Mar 15, 17 / Ari 18, 01 02:02 UTC
3D rendering: Blender ¶
Blender is a relatively easy to use open source 3D rendering package. Anyone already comfortable with this software?
Mar 15, 17 / Ari 18, 01 13:45 UTC
Happen to know much about "object collision"?
I'm able to make basic shapes(and some less basic) but when building something like, say an ant, when moving one leg it's trivial to make it move "through" another. Took me long enough to get the other bits of limb moving with. I've seen the "collision" doohicky but don't seem to be able to provide any physical density to the objects let alone the object become a "natural boundary".
Also would you be up for some blender work? This is likely to be a lot more boring than anything you've done previously. Luckily there's no particular rush behind such an affair - it's the sort of thing could spend five mins on then another five another time until completion. Basically there is need of objects placed into the public domain - high quality and accurately scaled parts. Screws, nuts, bolts, anything in the public domain or open source really(was thinking about taking a stab at the IDA soon). It'll make it easier when designing/building new things by allowing others to almost play lego.
Mar 15, 17 / Ari 18, 01 16:19 UTC
Great idea, a virtual storage place where you can go shopping (free)
to assemble everything you want. I was in the store this afternoon
and got a half little bag of material for +- 50euro's.
Mar 15, 17 / Ari 18, 01 22:03 UTC
I'm not so sure about "shopping" - but maybe at some point we'll have a network of 3D printers and production hardware within which the general public or private firms can select individual objects for production or upload plans for us to produce something custom. I've definitely intent for this sort of thing "eventually". This could be productive in furthering it but I actually had other intent in mind.
The intent here was to get some "basic parts" - I can see some objects placed into the public domain but not enough for "use". Things that actually exist in the real world. I specifically mentioned screws, nuts, bolts etc because these are used in a lot of other things. Basically I'm kinda miffed that to build my hexapod to scale in blender I had to render the SG90's first. I surely can't be the first person to want to put such a cheap, common piece of hardware into a model. Strikes me as we should organise somewhere to collect things like that, so the next person doesn't have to get out the calipers. I should actually re-do that, so the motor actually turns the gears which in turn adjust the arm position, rather than just moving the rod the arm bolts to. I'm lazy.
As a solo effort, attempting to render every real-world component in existence from open source plans or datasheets is an unrealistical challenge. One per day, and I'll not even be ½ way through before it's all out of date. But a group of people, donating a couple of hours a week could realistically gather a large number of components, in a very short amount of time.
Mar 16, 17 / Ari 19, 01 09:08 UTC
In fact you could make a sort of startrek transporter device.
You just say the object that you want to the device,
it assembles it in his memory with the parts available,
and then prints the whole object with a 3D-printer.
Mar 16, 17 / Ari 19, 01 17:55 UTC
Not quite a transporter... transporter should move things about, not make copies in other places.
The the ST universe, the invention of the transporter was preceeded by the invention of the replicator - the two technologies being distinctly linked. The loose premise of the replicator is your pour in common water, it splits this into hydrogen and oxygen - and here it gets cunning. It then splits the oxygen and the hydrogen into Protons, neutrons and electrons. By harvesting the energy from splitting the atoms, it also becomes a powerful generator. Armed with a pile of electrons, protons and neutrons it can recombine them into any given form to make any atom - combine atoms to make molecules etc until product.
People are working on this.
I know this isn't Star-Trek but I suspect replicator technology will be discovered and be common use before transporter technology, just like star-trek.
Mar 17, 17 / Ari 20, 01 14:15 UTC
There is a multitude of 3D models freely available to the public all across the internet. Sites like archive3d.net and blendswap.com and there's also some low poly free models on Turbosquid.com The really nice thing about Blender is that you can import Wavefront objects and 3DS objects which were developed in Studio Max. This application is very powerful.
I was reading about your collision situation. You can set the amount of 3D space that surrounds the object that you want to collide with by going to the Collsion Panel. The "Soft Body and Cloth" parameter can be changed to adjust where the collision occurs around the object - the default is .02 - quite small, but needs adjusting based on your object's perceived mass in the scene. It also helps to add a sub-division modifier to the object which will, in essence, provide more tactile points in 3D space to provide better collision animations. Be sure to save your file 1st so you can Bake the simulation at any time. Materials and textures will also need to be accounted for in this. In an animation with an object hitting a stone block perhaps, would be different than a bubble. If you are using a displacement modifier on your object, the parameter mentioned above can be the perfect adjustment. If you run your timeline in playback mode repetitiously, you can adjust the parameter in real-time and by looking at the viewport you can see how much more or less you need to make the objects collide at the correct point in 3D space. The graph editor can help modify the arc of the animation - to give it more realism.
Have a good day today.
Mar 17, 17 / Ari 20, 01 15:09 UTC
Thanks for the tips, I'll play with that and see what happens, cheers.
With regards to the existing object pools, they are lacking. Or at least anything I want isn't in there, typically. Case in point, SG-90's. That which is in there is just an object that looks right there's been no effort into how this can actually be made in reality. The SG90 I made was no different, really, it's the right external shape/dimensions but I was lazy with the internal gearing - the cog size and tooth count are likely well off, and it doesn't actually use the "motor" inside it. If I redo that with a little care, it not only can import into designs but as an object within itself all the parts(motor aside) can be printed and assembled into a real working product.
I'm suggesting a co-operative effort to build all the bits things get built from. First. Then start to build some better things - by this stage it should be reasonably simple for anyone to "lego" themselves pretty much anything - and actually have some chance of this being possible to actually build even if the person assembling these pieces don't know how any of them actually work.
Mar 17, 17 / Ari 20, 01 16:37 UTC
I wouldn't mind volunteering building .blend files for Asgardia. I would start by creating a base template of anything one can think of that is needed by notes, codes, objects that would be the foundation for all .blend files. Case-in-point; if volunteers around the globe were building and contributing objects to the database; all scale units need to be the same - one person may build in a 10 x 10 grid; somebody else might accidentally build in a 100 x 100 grid - all need to be the same - meters? inches?. With a .blend template one can pre-set empties and using Blender's measurement tool - make it obvious to the end-user of where objects should be constructed and centered. Also, in the template should be text guidelines for continuity. This is also a good point to set up empty objects to use as "drivers" - i.e. - speed, velocity, gravity, a base rotator object, etc. - you'll want to utilize these down the road. A base .blend file that is Asgardia approved - so to speak - can be replicated from that point forward and save much headache.
Mar 17, 17 / Ari 20, 01 16:48 UTC
With regards to measurements, millimeters, surely? Almost al existing plans, blueprints, datasheets, my calipers - etc all measure in mm.
Thinking, it might actually be possible to make software extract from visual data in datasheets/blueprints and have that plot up objects. Might be useful, I should look into that.
I think a starting template is definitely a good idea, standards are a good thing. Ideally we should have some sort of standards authority(this has been suggested elsewhere) which could make this a more sensible affair.
I've not played with "empty objects" - maybe that's ½ of what I was doing wrong.
Mar 17, 17 / Ari 20, 01 16:56 UTC
I have, in the past, set up Blender to read data in .midi files and drive objects in 3D. Using python, one can do the same with data (open-source) and drive objects in Blender 3D. I know if I can access .midi data; that it is definitly possible to access data in open source formats. It is a matter of setting up drivers in a scene that correlate to [named] input stream and it's file structure. This is one of the facets of Blender that gets me excited. I foresee, in the future, 3D data streams, tied directly into Blender to do amazing things.
Mar 17, 17 / Ari 20, 01 18:01 UTC
Yeah, that's a little more advanced than what I was thinking - but I was thinking python might already have some "visual processing" libraries that would be useful.
That's something I suspect might be sensible to have as a importable object - and something I certiainly have uses for. It's also something I suspect will take slightly longer than five seconds to accurately reproduce in blender. I was thinking especially as it's got nice labels and measurements it should be possible to get most of the work done by the machine itself. I'm lazy.