Related
After some time searching, I have revised my question.
I have found numerous examples of ball to ball collisions, but the only ones that seem to work use Vector2d or Vector2D.
This is a problem, because I am only allowed to use the regular java library, so my main question is: How do I convert the examples (which I will post below) to use what I can use?
I have several variables, both balls have the same mass, the velocities are broken into different variables, x and y. Also I have access to their x and y pos.
This is the ONLY problem left in my application.
I am at a total loss on how to convert the below example.
// get the mtd
Vector2d delta = (position.subtract(ball.position));
float d = delta.getLength();
// minimum translation distance to push balls apart after intersecting
Vector2d mtd = delta.multiply(((getRadius() + ball.getRadius())-d)/d);
// resolve intersection --
// inverse mass quantities
float im1 = 1 / getMass();
float im2 = 1 / ball.getMass();
// push-pull them apart based off their mass
position = position.add(mtd.multiply(im1 / (im1 + im2)));
ball.position = ball.position.subtract(mtd.multiply(im2 / (im1 + im2)));
// impact speed
Vector2d v = (this.velocity.subtract(ball.velocity));
float vn = v.dot(mtd.normalize());
// sphere intersecting but moving away from each other already
if (vn > 0.0f) return;
// collision impulse
float i = (-(1.0f + Constants.restitution) * vn) / (im1 + im2);
Vector2d impulse = mtd.multiply(i);
// change in momentum
this.velocity = this.velocity.add(impulse.multiply(im1));
ball.velocity = ball.velocity.subtract(impulse.multiply(im2));
Here is the URL for the question:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/345838/ball-to-ball-collision-detection-and-handling
And I have taken a look at his source code.
Thank you for taking the time to read this issue.
SUCCESS!
I have found how to use Vector2d, and it works PERFECTLY!
Will edit later with answer!
I'm implementing my own 3d engine in c# based on a really basic 3d open-source engine in JavaScript called a3. I don't know If I have 100% understand you but It sounds like you can only find examples with Vector2d but you are not allowed to use that class?
I that is the case, as you can imagine javascript does not have native Vector2d types so someone had to implement. Don't be afraid of giving it a try, is just a few high school maths functions, you should be able to implement your own Vector2d class in just a few minutes
The following link contain implementations if vector2d, vector3d, vector4d, matrix3, and matrix4 in javascript: https://github.com/paullewis/a3/tree/master/src/js/core/math hope it helps :)
I have a server and a client.
I have 40 opengl cubes. There state is described by 3d vector for position and 3x3 rotation matrix(or a quaternion).
How can I send intermediate packets and predict the object state on the client between those packets(extrapolation)?
for object position I can use a linear predictor on velocity.
How to predict quaternion states?
The easiest thing, parallel to what you're doing with linear velocity, is to use a linear predictor on angular velocity.
If you have two quaternions, q_0 and q_t, representing global orientations that are t seconds apart, you can compute the finite difference between the two quaternions and use that to find an angular velocity that can be used for extrapolation.
Make sure that the inner-product between q_0 and q_t is non-negative. If it's negative, negate all the components of one of the quaternions. This makes sure that we're not trying to go the long way around. If your bodies are rotating really fast relative to your sampling, this is a problem and you'll need a more complicated model that accounts for the previous angular velocity and makes assumptions about maximum possible acceleration. We'll assume that's not the case.
Then we compute the relative difference quaternion. dq = q_t * q_0' (where q_0' is the quaternion rotational inverse/conjugate). If you have the luxury of having fixed-sized steps, you can stop here and predict then next orientation t seconds into the future: q_2t = dq*d_t.
If we can' step forward by integer multiples of t, we compute the angle of rotation from dq. Quaternions and angular velocities are both variations on "axis-angle" representations of changes in orientation. If you rotate by Θ around unit-length axis [x,y,z], then the quaternion representation of that is q = [cos(Θ/2), sin(Θ/2)x, sin(Θ/2)y, sin(Θ/2)z] (using the quaternion convention where the w component comes first). If you rotate by Θ/t around axis [x,y,z], then the angular velocity is v = [Θx,Θy,Θz]/t. So v = Θ[q.x,q.y,q.z]/(t||[q.x,q.y,q.z]||). We can compute the angle two ways: Θ = 2acos(q.w) = 2asin(||[q.x,q.y,q.z]||). These will always be the same because of step 1. Numerics make it nicer to use sine since we need to find m = ||[q.x,q.y,q.z]|| anyway for the next step.
If m is large enough, then we just find the angular velocity:
v = 2asin(m)[dq.x,dq.y,dq.z]/(m*t)
However, if m's not large enough, we'll face numeric issues trying to divide by near-zero. So programmers will use the Taylor expansion of the sinc() function around zero, which happens to be very accurate in this case. Remember that m = sin(Θ/2). With m<1e-4, we can accurately compute asin(m)/m = 6/(6-m*m). Then you just need to multiply the result by 2*[dq.x,dq.y,dq.z]/t and you have your angular velocity. Phew.
Extrapolating is then a matter of multiplying your angular velocity times the time that has passed. Then you go backwards, converting the angular change to a quaternion and multiplying it onto q_t.
It seems like there must be an easier way...
I have 2 consecutive images from a camera and I want to estimate the change in camera pose:
I calculate the optical flow:
Const MAXFEATURES As Integer = 100
imgA = New Image(Of [Structure].Bgr, Byte)("pic1.bmp")
imgB = New Image(Of [Structure].Bgr, Byte)("pic2.bmp")
grayA = imgA.Convert(Of Gray, Byte)()
grayB = imgB.Convert(Of Gray, Byte)()
imagesize = cvGetSize(grayA)
pyrBufferA = New Emgu.CV.Image(Of Emgu.CV.Structure.Gray, Byte) _
(imagesize.Width + 8, imagesize.Height / 3)
pyrBufferB = New Emgu.CV.Image(Of Emgu.CV.Structure.Gray, Byte) _
(imagesize.Width + 8, imagesize.Height / 3)
features = MAXFEATURES
featuresA = grayA.GoodFeaturesToTrack(features, 0.01, 25, 3)
grayA.FindCornerSubPix(featuresA, New System.Drawing.Size(10, 10),
New System.Drawing.Size(-1, -1),
New Emgu.CV.Structure.MCvTermCriteria(20, 0.03))
features = featuresA(0).Length
Emgu.CV.OpticalFlow.PyrLK(grayA, grayB, pyrBufferA, pyrBufferB, _
featuresA(0), New Size(25, 25), 3, _
New Emgu.CV.Structure.MCvTermCriteria(20, 0.03D),
flags, featuresB(0), status, errors)
pointsA = New Matrix(Of Single)(features, 2)
pointsB = New Matrix(Of Single)(features, 2)
For i As Integer = 0 To features - 1
pointsA(i, 0) = featuresA(0)(i).X
pointsA(i, 1) = featuresA(0)(i).Y
pointsB(i, 0) = featuresB(0)(i).X
pointsB(i, 1) = featuresB(0)(i).Y
Next
Dim Homography As New Matrix(Of Double)(3, 3)
cvFindHomography(pointsA.Ptr, pointsB.Ptr, Homography, HOMOGRAPHY_METHOD.RANSAC, 1, 0)
and it looks right, the camera moved leftwards and upwards:
Now I want to find out how much the camera moved and rotated. If I declare my camera position and what it's looking at:
' Create camera location at origin and lookat (straight ahead, 1 in the Z axis)
Location = New Matrix(Of Double)(2, 3)
location(0, 0) = 0 ' X location
location(0, 1) = 0 ' Y location
location(0, 2) = 0 ' Z location
location(1, 0) = 0 ' X lookat
location(1, 1) = 0 ' Y lookat
location(1, 2) = 1 ' Z lookat
How do I calculate the new position and lookat?
If I'm doing this all wrong or if there's a better method, any suggestions would be very welcome, thanks!
For pure camera rotation R = A-1HA. To prove this consider image to plane homographies H1=A and H2=AR, where A is camera intrinsic matrix. Then H12=H2*H1-1=A-1RA, from which you can obtain R
Camera translation is harder to estimate. If the camera translates you have to a find fundamental matrix first (not homography): xTFx=0 and then convert it into an essential matrix E=ATFA; Then you can decompose E into rotation and translation E=txR, where tx means a vector product matrix. Decomposition is not obvious, see this.
The rotation you get will be exact while the translation vector can be found only up to scale. Intuitively this scaling means that from the two images alone you cannot really say whether the objects are close and small or far away and large. To disambiguate we may use a familiar size objects, known distance between two points, etc.
Finally note that a human visual system has a similar problem: though we "know" the distance between our eyes, when they are converged on the object the disparity is always zero and from disparity alone we cannot say what the distance is. Human vision relies on triangulation from eyes version signal to figure out absolute distance.
Well what your looking at is in simple terms a Pythagorean theorem problem a^2 + b^2 = c^2. However when it comes to camera based applications things are not very easy to accurately determine. You have found half of the detail you need for "a" however finding "b" or "c" is much harder.
The Short Answer
Basically it can't be done with a single camera. But it can be with done with two cameras.
The Long Winded Answer (Thought I'd explain in more depth, no pun intended)
I'll try and explain, say we select two points within our image and move the camera left. We know the distance from the camera of each point B1 is 20mm and point B2 is 40mm . Now lets assume that we process the image and our measurement are A1 is (0,2) and A2 is (0,4) these are related to B1 and B2 respectively. Now A1 and A2 are not measurements; they are pixels of movement.
What we now have to do is multiply the change in A1 and A2 by a calculated constant which will be the real world distance at B1 and B2. NOTE: Each one these is different according to measurement B*. This all relates to Angle of view or more commonly called the Field of View in photography at different distances. You can accurately calculate the constant if you know the size of each pixel on the camera CCD and the f number of the lens you have inside the camera.
I would expect this isn't the case so at different distances you have to place an object of which you know the length and see how many pixels it takes up. Close up you can use a ruler to make things easier. With these measurements. You take this data and form a curve with a line of best fit. Where the X-axis will be the distance of the object and the Y-axis will be the constant of pixel to distance ratio that you must multiply your movement by.
So how do we apply this curve. Well it's guess work. In theory the larger the measurement of movement A* the closer the object to the camera. In our example our ratios for A1 > A2 say 5mm and 3mm respectively and we would now know that point B1 has moved 10mm (2x5mm) and B2 has moved 6mm (2x6mm). But let's face it - we will never know B and we will never be able to tell if a distance moved is 20 pixels of an object close up not moving far or an object far away moving a much great distance. This is why things like the Xbox Kinect use additional sensors to get depth information that can be tied to the objects within the image.
What you attempting could be attempted with two cameras as the distance between these cameras is known the movement can be more accurately calculated (effectively without using a depth sensor). The maths behind this is extremely complex and I would suggest looking up some journal papers on the subject. If you would like me to explain the theory, I can attempt to.
All my experience comes from designing high speed video acquisition and image processing for my PHD so trust me, it can't be done with one camera, sorry. I hope some of this helps.
Cheers
Chris
[EDIT]
I was going to add a comment but this is easier due to the bulk of information:
Since it is the Kinect I will assume you have some relevant depth information associated with each point if not you will need to figure out how to get this.
The equation you will need to start of with is for the Field of View (FOV):
o/d = i/f
Where:
f is equal to the focal length of the lens usually given in mm (i.e. 18 28 30 50 are standard examples)
d is the object distance from the lens gathered from kinect data
o is the object dimension (or "field of view" perpendicular to and bisected by the optical axis).
i is the image dimension (or "field stop" perpendicular to and bisected by the optical axis).
We need to calculate i, where o is our unknown so for i (which is a diagonal measurement),
We will need the size of the pixel on the ccd this will in micrometres or µm you will need to find this information out, For know we will take it as being 14um which is standard for a midrange area scan camera.
So first we need to work out i horizontal dimension (ih) which is the number of pixels of the width of the camera multiplied by the size of the ccd pixel (We will use 640 x 320)
so: ih = 640*14um = 8960um
= 8960/1000 = 8.96mm
Now we need i vertical dimension (iv) same process but height
so: iv = (320 * 14um) / 1000 = 4.48mm
Now i is found by Pythagorean theorem Pythagorean theorem a^2 + b^2 = c^2
so: i = sqrt(ih^2 _ iv^2)
= 10.02 mm
Now we will assume we have a 28 mm lens. Again, this exact value will have to be found out. So our equation is rearranged to give us o is:
o = (i * d) / f
Remember o will be diagonal (we will assume of object or point is 50mm away):
o = (10.02mm * 50mm) / 28mm
17.89mm
Now we need to work out o horizontal dimension (oh) and o vertical dimension (ov) as this will give us the distance per pixel that the object has moved. Now as FOV α CCD or i is directly proportional to o we will work out a ratio k
k = i/o
= 10.02 / 17.89
= 0.56
so:
o horizontal dimension (oh):
oh = ih / k
= 8.96mm / 0.56 = 16mm per pixel
o vertical dimension (ov):
ov = iv / k
= 4.48mm / 0.56 = 8mm per pixel
Now we have the constants we require, let's use it in an example. If our object at 50mm moves from position (0,0) to (2,4) then the measurements in real life are:
(2*16mm , 4*8mm) = (32mm,32mm)
Again, a Pythagorean theorem: a^2 + b^2 = c^2
Total distance = sqrt(32^2 + 32^2)
= 45.25mm
Complicated I know, but once you have this in a program it's easier. So for every point you will have to repeat at least half the process as d will change on therefore o for every point your examining.
Hope this gets you on your way,
Cheers
Chris
I wanted to simulate the following through animation :
A ball starts with a certain velocity at the bottom most point of
a vertical circular loop and keeps rolling in it until its velocity permits.
For this, I wanted to find velocity/x/y vs. time equation.
For e.g. if the ball had mass : 5Kg, radius of the circular loop = 10m,
and initial velocity of the ball is 200 m/s, what will its velocity and (x,y) position
be after 5 seconds?
thanks.
Sliding, frictionless case with a point-particle ball
In this case we aren't worrying about rotational energy and are assuming that the ball is actually a point particle. Then, in order for the ball to stay on at the top, the centripetal force condition has to be satisfied:
m * v_top^2 / r = m * g
so
v_top = sqrt(r * g)
So the minimum initial velocity is determined by:
1 / 2 * m * v0^2 >= 1 / 2 * m * v_top^2 + m * g * 2 * r
v0 >= sqrt(5 * r * g)
This is similar to what Pete said, except that he forgot the centripetal force condition to stay on at the top.
Next, the acceleration tangential to the track is given by:
a = - g * sin(theta)
but a = r * alpha = r * d^2(theta)/dt^2 where alpha is the rotational acceleration. Thus, we get
r * d^2(theta)/dt^2 = g * sin(theta)
However, I don't know of an analytical solution to this differential equation and Mathematica was stumbling with finding one too. You can't just move the dts to the other side and integrate because theta is a function of t. I would recommend solving it by numerical means such as a Runga-Kutte or maybe the Verlet method. I solved it using Mathematica for the parameters you gave, but with the ball moving so quickly, it doesn't really slow down much in going around. When I lowered the initial velocity though, I was able to see the speeding up and slowing down by plotting theta as a function of time.
Adding in other things like a finite ball radius, rotational energy and friction are certainly doable, but I would worry about being able to solve this first case before moving on because it only gets more complicated from here. By the way, with the friction you will have to choose some kinetic coefficient of friction for your given materials which will of course be proportional to the normal force exerted on the ball by the track which can be solved for by summing the force components along the radius of the circle and don't forget to include the centripetal force condition.
If you haven't done this sort of physics before, I definitely recommend getting a introductory good book on physics (with calculus) and working through it. You only need to bother with the sections that apply to mechanics though that is a very large section of the book probably. There might be better routes to pursue though like some of the resources in this question.
If there are no acceleration (x,y) =(xstart+ vx*time ,ystart + vy*time) and speed remain the same, and it is not related to the radius
Since the velocity is constant you will have an angular velocity of omega = vel / radius. You will obtain how many radians you ball will move per second over its circular path.
To get the position at time t you just have to exploit polar coordinates:
x = x_center + sin( 3/2*PI + omega*t)*radius
y = y_center + cos( 3/2*PI + omega*t)*radius
This because you start from bottom point of the circle (so its 3/2*PI) plus how many radiants you move every second (we obtained it from tangential velocity). All multiplied for the radius, otherwise you will consider a unity circle.
EDIT: Since you wonder how to find a position of an object that is subject to many different forces I can tell you that usually a physical engine doesn't care about finding equations of moving objects. It just applies forces to objects considering their intended motions (like your circular one) or environmental factors (like gravity or friction) and calculates coordinates step by step by applying forces and using an integrator to see the results.
Ignoring friction, the forces on the ball are gravity and the track.
First, there are two main cases - is the velocity enough for the ball to loop-the-loop or not:
initial energy = 1/2 m v² = 0.5 * 5 * 200 * 200
potential energy = m g h = 5 * 9.8 * 20
so it will go round the whole loop.
Initially the ball is at the bottom of the loop, theta = 0
The acceleration on the ball is the component of g along the track
a = g⋅sin theta
The distance travelled is theta * radius. It is also the double integral of acceleration against time.
theta ⋅ radius = double integral of acceleration against time
Integrating acceleration once gives velocity, integrating velocity gives distance.
so solve this for t:
theta ⋅ r = ∫(∫ g⋅sin theta.dt).dt
then your x and y are trivial functions of theta.
Whether you solve it analytically or numerically is up to you.
With dynamic friction, friction is usually proportional to the normal force on the bodies. So this will equal the centripetal force - proportional to the square of the angular velocity, and the component of gravity normal to the track (g sin theta)
You didn't tell anything about how you want your velocity to change. Do you have any friction model? If there is no friction, then the formulas are simple:
length = velocity*t
x = sin(length)*radius
y = -cos(length)*radius
If the velocity is changing, then you have to change length to something like
length = integral over dt[0..t] (velocity dt)
The only thing I wanted to add is the if this is real ball (sphere) with mass 5kg then it must have a diameter dia=(6*m/(PI*rho))^(1/3) where rho is the density of the material. For steel (rho=7680) the diameter is dia=0.1075 meters. Therefore the pitch radius (radius at which the center of gravity of the ball rides on) is equal to R=10-(dia/2) or R=9.9466 meters.
The problem gets a little more complex when friction is included. For one you have to consider the direction of friction (assuming dry friction theory). That depends on the amount the ball rotates in its axis and that depends on moment of inertia of the ball.
When you do the simulation you might want to monitor the total kinetic energy + the total potential energy and make sure your are not adding energy to the system (or taking away). [Don't forget to include the rotational component for the kinetic energy]
Get a standard book on dynamics, and I am sure a similar problem is already described in the book.I would recommend "Vector Mechanic for Engineers - Dynamics".
I've tried the typical physics equations for this but none of them really work because the equations deal with constant acceleration and mine will need to change to work correctly. Basically I have a car that can be going at a large range of speeds and needs to slow down and stop over a given distance and time as it reaches the end of its path.
So, I have:
V0, or the current speed
Vf, or the speed I want to reach (typically 0)
t, or the amount of time I want to take to reach the end of my path
d, or the distance I want to go as I change from V0 to Vf
I want to calculate
a, or the acceleration needed to go from V0 to Vf
The reason this becomes a programming-specific question is because a needs to be recalculated every single timestep as the car keeps stopping. So, V0 constantly is changed to be V0 from last timestep plus the a that was calculated last timestep. So essentially it will start stopping slowly then will eventually stop more abruptly, sort of like a car in real life.
EDITS:
All right, thanks for the great responses. A lot of what I needed was just some help thinking about this. Let me be more specific now that I've got some more ideas from you all:
I have a car c that is 64 pixels from its destination, so d=64. It is driving at 2 pixels per timestep, where a timestep is 1/60 of a second. I want to find the acceleration a that will bring it to a speed of 0.2 pixels per timestep by the time it has traveled d.
d = 64 //distance
V0 = 2 //initial velocity (in ppt)
Vf = 0.2 //final velocity (in ppt)
Also because this happens in a game loop, a variable delta is passed through to each action, which is the multiple of 1/60s that the last timestep took. In other words, if it took 1/60s, then delta is 1.0, if it took 1/30s, then delta is 0.5. Before acceleration is actually applied, it is multiplied by this delta value. Similarly, before the car moves again its velocity is multiplied by the delta value. This is pretty standard stuff, but it might be what is causing problems with my calculations.
Linear acceleration a for a distance d going from a starting speed Vi to a final speed Vf:
a = (Vf*Vf - Vi*Vi)/(2 * d)
EDIT:
After your edit, let me try and gauge what you need...
If you take this formula and insert your numbers, you get a constant acceleration of -0,0309375. Now, let's keep calling this result 'a'.
What you need between timestamps (frames?) is not actually the acceleration, but new location of the vehicle, right? So you use the following formula:
Sd = Vi * t + 0.5 * t * t * a
where Sd is the current distance from the start position at current frame/moment/sum_of_deltas, Vi is the starting speed, and t is the time since the start.
With this, your decceleration is constant, but even if it is linear, your speed will accomodate to your constraints.
If you want a non-linear decceleration, you could find some non-linear interpolation method, and interpolate not acceleration, but simply position between two points.
location = non_linear_function(time);
The four constraints you give are one too many for a linear system (one with constant acceleration), where any three of the variables would suffice to compute the acceleration and thereby determine the fourth variables. However, the system is way under-specified for a completely general nonlinear system -- there may be uncountably infinite ways to change acceleration over time while satisfying all the constraints as given. Can you perhaps specify better along what kind of curve acceleration should change over time?
Using 0 index to mean "at the start", 1 to mean "at the end", and D for Delta to mean "variation", given a linearly changing acceleration
a(t) = a0 + t * (a1-a0)/Dt
where a0 and a1 are the two parameters we want to compute to satisfy all the various constraints, I compute (if there's been no misstep, as I did it all by hand):
DV = Dt * (a0+a1)/2
Ds = Dt * (V0 + ((a1-a0)/6 + a0/2) * Dt)
Given DV, Dt and Ds are all given, this leaves 2 linear equations in the unknowns a0 and a1 so you can solve for these (but I'm leaving things in this form to make it easier to double check on my derivations!!!).
If you're applying the proper formulas at every step to compute changes in space and velocity, it should make no difference whether you compute a0 and a1 once and for all or recompute them at every step based on the remaining Dt, Ds and DV.
If you're trying to simulate a time-dependent acceleration in your equations, it just means that you should assume that. You have to integrate F = ma along with the acceleration equations, that's all. If acceleration isn't constant, you just have to solve a system of equations instead of just one.
So now it's really three vector equations that you have to integrate simultaneously: one for each component of displacement, velocity, and acceleration, or nine equations in total. The force as a function of time will be an input for your problem.
If you're assuming 1D motion you're down to three simultaneous equations. The ones for velocity and displacement are both pretty easy.
In real life, a car's stopping ability depends on the pressure on the brake pedal, any engine braking that's going on, surface conditions, and such: also, there's that "grab" at the end when the car really stops. Modeling that is complicated, and you're unlikely to find good answers on a programming website. Find some automotive engineers.
Aside from that, I don't know what you're asking for. Are you trying to determine a braking schedule? As in there's a certain amount of deceleration while coasting, and then applying the brake? In real driving, the time is not usually considered in these maneuvers, but rather the distance.
As far as I can tell, your problem is that you aren't asking for anything specific, which suggests that you really haven't figured out what you actually want. If you'd provide a sample use for this, we could probably help you. As it is, you've provided the bare bones of a problem that is either overdetermined or way underconstrained, and there's really nothing we can do with that.
if you need to go from 10m/s to 0m/s in 1m with linear acceleration you need 2 equations.
first find the time (t) it takes to stop.
v0 = initial velocity
vf = final velocity
x0 = initial displacement
xf = final displacement
a = constant linear acceleration
(xf-x0)=.5*(v0-vf)*t
t=2*(xf-x0)/(v0-vf)
t=2*(1m-0m)/(10m/s-0m/s)
t=.2seconds
next to calculate the linear acceleration between x0 & xf
(xf-x0)=(v0-vf)*t+.5*a*t^2
(1m-0m)=(10m/s-0m/s)*(.2s)+.5*a*((.2s)^2)
1m=(10m/s)*(.2s)+.5*a*(.04s^2)
1m=2m+a*(.02s^2)
-1m=a*(.02s^2)
a=-1m/(.02s^2)
a=-50m/s^2
in terms of gravity (g's)
a=(-50m/s^2)/(9.8m/s^2)
a=5.1g over the .2 seconds from 0m to 10m
Problem is either overconstrained or underconstrained (a is not constant? is there a maximum a?) or ambiguous.
Simplest formula would be a=(Vf-V0)/t
Edit: if time is not constrained, and distance s is constrained, and acceleration is constant, then the relevant formulae are s = (Vf+V0)/2 * t, t=(Vf-V0)/a which simplifies to a = (Vf2 - V02) / (2s).