• Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  

2d rigid body colision response physics with friction

This topic is 1653 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I am searching for proper equation / code for doing 

2d rigid body collision response physics,

 

(by equation / code I mean computing update step-frame values

for linear and angular velocities of rigid bodies at some collision

point and moment) 

 

The best i found till now was

 

http://www.myphysicslab.com/collision.html

 

here is some equation in orange frame, I implemented this

in simple case when collision is between rigid body and wall

but not to carefull (I was doing it three months ago) and as far

as  I remember it worked though not too perfect in my opinion.

 

 

The problem with this is that it assume no friction, when vertice 

of rigid body hits the wall no friction is assumed and it seem 

to be wrong for me. I thing there should be tangent friction in 

point of collision but I am to weak to build a proper equation 

and code for that case (and also I cannot find it in the network)

 

could someone tell me how it should be look like with tangent

friction involved ? i need somewhat correct physical model

to that.. Or maybe some link to some tutorial of code about that?

(but do not send me to general physics books or some muddy

source of box2d or something like that - I am looking for this

specific answer, proper equation or pure routine.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement

Just out of curiosity - what is wrong with the "muddy" Box2D source? It has plenty plenty of derivations in the comments as well? Actually I collaborated implementing the 2x2 block solver. So I wonder what you think is bad about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity - what is wrong with the "muddy" Box2D source? It has plenty plenty of derivations in the comments as well? Actually I collaborated implementing the 2x2 block solver. So I wonder what you think is bad about it.


I didnt mean it like that, sorry for my weak english. I meant that people could say 'check it up in box2d source' or something like that and it is aggreviating 4 me, couse im not so good in spying on sources, need tutorial or stright answer from somebody experienced enough.

 

Just out of curiosity - what does such solver do?

Edited by fir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You question is too general. You should try a more specific question what point of the theory you don't understand. Did you look into some of these links here at GameDev.net:

http://www.gamedev.net/topic/475753-list-of-physics-engines-and-reference-material-updated-7-march-2011/

 

The Bullet forum has a similar section:

http://www.bulletphysics.org/Bullet/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=63

 

You will have to study some of these references and then you can ask about specifics you are not understanding. This is in my opinion the best way to use forums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You question is too general. You should try a more specific question what point of the theory you don't understand. Did you look into some of these links here at GameDev.net:

http://www.gamedev.net/topic/475753-list-of-physics-engines-and-reference-material-updated-7-march-2011/

 

The Bullet forum has a similar section:

http://www.bulletphysics.org/Bullet/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=63

 

You will have to study some of these references and then you can ask about specifics you are not understanding. This is in my opinion the best way to use forums.

 

I think it is internaly specific, it is: "I have got some equation (on this page i gave link to) where i got impulse response for collision with no friction - I need some equation just like that but with friction and i cannot find one" : (

 

Anyway thanx for such many links, I will have really hard time of reading that 

 

As to speaking about general and specyfic, youre right probably specifics

are probably (or maybe) better way of using forum, but personally i found

in myself some strong inclining to general, thats true

Edited by fir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement