Search Results

Search found 563 results on 23 pages for 'vertices'.

Page 3/23 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Why is my primitive xna square not drawn/shown?

    - by Mech0z
    I have made this class to draw a rectangle, but I cant get it to be drawn, I have no issues displaying a 3d model created in 3dmax, but shown these primitives seems much harder I use this to create it board = new Board(Vector3.Zero, 1000, 1000, Color.Yellow); And here is the implementation using System; using System.Net; using System.Windows; using System.Windows.Controls; using System.Windows.Documents; using System.Windows.Ink; using System.Windows.Input; using System.Windows.Shapes; using Quadro.Models; using Microsoft.Xna.Framework; using Microsoft.Xna.Framework.Graphics; namespace Quadro { public class Board : IGraphicObject { //Private Fields private Vector3 modelPosition; private BasicEffect effect; private VertexPositionColor[] vertices; private Matrix rotationMatrix; private GraphicsDevice graphicsDevice; private Matrix cameraProjection; //Constructor public Board(Vector3 position, float length, float width, Color color) { var _color = color; vertices = new VertexPositionColor[6]; vertices[0].Position = new Vector3(position.X, position.Y, position.Z); vertices[1].Position = new Vector3(position.X, position.Y + width, position.Z); vertices[2].Position = new Vector3(position.X + length, position.Y, position.Z); vertices[3].Position = new Vector3(position.X + length, position.Y, position.Z); vertices[4].Position = new Vector3(position.X, position.Y + width, position.Z); vertices[5].Position = new Vector3(position.X + length, position.Y + width, position.Z); for(int i = 0; i < vertices.Length; i++) { vertices[i].Color = color; } initFields(); } private void initFields() { graphicsDevice = SharedGraphicsDeviceManager.Current.GraphicsDevice; effect = new BasicEffect(graphicsDevice); modelPosition = Vector3.Zero; float screenWidth = (float)graphicsDevice.Viewport.Width; float screenHeight = (float)graphicsDevice.Viewport.Height; float aspectRatio = screenWidth / screenHeight; this.cameraProjection = Matrix.CreatePerspectiveFieldOfView(MathHelper.ToRadians(45.0f), aspectRatio, 1.0f, 10000.0f); this.rotationMatrix = Matrix.Identity; } //Public Methods public void Update(GameTimerEventArgs e) { } public void Draw(Vector3 cameraPosition, GameTimerEventArgs e) { Matrix cameraView = Matrix.CreateLookAt(cameraPosition, Vector3.Zero, Vector3.Up); foreach (EffectPass pass in effect.CurrentTechnique.Passes) { pass.Apply(); effect.World = rotationMatrix * Matrix.CreateTranslation(modelPosition); effect.View = cameraView; effect.Projection = cameraProjection; graphicsDevice.DrawUserPrimitives(PrimitiveType.TriangleList, vertices, 0, 2, VertexPositionColor.VertexDeclaration); } } public void Rotate(Matrix rotationMatrix) { this.rotationMatrix = rotationMatrix; } public void Move(Vector3 moveVector) { this.modelPosition += moveVector; } } }

    Read the article

  • creating bounding box list

    - by Christian Frantz
    I'm trying to create a list of bounding boxes for each cube drawn, so I can use the boxes to intersect with a ray that my mouse position is casting, but I have no idea how. I've created a list that stores the boxes, but how am I getting the values from each box? for (int x = 0; x < mapHeight; x++) { for (int z = 0; z < mapWidth; z++) { cubes.Add(new Vector3(x, map[x, z], z), Matrix.Identity, grass); boxList.Add(something here); } } public Cube(GraphicsDevice graphicsDevice) { device = graphicsDevice; var vertices = new List<VertexPositionTexture>(); BuildFace(vertices, new Vector3(0, 0, 0), new Vector3(0, 1, 1)); BuildFace(vertices, new Vector3(0, 0, 1), new Vector3(1, 1, 1)); BuildFace(vertices, new Vector3(1, 0, 1), new Vector3(1, 1, 0)); BuildFace(vertices, new Vector3(1, 0, 0), new Vector3(0, 1, 0)); BuildFaceHorizontal(vertices, new Vector3(0, 1, 0), new Vector3(1, 1, 1)); BuildFaceHorizontal(vertices, new Vector3(0, 0, 1), new Vector3(1, 0, 0)); cubeVertexBuffer = new VertexBuffer(device, VertexPositionTexture.VertexDeclaration, vertices.Count, BufferUsage.WriteOnly); cubeVertexBuffer.SetData<VertexPositionTexture>(vertices.ToArray()); } There aren't any clearly defined variables for the bounds of each cube created, so where do I create the bounding box from?

    Read the article

  • How can I move a polygon edge 1 unit away from the center?

    - by Stephen
    Let's say I have a polygon class that is represented by a list of vector classes as vertices, like so: var Vector = function(x, y) { this.x = x; this.y = y; }, Polygon = function(vectors) { this.vertices = vectors; }; Now I make a polygon (in this case, a square) like so: var poly = new Polygon([ new Vector(2, 2), new Vector(5, 2), new Vector(5, 5), new Vector(2, 5) ]); So, the top edge would be [poly.vertices[0], poly.vertices[1]]. I need to stretch this polygon by moving each edge away from the center of the polygon by one unit, along that edge's normal. The following example shows the first edge, the top, moved one unit up: The final polygon should look like this new one: var finalPoly = new Polygon([ new Vector(1, 1), new Vector(6, 1), new Vector(6, 6), new Vector(1, 6) ]); It is important that I iterate, moving one edge at a time, because I will be doing some collision tests after moving each edge. Here is what I tried so far (simplified for clarity), which fails triumphantly: for(var i = 0; i < vertices.length; i++) { var a = vertices[i], b = vertices[i + 1] || vertices[0]; // in case of final vertex var ax = a.x, ay = a.y, bx = b.x, by = b.y; // get some new perpendicular vectors var a2 = new Vector(-ay, ax), b2 = new Vector(-by, bx); // make into unit vectors a2.convertToUnitVector(); b2.convertToUnitVector(); // add the new vectors to the original ones a.add(a2); b.add(b2); // the rest of the code, collision tests, etc. } This makes my polygon start slowly rotating and sliding to the left, instead of what I need. Finally, the example shows a square, but the polygons in question could be anything. They will always be convex, and always with vertices in clockwise order.

    Read the article

  • What is a simple deformer in which vertices deform linearly with control points?

