)

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rendering and shading fluids is definitely tricky, but if course it very much depends on how you computed them in the first place.

If you have a eulerian grid which you used to compute motion by diffusing and advecting velocities / temperatures / densities / colours, you can pretty easily ray trace through the volume and get some decent results, depending on the resolution of your grid.

 

If you went down the sph / mass particles way, I find it trickier. Depending on what kind of fluid you are trying to render, you could render multiple times, to get surface depth and thickness, and then composite together. 

Or you could try sorting them and alpha blending them. Of you could try bucketing them into screen tiles/cluters and evaluating each block to reconstruct your surface. Marching cubes could be an option?

You mean that different fluids, like difference between ocean and a cup of water, will be simulated in different methods( I think maybe it's just a something detail in equation's item, is that right ?) ? I'm stopped at surface-reconstruction, that's very hard to me. I try to read a lot of opensource and thesis, then I can do next.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Rendering and shading fluids is definitely tricky, but if course it very much depends on how you computed them in the first place.

If you have a eulerian grid which you used to compute motion by diffusing and advecting velocities / temperatures / densities / colours, you can pretty easily ray trace through the volume and get some decent results, depending on the resolution of your grid.

 

If you went down the sph / mass particles way, I find it trickier. Depending on what kind of fluid you are trying to render, you could render multiple times, to get surface depth and thickness, and then composite together. 

Or you could try sorting them and alpha blending them. Of you could try bucketing them into screen tiles/cluters and evaluating each block to reconstruct your surface. Marching cubes could be an option?

You mean that different fluids, like difference between ocean and a cup of water, will be simulated in different methods( I think maybe it's just a something detail in equation's item, is that right ?) ? I'm stopped at surface-reconstruction, that's very hard to me. I try to read a lot of opensource and thesis, then I can do next.

 

Different types of fluids would most likely be simulated in different ways. There are many things to consider: the scale of the fluid, the detail needed, whether they can be bounded by a small volume or need to be able to leave said volume, etc.

Some examples could be ocean wave motion computed by FFTs + local object wake maps, a smoke pillar with well known bounds computed by a eulerian voxel grid, water spewing out of a pipe simulated by hundreds of thousands of sph simed particles, etc. The simulation method will dictate to a certain extent how you will tackle your surface reconstruction and shading due to the very different nature of the data you are producing. So I guess knowing what you are going to do on that side would be useful to come first.

I would start by checking out the SPH demo in the dxsdk, and the NV volumetric smoke/fire demo in their sdk. They use very different approaches. 

This guys blog has some really interesting posts on fluids, worth reading:
http://directtovideo.wordpress.com/


 

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