1 / 9

Animating Explosions

Animating Explosions. Abhinav Golas Akram Khan Under the guidance of Prof. Kalra & Prof. Kumar. Outline. The problem How we’ve split the problem Current progress Some comparison. The problem. Animating explosions – Navier Stokes Modeling the pressure wave Issues Large quantities

danno
Download Presentation

Animating Explosions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Animating Explosions Abhinav Golas Akram Khan Under the guidance of Prof. Kalra & Prof. Kumar

  2. Outline • The problem • How we’ve split the problem • Current progress • Some comparison

  3. The problem • Animating explosions – Navier Stokes • Modeling the pressure wave • Issues • Large quantities • Large spatial & temporal derivatives • Inherent shocks (speed of sound) • Large bulk transfer

  4. How we’ve split the problem • Abhinav • Navier Stokes modeling • Focus on seeing impact of viscosity on simulation in different media • Models for different solver components – applying known methods for incompressible flows to problem • Akram • Euler equation modeling – inviscid Navier Stokes • Mostly first derivatives – scope for linear algebra based solvers • Focus will be on modeling as sparse linear systems

  5. Current Progress • Our implementation • Ready • Some methods for larger timestep simulation ready • Original paper implementation (Animating Explosions Yngve et al, SIGGRAPH 2000) • 2D version ready – some parameter tuning required • Rendering • Renderman based particle systems renderer • Uses order of 100000 particles

  6. Some comparison • Original implementation • 0.1 ms timestep for simple blast case • Our implementation • 1 ms timestep for simple blast case using multistep advection • 5 ms timestep for same case also done.

  7. Modifications made • Staggered grid (vs. centralized grid) • Better accuracy of spatial derivatives • Semi-lagrangian based multi-step advecton(vs. donor acceptor method) • Much more stable – guarantee of output<=input (but slight dissipation) • Allows for larger timesteps Step 1ms 5ms Frame at 15ms

  8. Future work • Complete comparison with earlier implementation • Improve methods to allow larger timesteps • Improve rendering • Experiment with ENO methods (CFD) • Develop solid interaction and fracturing models

  9. Thanks

More Related