    - by sebf
    In my project I want to deform a complex mesh, using a simpler 'proxy' mesh. In effect, each vertex of the proxy/collision mesh will be a control point/bone, which should deform the vertices of the main mesh attached to it depending on weight, but where the weight is not dependant on the absolute distance from the control point but rather distance relative to the other affecting control points. The point of this is to preserve complex three dimensional features of the main mesh while using physics implementations which expect something far simpler, low resolution, single surface, etc. Therefore, the vertices must deform linearly with their respective weighted control points (i.e. no falloff fields or all the mesh features will end up collapsed) - as if each vertex was linked to a point on the plane created by the attached control points and deformed with it. I have tried implementing the weight computation algorithm in this paper (page 4) but it is not working as expected and I am wondering if it is really the best way to do what I want. What is the simplest way to 'skin'* an arbitrary mesh, to another arbitrary mesh? *By skin I mean I need an algorithm to determine the best control points for a vertex, and their weights.

    Read the article

  • GLSL, is it possible to offsetting vertices based on height map colour?

    - by Rob
    I am attempting to generate some terrain based upon a heightmap. I have generated a 32 x 32 grid and a corresponding height map - In my vertex shader I am trying to offset the position of the Y axis based upon the colour of the heightmap, white vertices being higher than black ones. //Vertex Shader Code #version 330 uniform mat4 modelMatrix; uniform mat4 viewMatrix; uniform mat4 projectionMatrix; uniform sampler2D heightmap; layout (location=0) in vec4 vertexPos; layout (location=1) in vec4 vertexColour; layout (location=3) in vec2 vertexTextureCoord; layout (location=4) in float offset; out vec4 fragCol; out vec4 fragPos; out vec2 fragTex; void main() { // Retreive the current pixel's colour vec4 hmColour = texture(heightmap,vertexTextureCoord); // Offset the y position by the value of current texel's colour value ? vec4 offset = vec4(vertexPos.x , vertexPos.y + hmColour.r, vertexPos.z , 1.0); // Final Position gl_Position = projectionMatrix * viewMatrix * modelMatrix * offset; // Data sent to Fragment Shader. fragCol = vertexColour; fragPos = vertexPos; fragTex = vertexTextureCoord; } However the code I have produced only creates a grid with none of the y vertices higher than any others.

    Read the article

  • Point in Polygon, Ray Method: ending infinite line

    - by user2878528
    Having a bit of trouble with point in polygon collision detection using the ray method i.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_in_polygon My problem is I need to give an end to the infinite line created. As with this infinite line I always get an even number of intersections and hence an invalid result. i.e. ignore or intersection to the right of the point being checked what I have what I want My current code based of Mecki awesome response for (int side = 0; side < vertices.Length; side++) { // Test if current side intersects with ray. // create infinite line // See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_equation a = end_point.Y - start_point.Y; b = start_point.X - end_point.X; c = end_point.X * start_point.Y - start_point.X * end_point.Y; //insert points of vector d2 = a * vertices[side].Position.X + b * vertices[side].Position.Y + c; if (side - 1 < 0) d1 = a * vertices[vertices.Length - 1].Position.X + b * vertices[vertices.Length - 1].Position.Y + c; else d1 = a * vertices[side-1].Position.X + b * vertices[side-1].Position.Y + c; // If points have opposite sides, intersections++; if (d1 > 0 && d2 < 0 ) intersections++; if (d1 < 0 && d2 > 0 ) intersections++; } //if intersections odd inside = true if ((intersections % 2) == 1) inside = true; else inside = false;

    Read the article

  • When should I use indexed arrays of OpenGL vertices?

    - by Tartley
    I'm trying to get a clear idea of when I should be using indexed arrays of OpenGL vertices, drawn with gl[Multi]DrawElements and the like, versus when I should simply use contiguous arrays of vertices, drawn with gl[Multi]DrawArrays. (Update: The consensus in the replies I got is that one should always be using indexed vertices.) I have gone back and forth on this issue several times, so I'm going to outline my current understanding, in the hopes someone can either tell me I'm now finally more or less correct, or else point out where my remaining misunderstandings are. Specifically, I have three conclusions, in bold. Please correct them if they are wrong. One simple case is if my geometry consists of meshes to form curved surfaces. In this case, the vertices in the middle of the mesh will have identical attributes (position, normal, color, texture coord, etc) for every triangle which uses the vertex. This leads me to conclude that: 1. For geometry with few seams, indexed arrays are a big win. Follow rule 1 always, except: For geometry that is very 'blocky', in which every edge represents a seam, the benefit of indexed arrays is less obvious. To take a simple cube as an example, although each vertex is used in three different faces, we can't share vertices between them, because for a single vertex, the surface normals (and possible other things, like color and texture co-ord) will differ on each face. Hence we need to explicitly introduce redundant vertex positions into our array, so that the same position can be used several times with different normals, etc. This means that indexed arrays are of less use. e.g. When rendering a single face of a cube: 0 1 o---o |\ | | \ | | \| o---o 3 2 (this can be considered in isolation, because the seams between this face and all adjacent faces mean than none of these vertices can be shared between faces) if rendering using GL_TRIANGLE_FAN (or _STRIP), then each face of the cube can be rendered thus: verts = [v0, v1, v2, v3] colors = [c0, c0, c0, c0] normal = [n0, n0, n0, n0] Adding indices does not allow us to simplify this. From this I conclude that: 2. When rendering geometry which is all seams or mostly seams, when using GL_TRIANGLE_STRIP or _FAN, then I should never use indexed arrays, and should instead always use gl[Multi]DrawArrays. (Update: Replies indicate that this conclusion is wrong. Even though indices don't allow us to reduce the size of the arrays here, they should still be used because of other performance benefits, as discussed in the comments) The only exception to rule 2 is: When using GL_TRIANGLES (instead of strips or fans), then half of the vertices can still be re-used twice, with identical normals and colors, etc, because each cube face is rendered as two separate triangles. Again, for the same single cube face: 0 1 o---o |\ | | \ | | \| o---o 3 2 Without indices, using GL_TRIANGLES, the arrays would be something like: verts = [v0, v1, v2, v2, v3, v0] normals = [n0, n0, n0, n0, n0, n0] colors = [c0, c0, c0, c0, c0, c0] Since a vertex and a normal are often 3 floats each, and a color is often 3 bytes, that gives, for each cube face, about: verts = 6 * 3 floats = 18 floats normals = 6 * 3 floats = 18 floats colors = 6 * 3 bytes = 18 bytes = 36 floats and 18 bytes per cube face. (I understand the number of bytes might change if different types are used, the exact figures are just for illustration.) With indices, we can simplify this a little, giving: verts = [v0, v1, v2, v3] (4 * 3 = 12 floats) normals = [n0, n0, n0, n0] (4 * 3 = 12 floats) colors = [c0, c0, c0, c0] (4 * 3 = 12 bytes) indices = [0, 1, 2, 2, 3, 0] (6 shorts) = 24 floats + 12 bytes, and maybe 6 shorts, per cube face. See how in the latter case, vertices 0 and 2 are used twice, but only represented once in each of the verts, normals and colors arrays. This sounds like a small win for using indices, even in the extreme case of every single geometry edge being a seam. This leads me to conclude that: 3. When using GL_TRIANGLES, one should always use indexed arrays, even for geometry which is all seams. Please correct my conclusions in bold if they are wrong.

    Read the article

  • In GLSL is it possible to offset vertices based on height map colour?

    - by Rob
    I am attempting to generate some terrain based upon a heightmap. I have generated a 32 x 32 grid and a corresponding height map - In my vertex shader I am trying to offset the position of the Y axis based upon the colour of the heightmap, white vertices being higher than black ones. //Vertex Shader Code #version 330 uniform mat4 modelMatrix; uniform mat4 viewMatrix; uniform mat4 projectionMatrix; uniform sampler2D heightmap; layout (location=0) in vec4 vertexPos; layout (location=1) in vec4 vertexColour; layout (location=3) in vec2 vertexTextureCoord; layout (location=4) in float offset; out vec4 fragCol; out vec4 fragPos; out vec2 fragTex; void main() { // Retreive the current pixel's colour vec4 hmColour = texture(heightmap,vertexTextureCoord); // Offset the y position by the value of current texel's colour value ? vec4 offset = vec4(vertexPos.x , vertexPos.y + hmColour.r, vertexPos.z , 1.0); // Final Position gl_Position = projectionMatrix * viewMatrix * modelMatrix * offset; // Data sent to Fragment Shader. fragCol = vertexColour; fragPos = vertexPos; fragTex = vertexTextureCoord; } However the code I have produced only creates a grid with none of the y vertices higher than any others. This is the C++ code that generates the grid and texture co-orientates which I believe to be correct as the texture is mapped to the grid, hence the white blob in the middle. The grid-lines are generated in the fragment shader, sorry for any confusion. I have tried multiplying the r value of hmColour by 1000 unfortunately that had no effect. The only other problem it could be is that the texture coordinate data is incorrect ? for (int z = 0; z < MAP_Z ; z++) { for(int x = 0; x < MAP_X ; x++) { //Generate Vertex Buffer vertexData[iVertex++] = float (x) * MAP_X; vertexData[iVertex++] = 0; vertexData[iVertex++] = -(float) (z) * MAP_Z; //Colour Buffer NOT NEEDED colourData[iColour++] = 255.0f; // R colourData[iColour++] = 1.0f; // G colourData[iColour++] = 0.0f; // B //Texture Buffer textureData[iTexture++] = (float ) x * (1.0f / MAP_X); textureData[iTexture++] = (float ) z * (1.0f / MAP_Z); } } The heightmap texture I am trying to use appears like so (without grid-lines). This is the corresponding fragment shader // Fragment Shader Code #version 330 uniform sampler2D hmTexture; layout (location=0) out vec4 fragColour; in vec2 fragTex; in vec4 pos; void main(void) { vec2 line = fragTex * 32; // Without Gridlines fragColour = texture(hmTexture,fragTex); // With grid lines // + mix(vec4(0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0), vec4(1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0), // smoothstep(0.05,fract(line.y), 0.99) * smoothstep(0.05,fract(line.x),0.99)); }

    Read the article

  • Given an even number of vertices, how to find an optimum set of pairs based on proximity?

    - by Alex Z
    The problem: We have a set of n vertices in 3D euclidean space, and there is an even number of these vertices. We want to pair them up based on their proximity. In other words, we'd like to be able to find a set of vertex pairs, where the vertices in each pair are as close as possible together. We want to minimise sacrificing the proximity between the vertices of any other pairs as much as possible in doing this. I am not looking for the most optimal solution (if it even strictly exists/can be done), just a reasonable one that can be computed relatively quickly. A relatively awful brute force approach involves choosing a vertex and looping through the rest to find its nearest neighbor and then repeating until there are none left. Of course as we near the end of the list the closest vertex could be very far away, but it is the only choice, therefore this can fail badly on the third point above.

    Read the article

  • BoundingBox Intersection Problems

    - by Deukalion
    When I try to render two cubes, same sizes, one beside the other. With the same proportions (XYZ). My problem is, why do a Box1.BoundingBox.Contains(Box2.BoundingBox) == ContaintmentType.Intersects - when it clearly doesn't? I'm trying to place objects with BoundingBoxes as "intersection" checking, but this simple example clearly shows that this doesn't work. Why is that? I also try checking height of the next object to be placed, by checking intersection, adding each boxes height += (Max.Y - Min.Y) to a Height value, so when I add a new Box it has a height value. This works, but sometimes due to strange behavior it adds extra values when there isn't anything there. This is an example of what I mean: BoundingBox box1 = GetBoundaries(new Vector3(0, 0, 0), new Vector3(128, 64, 128)); BoundingBox box2 = GetBoundaries(new Vector3(128, 0, 0), new Vector3(128, 64, 128)); if (box1.Contains(box2) == ContainmentType.Intersects) { // This will be executed System.Windows.Forms.MessageBox.Show("Intersects = True"); } if (box1.Contains(box2) == ContainmentType.Disjoint) { System.Windows.Forms.MessageBox.Show("Disjoint = True"); } if (box1.Contains(box2) == ContainmentType.Contains) { System.Windows.Forms.MessageBox.Show("Contains = True"); } Test Method: public BoundingBox GetBoundaries(Vector3 position, Vector3 size) { Vector3[] vertices = new Vector3[8]; vertices[0] = position + new Vector3(-0.5f, 0.5f, -0.5f) * size; vertices[1] = position + new Vector3(-0.5f, 0.5f, 0.5f) * size; vertices[2] = position + new Vector3(0.5f, 0.5f, -0.5f) * size; vertices[3] = position + new Vector3(0.5f, 0.5f, 0.5f) * size; vertices[4] = position + new Vector3(-0.5f, -0.5f, -0.5f) * size; vertices[5] = position + new Vector3(-0.5f, -0.5f, 0.5f) * size; vertices[6] = position + new Vector3(0.5f, -0.5f, -0.5f) * size; vertices[7] = position + new Vector3(0.5f, -0.5f, 0.5f) * size; return BoundingBox.CreateFromPoints(vertices); } Box 1 should start at x -64, Box 2 should start at x 64 which means they never overlap. If I add Box 2 to 129 instead it creates a small gap between the cubes which is not pretty. So, the question is how can I place two cubes beside eachother and make them understand that they do not overlap or actually intersect? Because this way I can never automatically check for intersections or place cube beside eachother.

    Read the article

  • What is a fast way to darken the vertices I'm rendering?

    - by Luis Cruz
    To make a lighting system for a voxel game, I need to specify a darkness value per vertex. I'm using GL_COLOR_MATERIAL and specifying a color per vertex, like this: glEnable(GL_COLOR_MATERIAL); glBegin(GL_QUADS); glColor3f(0.6f, 0.6f, 0.6f); glTexCoord2f(...); glVertex3f(...); glColor3f(0.3f, 0.3f, 0.3f); glTexCoord2f(...); glVertex3f(...); glColor3f(0.7f, 0.7f, 0.7f); glTexCoord2f(...); glVertex3f(...); glColor3f(0.9f, 0.9f, 0.9f); glTexCoord2f(...); glVertex3f(...); glEnd(); This is working, but with many quads it is very slow.. I'm using display lists too. Any good ideas in how to make vertices darker?

    Read the article

  • Having a problem with texturing vertices in WebGL, think parameters are off in the image?

    - by mathacka
    I'm having a problem texturing a simple rectangle in my WebGL program, I have the parameters set as follows: gl.texImage2D(gl.TEXTURE_2D, 0, gl.RGBA, gl.RGBA, gl.UNSIGNED_BYTE, textureImage); I'm using this image: On the properties of this image it says it's 32 bit depth, so that should take care of the gl.UNSIGNED_BYTE, and I've tried both gl.RGBA and gl.RGB to see if it's not reading the transparency. It is a 32x32 pixel image, so it's power of 2. And I've tried almost all the combinations of formats and types, but I'm not sure if this is the answer or not. I'm getting these two errors in the chrome console: INVALID_VALUE: texImage2D: invalid image (index):101 WebGL: drawArrays: texture bound to texture unit 0 is not renderable. It maybe non-power-of-2 and have incompatible texture filtering or is not 'texture complete'. Or the texture is Float or Half Float type with linear filtering while OES_float_linear or OES_half_float_linear extension is not enabled. the drawArrays function is simply: "gl.drawArrays(gl.TRIANGLES, 0, 6);" using 6 vertices to make a rectangle.

    Read the article

  • How exactly are textures drawn on faces of cubes?

    - by Christian Frantz
    Are they drawn from the lower left corner clockwise? I know how triangles are created, I'm not just sure if textures are the same way. The texture on my cube is skewed way off and after playing around with the U,V coordinates, I still can't get it right. //front left bottom corner ok vertices[0] = (new VertexPositionTexture(new Vector3(0, 0, 0), new Vector2(1, 0))); //front left upper corner vertices[1] = (new VertexPositionTexture(new Vector3(0, 1, 0), new Vector2(1, 1))); //front right upper corner ok vertices[2] = (new VertexPositionTexture(new Vector3(1, 1, 0), new Vector2(0, 1))); //front lower right corner vertices[3] = (new VertexPositionTexture(new Vector3(1, 0, 0), new Vector2(0, 0))); //back left lower corner ok vertices[4] = (new VertexPositionTexture(new Vector3(0, 0, -1), new Vector2(0, 1))); //back left upper corner vertices[5] = (new VertexPositionTexture(new Vector3(0, 1, -1), new Vector2(1, 1))); //back right upper corner ok vertices[6] = (new VertexPositionTexture(new Vector3(1, 1, -1), new Vector2(1, 0))); //back right lower corner vertices[7] = (new VertexPositionTexture(new Vector3(1, 0, -1), new Vector2(0, 0)));

    Read the article

  • 2D Skeletal Animation Transformations

    - by Brad Zeis
    I have been trying to build a 2D skeletal animation system for a while, and I believe that I'm fairly close to finishing. Currently, I have the following data structures: struct Bone { Bone *parent; int child_count; Bone **children; double x, y; }; struct Vertex { double x, y; int bone_count; Bone **bones; double *weights; }; struct Mesh { int vertex_count; Vertex **vertices; Vertex **tex_coords; } Bone->x and Bone->y are the coordinates of the end point of the Bone. The starting point is given by (bone->parent->x, bone->parent->y) or (0, 0). Each entity in the game has a Mesh, and Mesh->vertices is used as the bounding area for the entity. Mesh->tex_coords are texture coordinates. In the entity's update function, the position of the Bone is used to change the coordinates of the Vertices that are bound to it. Currently what I have is: void Mesh_update(Mesh *mesh) { int i, j; double sx, sy; for (i = 0; i < vertex_count; i++) { if (mesh->vertices[i]->bone_count == 0) { continue; } sx, sy = 0; for (j = 0; j < mesh->vertices[i]->bone_count; j++) { sx += (/* ??? */) * mesh->vertices[i]->weights[j]; sy += (/* ??? */) * mesh->vertices[i]->weights[j]; } mesh->vertices[i]->x = sx; mesh->vertices[i]->y = sy; } } I think I have everything I need, I just don't know how to apply the transformations to the final mesh coordinates. What tranformations do I need here? Or is my approach just completely wrong?

    Read the article

  • Drawing 2D Grid in 3D View - Need help with method

    - by Deukalion
    I'm trying to draw a simple 2D grid for an editor, to able to navigate more clearly around the 3D space, but I can't render it: Grid2D class, creates a grid of a certain size at a location and should just draw lines. public class Grid2D : IShape { private VertexPositionColor[] _vertices; private Vector2 _size; private Vector3 _location; private int _faces; public Grid2D(Vector2 size, Vector3 location, Color color) { float x = 0, y = 0; if (size.X < 1f) { size.X = 1f; } if (size.Y < 1f) { size.Y = 1f; } _size = size; _location = location; List<VertexPositionColor> vertices = new List<VertexPositionColor>(); _faces = 0; for (y = -size.Y; y <= size.Y; y++) { vertices.Add(new VertexPositionColor(location + new Vector3(-size.X, y, 0), color)); vertices.Add(new VertexPositionColor(location + new Vector3(size.X, y, 0), color)); _faces++; } for (x = -size.X; x <= size.X; x++) { vertices.Add(new VertexPositionColor(location + new Vector3(x, -size.Y, 0), color)); vertices.Add(new VertexPositionColor(location + new Vector3(x, size.Y, 0), color)); _faces++; } _vertices = vertices.ToArray(); } public void Render(GraphicsDevice device) { device.DrawUserPrimitives<VertexPositionColor>(PrimitiveType.LineList, _vertices, 0, _faces); } } Like this: +----+----+----+----+ | | | | | +----+----+----+----+ | | | | | +----+----+----+----+ | | | | | +----+----+----+----+ | | | | | +----+----+----+----+ Anyone knows what I'm doing wrong? If I add a Shape without texture, it's set automatically to VertexColorEnabled and TextureEnabled = false. This is how I render it: foreach (RenderObject render in _renderObjects) { render.Effect.Projection = projection; render.Effect.View = view; render.Effect.World = world; foreach (EffectPass pass in render.Effect.CurrentTechnique.Passes) { pass.Apply(); try { // Could be a Grid2D render.Shape.Render(_device); } catch { throw; } } } Exception is thrown: The current vertex shader declaration does not include all the elements required by the current Vertex Shader. Normal0 is missing. Simply put, I can't figure out how to draw a few lines. I want to draw them one at a time and I guess that's the problem I haven't figured out, and even when I tried rendering vertices[i], vertices[i+1] and primitiveCount = 1, vertices = 2, and so on it didn't work either. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Drawing a circle in opengl es android, squiggly boundaries

    - by ladiesMan217
    I am new to OpenGL ES and facing a hard time drawing a circle on my GLSurfaceView. Here's what I have so far. the Circle Class public class MyGLBall { private int points=40; private float vertices[]={0.0f,0.0f,0.0f}; private FloatBuffer vertBuff; //centre of circle public MyGLBall(){ vertices=new float[(points+1)*3]; for(int i=3;i<(points+1)*3;i+=3){ double rad=(i*360/points*3)*(3.14/180); vertices[i]=(float)Math.cos(rad); vertices[i+1]=(float) Math.sin(rad); vertices[i+2]=0; } ByteBuffer bBuff=ByteBuffer.allocateDirect(vertices.length*4); bBuff.order(ByteOrder.nativeOrder()); vertBuff=bBuff.asFloatBuffer(); vertBuff.put(vertices); vertBuff.position(0); } public void draw(GL10 gl){ gl.glPushMatrix(); gl.glTranslatef(0, 0, 0); // gl.glScalef(size, size, 1.0f); gl.glColor4f(1.0f,1.0f,1.0f, 1.0f); gl.glVertexPointer(3, GL10.GL_FLOAT, 0, vertBuff); gl.glEnableClientState(GL10.GL_VERTEX_ARRAY); gl.glDrawArrays(GL10.GL_TRIANGLE_FAN, 0, points/2); gl.glDisableClientState(GL10.GL_VERTEX_ARRAY); gl.glPopMatrix(); } } I couldn't retrieve the screenshot of my image but here's what it looks like As you can see the border has crests and troughs thereby renering it squiggly which I do not want. All I want is a simple curve

    Read the article

  • How can I find a position between 4 vertices in a fragment shader?

    - by c4sh
    I'm creating a shader with SharpDX (DirectX11 in C#) that takes a segment (2 points) from the output of a Vertex Shader and then passes them to a Geometry Shader, which converts this line into a rectangle (4 points) and assigns the four corners a texture coordinate. After that I want a Fragment Shader (which recieves the interpolated position and the interpolated texture coordinates) that checks the depth at the "spine of the rectangle" (that is, in the line that passes through the middle of the rectangle. The problem is I don't know how to extract the position of the corresponding fragment at the spine of the rectangle. This happens because I have the texture coordinates interpolated, but I don't know how to use them to get the fragment I want, because the coordinate system of a) the texture and b) the position of my fragment in screen space are not the same. Thanks a lot for any help.

    Read the article

  • How i can sign and/or group a specific set of vertices in a 3D file container like OBJ ? - in Blender

    - by user827992
    I would like to export a 3D model with each part having a name or a label if you will. For example i would like to export a model of an human body and name each part in specifics vertex groups like: left hand, right hand, right foot, head, ears, ... and you got the idea; so i can have a single 3D model that i can explode in various parts if needed. If there is a better technique about how to mark vertex groups in a 3D file please share your solution. As 3D editor i use Blender.

    Read the article

  • Level of detail algorithm not functioning correctly

    - by Darestium
    I have been working on this problem for months; I have been creating Planet Generator of sorts, after more than 6 months of work I am no closer to finishing it then I was 4 months ago. My problem; The terrain does not subdivide in the correct locations properly, it almost seems as if there is a ghost camera next to me, and the quads subdivide based on the position of this "ghost camera". Here is a video of the broken program: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF_pHeMOju8 The best example of the problem occurs around 0:36. For detail limiting, I am going for a chunked LOD approach, which subdivides the terrain based on how far you are away from it. I use a "depth table" to determine how many subdivisions should take place. void PQuad::construct_depth_table(float distance) { tree[0] = -1; for (int i = 1; i < MAX_DEPTH; i++) { tree[i] = distance; distance /= 2.0f; } } The chuncked LOD relies on the child/parent structure of quads, the depth is determined by a constant e.g: if the constant is 6, there are six levels of detail. The quads which should be drawn go through a distance test from the player to the centre of the quad. void PQuad::get_recursive(glm::vec3 player_pos, std::vector<PQuad*>& out_children) { for (size_t i = 0; i < children.size(); i++) { children[i].get_recursive(player_pos, out_children); } if (this->should_draw(player_pos) || this->depth == 0) { out_children.emplace_back(this); } } bool PQuad::should_draw(glm::vec3 player_position) { float distance = distance3(player_position, centre); if (distance < tree[depth]) { return true; } return false; } The root quad has four children which could be visualized like the following: [] [] [] [] Where each [] is a child. Each child has the same amount of children up until the detail limit, the quads which have are 6 iterations deep are leaf nodes, these nodes have no children. Each node has a corresponding Mesh, each Mesh structure has 16x16 Quad-shapes, each Mesh's Quad-shapes halves in size each detail level deeper - creating more detail. void PQuad::construct_children() { // Calculate the position of the Quad based on the parent's location calculate_position(); if (depth < (int)MAX_DEPTH) { children.reserve((int)NUM_OF_CHILDREN); for (int i = 0; i < (int)NUM_OF_CHILDREN; i++) { children.emplace_back(PQuad(this->face_direction, this->radius)); PQuad *child = &children.back(); child->set_depth(depth + 1); child->set_child_index(i); child->set_parent(this); child->construct_children(); } } else { leaf = true; } } The following function creates the vertices for each quad, I feel that it may play a role in the problem - I just can't determine what is causing the problem. void PQuad::construct_vertices(std::vector<glm::vec3> *vertices, std::vector<Color3> *colors) { vertices->reserve(quad_width * quad_height); for (int y = 0; y < quad_height; y++) { for (int x = 0; x < quad_width; x++) { switch (face_direction) { case YIncreasing: vertices->emplace_back(glm::vec3(position.x + x * element_width, quad_height - 1.0f, -(position.y + y * element_width))); break; case YDecreasing: vertices->emplace_back(glm::vec3(position.x + x * element_width, 0.0f, -(position.y + y * element_width))); break; case XIncreasing: vertices->emplace_back(glm::vec3(quad_width - 1.0f, position.y + y * element_width, -(position.x + x * element_width))); break; case XDecreasing: vertices->emplace_back(glm::vec3(0.0f, position.y + y * element_width, -(position.x + x * element_width))); break; case ZIncreasing: vertices->emplace_back(glm::vec3(position.x + x * element_width, position.y + y * element_width, 0.0f)); break; case ZDecreasing: vertices->emplace_back(glm::vec3(position.x + x * element_width, position.y + y * element_width, -(quad_width - 1.0f))); break; } // Position the bottom, right, front vertex of the cube from being (0,0,0) to (-16, -16, 16) (*vertices)[vertices->size() - 1] -= glm::vec3(quad_width / 2.0f, quad_width / 2.0f, -(quad_width / 2.0f)); colors->emplace_back(Color3(255.0f, 255.0f, 255.0f, false)); } } switch (face_direction) { case YIncreasing: this->centre = glm::vec3(position.x + quad_width / 2.0f, quad_height - 1.0f, -(position.y + quad_height / 2.0f)); break; case YDecreasing: this->centre = glm::vec3(position.x + quad_width / 2.0f, 0.0f, -(position.y + quad_height / 2.0f)); break; case XIncreasing: this->centre = glm::vec3(quad_width - 1.0f, position.y + quad_height / 2.0f, -(position.x + quad_width / 2.0f)); break; case XDecreasing: this->centre = glm::vec3(0.0f, position.y + quad_height / 2.0f, -(position.x + quad_width / 2.0f)); break; case ZIncreasing: this->centre = glm::vec3(position.x + quad_width / 2.0f, position.y + quad_height / 2.0f, 0.0f); break; case ZDecreasing: this->centre = glm::vec3(position.x + quad_width / 2.0f, position.y + quad_height / 2.0f, -(quad_height - 1.0f)); break; } this->centre -= glm::vec3(quad_width / 2.0f, quad_width / 2.0f, -(quad_width / 2.0f)); } Any help in discovering what is causing this "subdivding in the wrong place" would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Interleaving Arrays in OpenGL

    - by Benjamin Danger Johnson
    In my pursuit to write code that matches todays OpenGL standards I have found that I am completely clueless about interleaving arrays. I've tried and debugged just about everywhere I can think of but I can't get my model to render using interleaved arrays (It worked when it was configuered to use multiple arrays) Now I know that all the data is properly being parsed from an obj file and information is being copied properly copied into the Vertex object array, but I still can't seem to get anything to render. Below is the code for initializing a model and drawing it (along with the Vertex struct for reference.) Vertex: struct Vertex { glm::vec3 position; glm::vec3 normal; glm::vec2 uv; glm::vec3 tangent; glm::vec3 bitangent; }; Model Constructor: Model::Model(const char* filename) { bool result = loadObj(filename, vertices, indices); glGenVertexArrays(1, &vertexArrayID); glBindVertexArray(vertexArrayID); glGenBuffers(1, &vertexbuffer); glBindBuffer(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, vertexbuffer); glBufferData(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, vertices.size() * sizeof(Vertex), &vertices[0], GL_STATIC_DRAW); glGenBuffers(1, &elementbuffer); glBindBuffer(GL_ELEMENT_ARRAY_BUFFER, elementbuffer); glBufferData(GL_ELEMENT_ARRAY_BUFFER, indices.size() * sizeof(unsigned short), &indices[0], GL_STATIC_DRAW); } Draw Model: Model::Draw(ICamera camera) { GLuint matrixID = glGetUniformLocation(programID, "mvp"); GLuint positionID = glGetAttribLocation(programID, "position_modelspace"); GLuint uvID = glGetAttribLocation(programID, "uv"); GLuint normalID = glGetAttribLocation(programID, "normal_modelspace"); GLuint tangentID = glGetAttribLocation(programID, "tangent_modelspace"); GLuint bitangentID = glGetAttribLocation(programID, "bitangent_modelspace"); glm::mat4 projection = camera->GetProjectionMatrix(); glm::mat4 view = camera->GetViewMatrix(); glm::mat4 model = glm::mat4(1.0f); glm::mat4 mvp = projection * view * model; glUniformMatrix4fv(matrixID, 1, GL_FALSE, &mvp[0][0]); glBindVertexArray(vertexArrayID); glEnableVertexAttribArray(positionID); glBindBuffer(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, vertexbuffer); glVertexAttribPointer(positionID, 3, GL_FLOAT, GL_FALSE, sizeof(Vertex), &vertices[0].position); glEnableVertexAttribArray(uvID); glVertexAttribPointer(uvID, 2, GL_FLOAT, GL_FALSE, sizeof(Vertex), &vertices[0].uv); glEnableVertexAttribArray(normalID); glVertexAttribPointer(normalID, 3, GL_FLOAT, GL_FALSE, sizeof(Vertex), &vertices[0].normal); glEnableVertexAttribArray(tangentID); glVertexAttribPointer(tangentID, 3, GL_FLOAT, GL_FALSE, sizeof(Vertex), &vertices[0].tangent); glEnableVertexAttribArray(bitangentID); glVertexAttribPointer(bitangentID, 3, GL_FLOAT, GL_FALSE, sizeof(Vertex), &vertices[0].bitangent); glBindBuffer(GL_ELEMENT_ARRAY_BUFFER, elementbuffer); glDrawElements(GL_TRIANGLES, indices.size(), GL_UNSIGNED_SHORT, (void*)0); glDisableVertexAttribArray(positionID); glDisableVertexAttribArray(uvID); glDisableVertexAttribArray(normalID); glDisableVertexAttribArray(tangentID); glDisableVertexAttribArray(bitangentID); }

    Read the article

  • How to shoot a triangle out of an asteroid which floats all of the way up to the screen?

    - by Holland
    I currently have an asteroid texture loaded as my "test player" for the game I'm writing. What I'm trying to figure out how to do is get a triangle to shoot from the center of the asteroid, and keep going until it hits the top of the screen. What happens in my case (as you'll see from the code I've posted), is that the triangle will show, however it will either be a long line, or it will just be a single triangle which stays in the same location as the asteroid moving around (that disappears when I stop pressing the space bar), or it simply won't appear at all. I've tried many different methods, but I could use a formula here. All I'm trying to do is write a space invaders clone for my final in C#. I know how to code fairly well, my formulas just need work is all. So far, this is what I have: Main Logic Code protected override void Draw(GameTime gameTime) { GraphicsDevice.Clear(ClearOptions.Target, Color.Black, 1, 1); mAsteroid.Draw(mSpriteBatch); if (mIsFired) { mPositions.Add(mAsteroid.LastPosition); mRay.Fire(mPositions); mIsFired = false; mRay.Bullets.Clear(); mPositions.Clear(); } base.Draw(gameTime); } Draw Code public void Draw() { VertexPositionColor[] vertices = new VertexPositionColor[3]; int stopDrawing = mGraphicsDevice.Viewport.Width / mGraphicsDevice.Viewport.Height; for (int i = 0; i < mRayPos.Length(); ++i) { vertices[0].Position = new Vector3(mRayPos.X, mRayPos.Y + 5f, 10); vertices[0].Color = Color.Blue; vertices[1].Position = new Vector3(mRayPos.X - 5f, mRayPos.Y - 5f, 10); vertices[1].Color = Color.White; vertices[2].Position = new Vector3(mRayPos.X + 5f, mRayPos.Y - 5f, 10); vertices[2].Color = Color.Red; mShader.CurrentTechnique.Passes[0].Apply(); mGraphicsDevice.DrawUserPrimitives<VertexPositionColor>(PrimitiveType.TriangleStrip, vertices, 0, 1); mRayPos += new Vector2(0, 1f); mGraphicsDevice.ReferenceStencil = 1; } }

    Read the article

  • Finding Z given X & Y coordinates on terrain?

    - by mrky
    I need to know what the most efficient way of finding Z given X & Y coordinates on terrain. My terrain is set up as a grid, each grid block consisting of two triangles, which may be flipped in any direction. I want to move game objects smoothly along the floor of the terrain without "stepping." I'm currently using the following method with unexpected results: double mapClass::getZ(double x, double y) { int vertexIndex = ((floor(y))*width*2)+((floor(x))*2); vec3ray ray = {glm::vec3(x, y, 2), glm::vec3(x, y, 0)}; vec3triangle tri1 = { glmFrom(vertices[vertexIndex].v1), glmFrom(vertices[vertexIndex].v2), glmFrom(vertices[vertexIndex].v3) }; vec3triangle tri2 = { glmFrom(vertices[vertexIndex+1].v1), glmFrom(vertices[vertexIndex+1].v2), glmFrom(vertices[vertexIndex+1].v3) }; glm::vec3 intersect; if (!intersectRayTriangle(tri1, ray, intersect)) { intersectRayTriangle(tri2, ray, intersect); } return intersect.z; } intersectRayTriangle() and glmFrom() are as follows: bool intersectRayTriangle(vec3triangle tri, vec3ray ray, glm::vec3 &worldIntersect) { glm::vec3 barycentricIntersect; if (glm::intersectLineTriangle(ray.origin, ray.direction, tri.p0, tri.p1, tri.p2, barycentricIntersect)) { // Convert barycentric to world coordinates double u, v, w; u = barycentricIntersect.x; v = barycentricIntersect.y; w = 1 - (u+v); worldIntersect.x = (u * tri.p0.x + v * tri.p1.x + w * tri.p2.x); worldIntersect.y = (u * tri.p0.y + v * tri.p1.y + w * tri.p2.y); worldIntersect.z = (u * tri.p0.z + v * tri.p1.z + w * tri.p2.z); return true; } else { return false; } } glm::vec3 glmFrom(s_point3f point) { return glm::vec3(point.x, point.y, point.z); } My convenience structures are defined as: struct s_point3f { GLfloat x, y, z; }; struct s_triangle3f { s_point3f v1, v2, v3; }; struct vec3ray { glm::vec3 origin, direction; }; struct vec3triangle { glm::vec3 p0, p1, p2; }; vertices is defined as: std::vector<s_triangle3f> vertices; Basically, I'm trying to get the intersect of a ray (which is positioned at the x, and y coordinates specified facing pointing downwards toward the terrain) and one of the two triangles on the grid. getZ() rarely returns anything but 0. Other times, the numbers it generates seem to be completely off. Am I taking the wrong approach? Can anyone see a problem with my code? Any help or critique is appreciated!

    Read the article

  • How to get X,Y,Z rotations of vertices on a sphere at the origin?

    - by Stoff81
    Hey, I have a sphere in my game world and i would like to place a plane at each vertex on this sphere for debugging purposes. The planes should be orientated so that they lie flat against the sphere (perpendicular to the normals). The sphere is located at the origin, so all the vertices are relative to that. If my thinking is correct, i should be able to do this using the positions of the vertices and some simple trigonometry. I have tried a few combinations but have had no joy yet. I would greatly appreciate some help on this. Thanks. Here is my code: float xRot = RADIANS_TO_DEGREES(sinf(vertex.x/PLANET_RADIUS)); float yRot = RADIANS_TO_DEGREES(cosf(vertex.y/PLANET_RADIUS)); glRotatef(xRot, 1.0, 0, 0); glRotatef(yRot, 0, 1.0, 0);

    Read the article

  • How to color a mesh with values at the vertices in WPF 3D?

    - by Christo
    We've got a sphere which we want to display in 3D and color given a fuction that depends on spherical coordinates. The sphere was triangulated using a regular grid in (theta, phi), but this produced a lot of small triangles near the poles. In an attempt to reduce the number triangles at the poles, we've changed out mesh generation to produce more evenly sized triangles over the surface. The first triangulation method had the advantage that we could easily create a texture and drape it over the surface. It seems that in WPF it isn't possible to assign colors to vertices the way one would go about in OpenGL or Direct3D. With the second triangulation method it isn't apparent how to go about generating the texture and setting the texture coordinates, since the vertices aren't aligned to a grid anymore. Maybe it would be possible to create a linear texture containing a color for each vertex, but then how will that effect the coloring? Will it still render smoothly over the triangle surfaces as one would expect by applying per vertex coloring?

    Read the article

  • Understanding and Implementing a Force based graph layout algorithm

    - by zcourts
    I'm trying to implement a force base graph layout algorithm, based on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force-based_algorithms_(graph_drawing) My first attempt didn't work so I looked at http://blog.ivank.net/force-based-graph-drawing-in-javascript.html and https://github.com/dhotson/springy I changed my implementation based on what I thought I understood from those two but I haven't managed to get it right and I'm hoping someone can help? JavaScript isn't my strong point so be gentle... If you're wondering why write my own. In reality I have no real reason to write my own I'm just trying to understand how the algorithm is implemented. Especially in my first link, that demo is brilliant. This is what I've come up with //support function.bind - https://developer.mozilla.org/en/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Function/bind#Compatibility if (!Function.prototype.bind) { Function.prototype.bind = function (oThis) { if (typeof this !== "function") { // closest thing possible to the ECMAScript 5 internal IsCallable function throw new TypeError("Function.prototype.bind - what is trying to be bound is not callable"); } var aArgs = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 1), fToBind = this, fNOP = function () {}, fBound = function () { return fToBind.apply(this instanceof fNOP ? this : oThis || window, aArgs.concat(Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments))); }; fNOP.prototype = this.prototype; fBound.prototype = new fNOP(); return fBound; }; } (function() { var lastTime = 0; var vendors = ['ms', 'moz', 'webkit', 'o']; for(var x = 0; x < vendors.length && !window.requestAnimationFrame; ++x) { window.requestAnimationFrame = window[vendors[x]+'RequestAnimationFrame']; window.cancelAnimationFrame = window[vendors[x]+'CancelAnimationFrame'] || window[vendors[x]+'CancelRequestAnimationFrame']; } if (!window.requestAnimationFrame) window.requestAnimationFrame = function(callback, element) { var currTime = new Date().getTime(); var timeToCall = Math.max(0, 16 - (currTime - lastTime)); var id = window.setTimeout(function() { callback(currTime + timeToCall); }, timeToCall); lastTime = currTime + timeToCall; return id; }; if (!window.cancelAnimationFrame) window.cancelAnimationFrame = function(id) { clearTimeout(id); }; }()); function Graph(o){ this.options=o; this.vertices={}; this.edges={};//form {vertexID:{edgeID:edge}} } /** *Adds an edge to the graph. If the verticies in this edge are not already in the *graph then they are added */ Graph.prototype.addEdge=function(e){ //if vertex1 and vertex2 doesn't exist in this.vertices add them if(typeof(this.vertices[e.vertex1])==='undefined') this.vertices[e.vertex1]=new Vertex(e.vertex1); if(typeof(this.vertices[e.vertex2])==='undefined') this.vertices[e.vertex2]=new Vertex(e.vertex2); //add the edge if(typeof(this.edges[e.vertex1])==='undefined') this.edges[e.vertex1]={}; this.edges[e.vertex1][e.id]=e; } /** * Add a vertex to the graph. If a vertex with the same ID already exists then * the existing vertex's .data property is replaced with the @param v.data */ Graph.prototype.addVertex=function(v){ if(typeof(this.vertices[v.id])==='undefined') this.vertices[v.id]=v; else this.vertices[v.id].data=v.data; } function Vertex(id,data){ this.id=id; this.data=data?data:{}; //initialize to data.[x|y|z] or generate random number for each this.x = this.data.x?this.data.x:-100 + Math.random()*200; this.y = this.data.y?this.data.y:-100 + Math.random()*200; this.z = this.data.y?this.data.y:-100 + Math.random()*200; //set initial velocity to 0 this.velocity = new Point(0, 0, 0); this.mass=this.data.mass?this.data.mass:Math.random(); this.force=new Point(0,0,0); } function Edge(vertex1ID,vertex2ID){ vertex1ID=vertex1ID?vertex1ID:Math.random() vertex2ID=vertex2ID?vertex2ID:Math.random() this.id=vertex1ID+"->"+vertex2ID; this.vertex1=vertex1ID; this.vertex2=vertex2ID; } function Point(x, y, z) { this.x = x; this.y = y; this.z = z; } Point.prototype.plus=function(p){ this.x +=p.x this.y +=p.y this.z +=p.z } function ForceLayout(o){ this.repulsion = o.repulsion?o.repulsion:200; this.attraction = o.attraction?o.attraction:0.06; this.damping = o.damping?o.damping:0.9; this.graph = o.graph?o.graph:new Graph(); this.total_kinetic_energy =0; this.animationID=-1; } ForceLayout.prototype.draw=function(){ //vertex velocities initialized to (0,0,0) when a vertex is created //vertex positions initialized to random position when created cc=0; do{ this.total_kinetic_energy =0; //for each vertex for(var i in this.graph.vertices){ var thisNode=this.graph.vertices[i]; // running sum of total force on this particular node var netForce=new Point(0,0,0) //for each other node for(var j in this.graph.vertices){ if(thisNode!=this.graph.vertices[j]){ //net-force := net-force + Coulomb_repulsion( this_node, other_node ) netForce.plus(this.CoulombRepulsion( thisNode,this.graph.vertices[j])) } } //for each spring connected to this node for(var k in this.graph.edges[thisNode.id]){ //(this node, node its connected to) //pass id of this node and the node its connected to so hookesattraction //can update the force on both vertices and return that force to be //added to the net force this.HookesAttraction(thisNode.id, this.graph.edges[thisNode.id][k].vertex2 ) } // without damping, it moves forever // this_node.velocity := (this_node.velocity + timestep * net-force) * damping thisNode.velocity.x=(thisNode.velocity.x+thisNode.force.x)*this.damping; thisNode.velocity.y=(thisNode.velocity.y+thisNode.force.y)*this.damping; thisNode.velocity.z=(thisNode.velocity.z+thisNode.force.z)*this.damping; //this_node.position := this_node.position + timestep * this_node.velocity thisNode.x=thisNode.velocity.x; thisNode.y=thisNode.velocity.y; thisNode.z=thisNode.velocity.z; //normalize x,y,z??? //total_kinetic_energy := total_kinetic_energy + this_node.mass * (this_node.velocity)^2 this.total_kinetic_energy +=thisNode.mass*((thisNode.velocity.x+thisNode.velocity.y+thisNode.velocity.z)* (thisNode.velocity.x+thisNode.velocity.y+thisNode.velocity.z)) } cc+=1; }while(this.total_kinetic_energy >0.5) console.log(cc,this.total_kinetic_energy,this.graph) this.cancelAnimation(); } ForceLayout.prototype.HookesAttraction=function(v1ID,v2ID){ var a=this.graph.vertices[v1ID] var b=this.graph.vertices[v2ID] var force=new Point(this.attraction*(b.x - a.x),this.attraction*(b.y - a.y),this.attraction*(b.z - a.z)) // hook's attraction a.force.x += force.x; a.force.y += force.y; a.force.z += force.z; b.force.x += this.attraction*(a.x - b.x); b.force.y += this.attraction*(a.y - b.y); b.force.z += this.attraction*(a.z - b.z); return force; } ForceLayout.prototype.CoulombRepulsion=function(vertex1,vertex2){ //http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb's_law // distance squared = ((x1-x2)*(x1-x2)) + ((y1-y2)*(y1-y2)) + ((z1-z2)*(z1-z2)) var distanceSquared = ( (vertex1.x-vertex2.x)*(vertex1.x-vertex2.x)+ (vertex1.y-vertex2.y)*(vertex1.y-vertex2.y)+ (vertex1.z-vertex2.z)*(vertex1.z-vertex2.z) ); if(distanceSquared==0) distanceSquared = 0.001; var coul = this.repulsion / distanceSquared; return new Point(coul * (vertex1.x-vertex2.x),coul * (vertex1.y-vertex2.y), coul * (vertex1.z-vertex2.z)); } ForceLayout.prototype.animate=function(){ if(this.animating) this.animationID=requestAnimationFrame(this.animate.bind(this)); this.draw(); } ForceLayout.prototype.cancelAnimation=function(){ cancelAnimationFrame(this.animationID); this.animating=false; } ForceLayout.prototype.redraw=function(){ this.animating=true; this.animate(); } $(document).ready(function(){ var g= new Graph(); for(var i=0;i<=100;i++){ var v1=new Vertex(Math.random(), {}) var v2=new Vertex(Math.random(), {}) var e1= new Edge(v1.id,v2.id); g.addEdge(e1); } console.log(g); var l=new ForceLayout({ graph:g }); l.redraw(); });

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >