Car physics -- Inertia tensors

Ok, can anybody help me out on this one? My project is not using inertia tensors because I don't understand how to use them. Right now, I have three different polar moment of inertia values that are local to the car (yaw, pitch, and roll axes). These alter rotational velocity and acceleration directly around the three world axes. This seems to work well enough as long as the car isn't flipping through the air or driving on a 80 degree embankment/hill. When it does fly into the air, it doesn't flip correctly of course. Their isn't any gyroscopic precession to the tumble. This must be effecting the rest of the model at high bank angles too. I downloaded and printed out a ton of information on rigid body dynamics and inertia tensors for angular momentum calculations, and understand some of the concepts. For instance, angular velocity is usually not manipulated directly or used at all in rigid body dynamic simulation, as by applying forces to the body through the inertia tensor, angular momentum gets changed directly and appropriately instead, something that is supposedly very difficult and expensive to do correctly to angular velocities. So, suppose I express my initial inertia tensor using the three seperate polar moments of inertia of the sprung weight of the car (assuming it's the same as a 3-D box) in matrix form like this: Inertia1 0 0 0 Inertia2 0 0 0 Inertia3 I downloaded a paper written by David Baraff, from the Robotics Institute at Carnegie Mellon University, available at Chris Hecker's web page: http://www.d6.com/users/checker/dynamics.htm This explained to me everything I currently know on this subject up until now (which isn't much, obviously!). In it, he shows how a force vector and a position vector for the location of the force on the body can be used to find the total torque vector on the body (for 3 dimensions). However, I'm confused as to what to do with this torque and the inertia tensor. I'm using a 3x3 matrix to define the rotational orientation of the sprung mass of the car. What do I do with the torque vector? It says that the inertia tensor itself changes with orientation. Should I be multiplying my orientation matrix by the inertia tensor, then multiplying the result by the angular momentum matrix and the time step in order to change the orientation matrix again? Any ideas?? I know GPL must do this for the body, as well as all four wheels independently, because there's gyroscopic precession in the wheels, and this is the only way I can imagine it might be done. Help!! Thanks, Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

Hello, First of all, for those not interested, I appologize for the longish post. You are just one small step away from doing it correctly. There is much talk of the 6DOF models. These 6 degrees of freedom are the position of the center of gravity (3 components) and then three variables that describe the rotational orientation of the object relative to its c.o.g. . As you say, and it's the easiest way to do it, instead of using, say, three angles (say, pitch, yaw, roll) to describe orientation, you are using a 3x3 matrix that is very well known to anyone ever doing 3D graphics, however, usually in 3D graphics the position vector is also included in the last row (or column) to form a larger 4x4 matrix. The 3x3 orientation matrix, let's name it O, is an orthogonal matrix, meaning that if you exchange rows and columns and multiply it by the original matrix )transpose it, O^T ), you should get the identity matrix. Now, the inertia tensor (let's name it J0 in the local coordinates of the body) can also be represented as a 3x3 matrix. However, this tensor is a constant only in the system that rotates with the vehicle. The tensor that you created with components in pitch, yaw, and roll axes is an example of such a tensor, although generally you would also get components away from the diagonal. If you've done 3D graphics, you know that the position of an arbitrary vector v0 that is given in the local coordinates of the body needs to be multiplied by the orientation matrix O, v = O v0 , to get the vector v as the vector v0 oriented in the world coordinates. The tensor J0 in world coordinates, J, however transforms a bit differently (as a matrix). Without going into too much detail, to obtain the world representation of the tensor J, you need to perform the following operation: J = O J0 O^T, (1) where O^T is the transposed of O as given before. I guess you are familiar with the concept of rotational momentum, gamma, which is a vector. The relation d(gamma)/dt = torque, (2) is true, where torque is the torque vector. Now, gamma is given as gamma = J omega, (3) where omega is the rotational velocity vector, which points along the axis of the rotation and whose magnitue gives the speed of rotation. Actually, (d O)/dt y0 = omega (x) (O y0) (4) holds true, where (d O)/dt is the time derivative of the orientation matrix, (x) denotes the vectorial product, and v is an arbitrary vector. Similarly, (d O^T)/dt y = - O^T (omega (x) y) . (5) Now one needs to take into account that both the tensor of inertia in the world (but not local) coordinates and omega change with time. Inserting (3) into (2), and taking into account both (4), (5) and (1), one gets omega (x) O J0 O^T omega - O J0 O^T (omega (x) omega) + O J0 O^T (d omega)/dt = torque (6) where the second term clearly vanishes, and from this one obtains (d omega)/dt = J^(-1) (torque - omega (x) (J omega) ). (7) While the derivation was done in an inertial frame of reference (world coordinates for example), the equation (7) can be rewriten in any frame of reference, as long as all the quantities are transformed correctly. In the local coordinate system of the body, the J is just J0 (and J^(-1) is the inverse of the J0 (J0^(-1)), while in the world system J=O J0 O^T, J^(-1)= O (J0^(-1)) O^T. If you need help on how to update the matrix O from a given vector omega, let me know, but basically you need to construct a matrix that creates a small rotation around the vector omega and multiply the matrix O by it from the left. -Gregor P.S. There might be some small errors above as I've last visited this derivation a while ago. The result (7) that you need, however, is surely correct.

----- Original Message ----- From: "J. Todd Wasson" <[email hidden]> Newsgroups: rec.autos.simulators Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 8:20 AM Subject: Car physics -- Inertia tensors Hi Todd, I've been working on a little driving simulation of my own since last July, and have managed to build fully working rigid body dynamics for it, so I might be able to help. > This explained to me everything I currently know on this subject upuntil now > (which isn't much, obviously!). In it, he shows how a force vector and a > position vector for the location of the force on the body can be used tofind > the total torque vector on the body (for 3 dimensions). However, I'mconfused > as to what to do with this torque and the inertia tensor. I'm using a 3x3 > matrix to define the rotational orientation of the sprung mass of the car. > What do I do with the torque vector? It says that the inertia tensoritself > changes with orientation. Should I be multiplying my orientation matrixby the > inertia tensor, then multiplying the result by the angular momentum matrixand > the time step in order to change the orientation matrix again? Anyideas?? First of all, you need to work with the _inverse_ of the inertia tensor. It's no big deal, simply calculate the inverse once in the beginning and store it. If you're just using the elements on the diagonal (ie. you assume no asymmetry in the mass distribution) the inverse of the matrix can be calculated by just inverting the elements. Assuming you calculate the torque vector and angular velocity and momentum vectors in world coordinates, as I have done, what you do is you take the torque vector (tau) and multiply by the time step (dt), then add this to the angular momentum vector (L) of the object: L = L + tau * dt To calculate the angular velocity vector, you first multiply the current rotation matrix (R) by the inverse of the inertia tensor (Ibodyinv, which you calculate and store once in the beginning of the program), then multiply the result of that by the transpose of the current rotation matrix (this operation transforms the inverse of the inertia tensor from body coordinates to world coordinates): Iinv = R * Ibodyinv * transpose(R) Then, to get the new angular velocity vector (omega), you multiply the angular momentum vector by Iinv. Et voila, there you have it: omega = L * Iinv Then you just integrate, calculate the new rotation matrix, and you'll have your cars rotating realistically, with precession and all that. I'm using quaternions for rotation which makes things slightly different, but the basic principle is the same. For numerical integration, I suggest using a fourth-order Runge-Kutta method for accuracy. I hope this helps (and that I didn't make any mistakes... I'm sure someone will step in and correct me if I did. :) Petri Blomqvist

Petri Blomqvist wrote: <snip>

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > I'm using quaternions for rotation which makes things slightly different, > but the basic principle is the same. For numerical integration, I suggest > using a fourth-order Runge-Kutta method for accuracy. > > I hope this helps (and that I didn't make any mistakes... I'm sure someone > will step in and correct me if I did. :) > > Petri Blomqvist

I must say I would heartily recommend this approach over what I suggested. Working with both the angular momentum and angular velocity is easier to implement than just the angular velocity approach (which is what my derivation focused on). Blame it on my narrowminded education :). -Gregor

Quoted text (7 lines)

>I must say I would heartily recommend this approach over what I >suggested. Working with both the angular momentum and angular velocity >is easier to implement than just the angular velocity approach (which is >what my derivation focused on). Blame it on my narrowminded education >:). > >-Gregor

Geeze, Gregor! The paper I looked at just skipped through that derivation because it was so complicated! You know your stuff! Thanks a ton for your help, I'll probably be needing more to get this working right. :-) Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

Quoted text (29 lines)

>First of all, you need to work with the _inverse_ of the inertia tensor. >It's no big deal, simply calculate the inverse once in the beginning and >store it. If you're just using the elements on the diagonal (ie. you assume >no asymmetry in the mass distribution) the inverse of the matrix can be >calculated by just inverting the elements. > >Assuming you calculate the torque vector and angular velocity and momentum >vectors in world coordinates, as I have done, what you do is you take the >torque vector (tau) and multiply by the time step (dt), then add this to the >angular momentum vector (L) of the object: > > L = L + tau * dt > >To calculate the angular velocity vector, you first multiply the current >rotation matrix (R) by the inverse of the inertia tensor (Ibodyinv, which >you calculate and store once in the beginning of the program), then multiply >the result of that by the transpose of the current rotation matrix (this >operation transforms the inverse of the inertia tensor from body coordinates >to world coordinates): > > Iinv = R * Ibodyinv * transpose(R) > >Then, to get the new angular velocity vector (omega), you multiply the >angular momentum vector by Iinv. Et voila, there you have it: > > omega = L * Iinv > >Then you just integrate, calculate the new rotation matrix, and you'll have >your cars rotating realistically, with precession and all that.

Ok, let me see if I follow you here. I was going to have a symmetrical inertia tensor: inertia1 0 0 0 inertia2 0 0 0 inertia3 But what I really want is the inverse of this. Is this it? Silly question, I know. Ibodyinv: inertia3 0 0 0 inertia2 0 0 0 inertia1 I'm a real amateur with matrices and vectors at this point, as I've just started using these one or two months ago. My 3-D graphics are a wireframe Win32Api thing that hardly uses vectors or matrices at all, so I'm still learning this stuff. The angular momentum vector is a 3x3 matrix, correct? Or is it a three dimensional vector? The angular velocity vector is also a 3x3 matrix, correct? Ok, to calculate the angular velocity vector, I multiply the current rotation matrix by the inverse of the inertia tensor, which is calculated one time at the beginning of the simulation. The, I multiply the result of that by the transpose of the current rotation matrix. What is the transpose of the rotation matrix? Rotation matrix is: xx yx zx xy yy zy xz yz zz Ok, after the result of this is found, I get the new angular velocity vector by multiplying the angular momentum vector by Ibodyinv (the inverse of the inertia tensor). Now, the angular velocity vector is essentially added to the old rotation matrix to get the new rotation matrix? Geeze, I guess I have a lot of homework to do here! I'll go through this paper again with your post as a guide. Hopefully I'll get this working. Studying vectors and matrices more ought to help. Thank you very much for your help Petri. Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

"J. Todd Wasson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Ok, let me see if I follow you here. I was going to have a symmetrical > inertia tensor: > > inertia1 0 0 > 0 inertia2 0 > 0 0 inertia3 > > But what I really want is the inverse of this. Is this it? Silly

question, > I know. > > Ibodyinv: > inertia3 0 0 > 0 inertia2 0 > 0 0 inertia1 Not quite. :) This is what I meant: 1/inertia1 0 0 0 1/inertia2 0 0 0 1/inertia3 In general, inverting a matrix is more complex, but if every element off the diagonal is zero you can take this handy shortcut. > I'm a real amateur with matrices and vectors at this point, as I've just > started using these one or two months ago. My 3-D graphics are awireframe > Win32Api thing that hardly uses vectors or matrices at all, so I'm still > learning this stuff. I'm using OpenGL for my own simulation. I must say, if I had to pick one thing about OpenGL that I like the most, it's the ease with which it can be learnt and used. I've gone in a couple of months from spinning, unlit single-colored cubes to multitextured, lit, environment-mapped 3d models. I don't think I could've done that with D3D. Other people's mileage may vary, of course. :) > The angular momentum vector is a 3x3 matrix, correct? Or is it a three > dimensional vector? It's a 3-d vector. > The angular velocity vector is also a 3x3 matrix, correct? Nope, it's also a 3-d vector. :) > Ok, to calculate the angular velocity vector, I multiply the currentrotation > matrix by the inverse of the inertia tensor, which is calculated one timeat > the beginning of the simulation. The, I multiply the result of that bythe > transpose of the current rotation matrix. What is the transpose of the > rotation matrix? > Rotation matrix is: > xx yx zx > xy yy zy > xz yz zz Transposing a matrix means simply mirroring it along the diagonal, in this case the transpose is xx xy xz yx yy yz zx zy zz > Ok, after the result of this is found, I get the new angular velocityvector > by multiplying the angular momentum vector by Ibodyinv (the inverse of the > inertia tensor). Not by Ibodyinv, but by the result of what we discussed above (which is Ibodyinv transformed to world coordinates). > Now, the angular velocity vector is essentially added to the oldrotation > matrix to get the new rotation matrix? No, you first form a matrix from the elements of the angular velocity vector like this: 0 -z y z 0 -x -y x 0 Then you multiply this by the old rotation matrix, and add the result of this to the old rotation matrix to get the new one. If you're wondering where that matrix in the middle comes from, I believe the formulation is in the Baraff paper you downloaded. Then there's also the fact that you'll need to normalize the rotation matrix every now and then to keep it orthogonal. Normalizing quaternions is faster, which is one good reason to use them. > Geeze, I guess I have a lot of homework to do here! I'll go throughthis > paper again with your post as a guide. Hopefully I'll get this working. > Studying vectors and matrices more ought to help. Yep, that's the key. And once you have the rigid body dynamics working, adding things like aerodynamic effects is a breeze, if you'll pardon the pun. :) > Thank you very much for your help Petri. Happy to help. By the way, you mentioned something about precession of the wheels in GPL? I haven't seen that game (shame on me :), I assume you mean the wheels precess if they go flying through the air after a crash? Sounds cool. Petri Blomqvist

Great, thanks again Petri. I'll see what I can do now. Yes, basic aerodynamics will be pretty simple to add in when things are done this way. Also, I imagine adding impulses from collisions would be simplified quite a bit. (I haven't gone there yet anyway.) >By the way, you mentioned something about precession of the wheels in GPL? I >haven't seen that game (shame on me :), I assume you mean the wheels precess >if they go flying through the air after a crash? Sounds cool. > Yes, basically. If you get some air off a steep hill, you're supposedly able to rotate the car by steering the front wheels once airborne. GPL seems to be the most complete model out there, but I haven't tried N4, Nascar Heat, or Viper Racing, so maybe it's just the hype. I don't imagine many folks would go through the trouble of modelling each wheel with an inertia tensor, but GPL seems to have done this. I know I don't, it's complicated enough as it is right now! Might as well do the flywheel and engine this way too. That way, high engine rpm's would cause the chassis to have a little more resistance to turning. Probably not enough to notice, of course. Don't count on me doing this! lol Real frame rate killer for an unnoticable effect. Thanks for the help again, Petri. I'll see what I can do with this and come back later if I get stuck. Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

Hi Todd Quick and dirty inverter of a 3x3 matric for you, plenty of room for improvement, but as you only need to call once (or whenever you mass distribution changes) then it will do :O) Chris BOOL InverseMassMatrix(MATRIX3X3 *source, MATRIX3X3 *dest) { long col,row; float fDet; float fInvdet; dest->matrix[0][0] = source->matrix[1][1] * source->matrix[2][2] - source->matrix[1][2] * source->matrix[2][1]; dest->matrix[0][1] = source->matrix[0][2] * source->matrix[2][1] - source->matrix[0][1] * source->matrix[2][2]; dest->matrix[0][2] = source->matrix[0][1] * source->matrix[1][2] - source->matrix[0][2] * source->matrix[1][1]; dest->matrix[1][0] = source->matrix[1][2] * source->matrix[2][0] - source->matrix[1][0] * source->matrix[2][2]; dest->matrix[1][1] = source->matrix[0][0] * source->matrix[2][2] - source->matrix[0][2] * source->matrix[2][0]; dest->matrix[1][2] = source->matrix[0][2] * source->matrix[1][0] - source->matrix[0][0] * source->matrix[1][2]; dest->matrix[2][0] = source->matrix[1][0] * source->matrix[2][1] - source->matrix[1][1] * source->matrix[2][0]; dest->matrix[2][1] = source->matrix[0][1] * source->matrix[2][0] - source->matrix[0][0] * source->matrix[2][1]; dest->matrix[2][2] = source->matrix[0][0] * source->matrix[1][1] - source->matrix[0][1] * source->matrix[1][0]; fDet = source->matrix[0][0] * dest->matrix[0][0] + source->matrix[0][1] * dest->matrix[1][0] + source->matrix[0][2] * dest->matrix[2][0]; if ( fabs(fDet) <= 1e-06 ) return FALSE; fInvdet = 1.0f / fDet; for ( row = 0; row < 3; row++) { for ( col = 0; col < 3; col++) dest->matrix[row][col] *= fInvdet; } return TRUE; } J. Todd Wasson wrote in message <[email hidden]>... >>First of all, you need to work with the _inverse_ of the inertia tensor. >>It's no big deal, simply calculate the inverse once in the beginning and >>store it. If you're just using the elements on the diagonal (ie. youassume >>no asymmetry in the mass distribution) the inverse of the matrix can be >>calculated by just inverting the elements. >> >>Assuming you calculate the torque vector and angular velocity and momentum >>vectors in world coordinates, as I have done, what you do is you take the >>torque vector (tau) and multiply by the time step (dt), then add this tothe

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>angular momentum vector (L) of the object: >> >> L = L + tau * dt >> >>To calculate the angular velocity vector, you first multiply the current >>rotation matrix (R) by the inverse of the inertia tensor (Ibodyinv, which >>you calculate and store once in the beginning of the program), then

multiply >>the result of that by the transpose of the current rotation matrix (this >>operation transforms the inverse of the inertia tensor from bodycoordinates

Quoted text (10 lines)

>>to world coordinates): >> >> Iinv = R * Ibodyinv * transpose(R) >> >>Then, to get the new angular velocity vector (omega), you multiply the >>angular momentum vector by Iinv. Et voila, there you have it: >> >> omega = L * Iinv >> >>Then you just integrate, calculate the new rotation matrix, and you'll

have

Quoted text (10 lines)

>>your cars rotating realistically, with precession and all that. > > Ok, let me see if I follow you here. I was going to have a symmetrical >inertia tensor: > >inertia1 0 0 > 0 inertia2 0 > 0 0 inertia3 > > But what I really want is the inverse of this. Is this it? Silly

question,

Quoted text (18 lines)

>I know. > >Ibodyinv: >inertia3 0 0 > 0 inertia2 0 > 0 0 inertia1 > > I'm a real amateur with matrices and vectors at this point, as I've just >started using these one or two months ago. My 3-D graphics are a wireframe >Win32Api thing that hardly uses vectors or matrices at all, so I'm still >learning this stuff. > > The angular momentum vector is a 3x3 matrix, correct? Or is it a three >dimensional vector? > > The angular velocity vector is also a 3x3 matrix, correct? > > Ok, to calculate the angular velocity vector, I multiply the current

rotation >matrix by the inverse of the inertia tensor, which is calculated one timeat

Quoted text (9 lines)

>the beginning of the simulation. The, I multiply the result of that by the >transpose of the current rotation matrix. What is the transpose of the >rotation matrix? >Rotation matrix is: >xx yx zx >xy yy zy >xz yz zz > > Ok, after the result of this is found, I get the new angular velocity

vector

Quoted text (18 lines)

>by multiplying the angular momentum vector by Ibodyinv (the inverse of the >inertia tensor). > > Now, the angular velocity vector is essentially added to the old rotation >matrix to get the new rotation matrix? > > Geeze, I guess I have a lot of homework to do here! I'll go through this >paper again with your post as a guide. Hopefully I'll get this working. >Studying vectors and matrices more ought to help. > > Thank you very much for your help Petri. > >Todd Wasson >--- >Performance Simulations >Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction >Software >http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

Geeze Chris......what a showoff<G> whens that demo ever gonna be released.......sorry just had to ask neil canning "Chris West" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:7pQ56.46023$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (34 lines)

> Hi Todd > > Quick and dirty inverter of a 3x3 matric for you, plenty of room for > improvement, but as you only need to call once (or whenever you mass > distribution changes) then it will do :O) > > Chris > > BOOL InverseMassMatrix(MATRIX3X3 *source, MATRIX3X3 *dest) > { > long col,row; > float fDet; > float fInvdet; > > dest->matrix[0][0] = source->matrix[1][1] * source->matrix[2][2] - > source->matrix[1][2] * source->matrix[2][1]; > dest->matrix[0][1] = source->matrix[0][2] * source->matrix[2][1] - > source->matrix[0][1] * source->matrix[2][2]; > dest->matrix[0][2] = source->matrix[0][1] * source->matrix[1][2] - > source->matrix[0][2] * source->matrix[1][1]; > dest->matrix[1][0] = source->matrix[1][2] * source->matrix[2][0] - > source->matrix[1][0] * source->matrix[2][2]; > dest->matrix[1][1] = source->matrix[0][0] * source->matrix[2][2] - > source->matrix[0][2] * source->matrix[2][0]; > dest->matrix[1][2] = source->matrix[0][2] * source->matrix[1][0] - > source->matrix[0][0] * source->matrix[1][2]; > dest->matrix[2][0] = source->matrix[1][0] * source->matrix[2][1] - > source->matrix[1][1] * source->matrix[2][0]; > dest->matrix[2][1] = source->matrix[0][1] * source->matrix[2][0] - > source->matrix[0][0] * source->matrix[2][1]; > dest->matrix[2][2] = source->matrix[0][0] * source->matrix[1][1] - > source->matrix[0][1] * source->matrix[1][0]; > > fDet = source->matrix[0][0] * dest->matrix[0][0] +

source->matrix[0][1]

Quoted text (24 lines)

> * dest->matrix[1][0] + source->matrix[0][2] * dest->matrix[2][0]; > if ( fabs(fDet) <= 1e-06 ) > return FALSE; > > fInvdet = 1.0f / fDet; > for ( row = 0; row < 3; row++) > { > for ( col = 0; col < 3; col++) > dest->matrix[row][col] *= fInvdet; > } > > return TRUE; > } > > J. Todd Wasson wrote in message > <[email hidden]>... > >>First of all, you need to work with the _inverse_ of the inertia tensor. > >>It's no big deal, simply calculate the inverse once in the beginning and > >>store it. If you're just using the elements on the diagonal (ie. you > assume > >>no asymmetry in the mass distribution) the inverse of the matrix can be > >>calculated by just inverting the elements. > >> > >>Assuming you calculate the torque vector and angular velocity and

momentum > >>vectors in world coordinates, as I have done, what you do is you takethe

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >>torque vector (tau) and multiply by the time step (dt), then add this to > the > >>angular momentum vector (L) of the object: > >> > >> L = L + tau * dt > >> > >>To calculate the angular velocity vector, you first multiply the current > >>rotation matrix (R) by the inverse of the inertia tensor (Ibodyinv,

which

Quoted text (35 lines)

> >>you calculate and store once in the beginning of the program), then > multiply > >>the result of that by the transpose of the current rotation matrix (this > >>operation transforms the inverse of the inertia tensor from body > coordinates > >>to world coordinates): > >> > >> Iinv = R * Ibodyinv * transpose(R) > >> > >>Then, to get the new angular velocity vector (omega), you multiply the > >>angular momentum vector by Iinv. Et voila, there you have it: > >> > >> omega = L * Iinv > >> > >>Then you just integrate, calculate the new rotation matrix, and you'll > have > >>your cars rotating realistically, with precession and all that. > > > > Ok, let me see if I follow you here. I was going to have a symmetrical > >inertia tensor: > > > >inertia1 0 0 > > 0 inertia2 0 > > 0 0 inertia3 > > > > But what I really want is the inverse of this. Is this it? Silly > question, > >I know. > > > >Ibodyinv: > >inertia3 0 0 > > 0 inertia2 0 > > 0 0 inertia1 > > > > I'm a real amateur with matrices and vectors at this point, as I've

just > >started using these one or two months ago. My 3-D graphics are awireframe

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >Win32Api thing that hardly uses vectors or matrices at all, so I'm still > >learning this stuff. > > > > The angular momentum vector is a 3x3 matrix, correct? Or is it a three > >dimensional vector? > > > > The angular velocity vector is also a 3x3 matrix, correct? > > > > Ok, to calculate the angular velocity vector, I multiply the current > rotation > >matrix by the inverse of the inertia tensor, which is calculated one time > at > >the beginning of the simulation. The, I multiply the result of that by

the

Quoted text (10 lines)

> >transpose of the current rotation matrix. What is the transpose of the > >rotation matrix? > >Rotation matrix is: > >xx yx zx > >xy yy zy > >xz yz zz > > > > Ok, after the result of this is found, I get the new angular velocity > vector > >by multiplying the angular momentum vector by Ibodyinv (the inverse of

the > >inertia tensor). > > > > Now, the angular velocity vector is essentially added to the oldrotation > >matrix to get the new rotation matrix? > > > > Geeze, I guess I have a lot of homework to do here! I'll go throughthis

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >paper again with your post as a guide. Hopefully I'll get this working. > >Studying vectors and matrices more ought to help. > > > > Thank you very much for your help Petri. > > > >Todd Wasson > >--- > >Performance Simulations > >Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction > >Software > >http://PerformanceSimulations.Com > >

On Sun, 7 Jan 2001 02:21:51 -0000, "Chris West" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Quick and dirty inverter of a 3x3 matric for you,... >BOOL InverseMassMatrix(MATRIX3X3 *source, MATRIX3X3 *dest) >{ Is that a column-major or row-major matrix? It will really be bughunting plaza when you're (Todd) mixing up code for row- and columnmajor code by using snippets. (I use column-major btw, only in OpenGL format, so the C m[3][3] code is a bit tricky as it is m[column][row] effectively, but very handy because I'm dealing with OpenGL). Ruud van Gaal, GPL Rank +53.25 Pencil art : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/ Car simulation: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/racer/

Thats Row Major :O) Ruud van Gaal wrote in message <[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (19 lines)

>On Sun, 7 Jan 2001 02:21:51 -0000, "Chris West" ><[email hidden]> wrote: > >>Quick and dirty inverter of a 3x3 matric for you, >... >>BOOL InverseMassMatrix(MATRIX3X3 *source, MATRIX3X3 *dest) >>{ > >Is that a column-major or row-major matrix? It will really be >bughunting plaza when you're (Todd) mixing up code for row- and >columnmajor code by using snippets. (I use column-major btw, only in >OpenGL format, so the C m[3][3] code is a bit tricky as it is >m[column][row] effectively, but very handy because I'm dealing with >OpenGL). > > >Ruud van Gaal, GPL Rank +53.25 >Pencil art : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/ >Car simulation: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/racer/

Thanks, Chris :0) Too late though, everything works already. I'll keep the snippet in case I switch to an OOP language anytime soon. That looks like greek to me! Thanks again, Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

>Is that a column-major or row-major matrix? It will really be >bughunting plaza when you're (Todd) mixing up code for row- and >columnmajor code by using snippets. (I use column-major btw, only in >OpenGL format, so the C m[3][3] code is a bit tricky as it is >m[column][row] effectively, but very handy because I'm dealing with >OpenGL). Thanks Ruud. I've got it working already. My compiler has some built in Matrix functions, so even though this is all greek to me, I can continue with my project anyway :-) Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

It works! Thanks for everybody's help here. It seems to work properly. Download a little demo here at http://performancesimulations.com/files/vector3b.exe Input an initial torque in world space about the x,y, and z axes. This torque only lasts for one frame, then the object spins on it's own after that. It looks like it is working correctly to me. What do you guys/gals think? It may not work on either Windows 2000 or ME, I forget which one, but it's fine on Win95/98. Thanks for any input, and thanks again for the help. Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

On 08 Jan 2001 07:33:03 GMT, [email hidden] (J. Todd Wasson) wrote: > > It works! Thanks for everybody's help here. It seems to work properly. >Download a little demo here at >http://performancesimulations.com/files/vector3b.exe Damn, indeed, it doesn't run in my Win2K. Just gives 6 little dots after inputting XYZ. I'll try it under Win95 later. Ruud van Gaal, GPL Rank +53.25 Pencil art : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/ Car simulation: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/racer/

On 08 Jan 2001 04:56:07 GMT, [email hidden] (J. Todd Wasson) wrote: > Thanks, Chris :0) Too late though, everything works already. I'll keep the >snippet in case I switch to an OOP language anytime soon. That looks like >greek to me! Do try to get it into OOP when you have some (long, lol) spare moments. Matrices, vectors etc really do very well in an OOP environment. Ruud van Gaal, GPL Rank +53.25 Pencil art : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/ Car simulation: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/racer/

>Do try to get it into OOP when you have some (long, lol) spare >moments. Matrices, vectors etc really do very well in an OOP >environment. Yeah, I'm sure it'll take at least a week or two lol!!! See you in a couple years! It took me about 6 months to write the program on my website, and that was my first Windows program (aside from little monkeying around stuff to see how things work.) The physics that went into that were ported from an old DOS QBasic program I wrote, so it took MUCH longer to figure out. OOP? That'll take a while... :-) Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

>Damn, indeed, it doesn't run in my Win2K. Just gives 6 little dots >after inputting XYZ. I'll try it under Win95 later. Sorry, it's because I don't handle drawing properly (through WM_Paint messages), rather, it uses WM_Timer. That doesn't seem to work in Win2K. I think it does in Win ME, though. Anyway, let me know if it looks right. Do objects really do wierd things like that when they're spinning in 0g? Bizarre! Not sure if it's right. Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

On 08 Jan 2001 23:54:09 GMT, [email hidden] (J. Todd Wasson) wrote: >>Damn, indeed, it doesn't run in my Win2K. Just gives 6 little dots >>after inputting XYZ. I'll try it under Win95 later. > > Sorry, it's because I don't handle drawing properly (through WM_Paint >messages), rather, it uses WM_Timer. That doesn't seem to work in Win2K. Weird, WM_TIMER works in Win2K though. Perhaps you're not handling BeginPaint()/EndPaint() things right. Well, I don't know much Windows programming actually, so I can't really tell. Perhaps you should call Invalidate() on the window instead of painting from within WM_TIMER. (and process the WM_PAINT message, this is not really a message at all I believe, more a state which is sent when no messages are available (idle processing)). Anyway, this is not the place for these discussions. :) I still have to check in Win95, unfortunately, upto Sunday I seem to be stuck with work (outside the office). Ruud van Gaal, GPL Rank +53.25 Pencil art : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/ Car simulation: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/racer/

"J. Todd Wasson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Do objects really do wierd things like that when they're spinning in 0g? > Bizarre! > Not sure if it's right. You still seem to have some work ahead of you. That rotation looks a lot like what I got from my first attempts. In fact, I only got mine working when I switched to using quaternions to describe the orientations of my objects... but I digress. :) I would suggest that you use a top (large moment of inertia on one axis, a much smaller one on the other two) to test the rotation. If you can make the top spin and precess stably by giving it a large initial angular momentum on the axis with the large moment of inertia, and small momentums on the other two, your code is probably working. Petri Blomqvist

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> On 08 Jan 2001 23:54:09 GMT, [email hidden] (J. Todd Wasson) wrote: > > >>Damn, indeed, it doesn't run in my Win2K. Just gives 6 little dots > >>after inputting XYZ. I'll try it under Win95 later. > > > > Sorry, it's because I don't handle drawing properly (through WM_Paint > >messages), rather, it uses WM_Timer. That doesn't seem to work in Win2K. > > Weird, WM_TIMER works in Win2K though. Perhaps you're not handling > BeginPaint()/EndPaint() things right. Well, I don't know much Windows > programming actually, so I can't really tell. > Perhaps you should call Invalidate() on the window instead of painting > from within WM_TIMER. (and process the WM_PAINT message, this is not > really a message at all I believe, more a state which is sent when no > messages are available (idle processing)). > > Anyway, this is not the place for these discussions. :) > > I still have to check in Win95, unfortunately, upto Sunday I seem to > be stuck with work (outside the office).

The WM_TIMER message is the lowest priority message. It gets process after EVERYTHING else. If you want something to work on a timer, you should set up a timer thread. I have a threaded timer class if you need it. -- ========================================================= Redneck Techno-Biker (Zerex12) http://www.paddedwall.org/john Barbarian Diecast Collector (420+ cars and counting) http://www.paddedwall.org/diecast DeMONS Scheduler for N3 and NL http://www.paddedwall.org/demons IGPS/3 Home Page http://www.paddedwall.org/igps3 If you want to send me email, go to the first URL shown above & click "Send Me Mail" in the contents frame. =========================================================

Mojo wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > Do you work or have you ever worked on a RBS? You really don't know whom you are just talking to, do you :) ? -Gregor

Ruud van Gaal wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Do try to get it into OOP when you have some (long, lol) spare > moments. Matrices, vectors etc really do very well in an OOP > environment. > > Ruud van Gaal, GPL Rank +53.25 > Pencil art : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/ > Car simulation: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/racer/

Well, I'd say that for matrices and vectors the operator overloading possibility is much more important than objects. However, if you have an elegant way of treating them as objects, I'd love to hear more about it. -Gregor

Hi Chris, Do you work or have you ever worked on a RBS?

[email hidden] (Mojo) writes: > Hi Chris, > > Do you work or have you ever worked on a RBS? Nice quoting. -- Olav K. Malmin remove .spam when replying

Quoted text (8 lines)

>Weird, WM_TIMER works in Win2K though. Perhaps you're not handling >BeginPaint()/EndPaint() things right. Well, I don't know much Windows >programming actually, so I can't really tell. >Perhaps you should call Invalidate() on the window instead of painting >from within WM_TIMER. (and process the WM_PAINT message, this is not >really a message at all I believe, more a state which is sent when no >messages are available (idle processing)). >

Right, I'm not even using WM_PAINT, beginpaint, or endpaint :-) It just goes into a sub right after the WM_TIMER message and draws on the bitmap, then bitblts it. I'm pretty sure this is what causes the Win2K problem. InvalidateRect would fire a WM_PAINT message, then I should really call the graphics section from there. Oh well, it works on my system anyway ;-) Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

>The WM_TIMER message is the lowest priority message. It gets process >after EVERYTHING else. If you want something to work on a timer, you >should set up a timer thread. I have a threaded timer class if you need >it. > Thanks for the offer, that's kind of you. Unfortunately, I'm not using an OOP language, so a class won't do me much good. I just need to set things up through WM_PAINT, like it's supposed to be done :-) Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

Quoted text (11 lines)

>You still seem to have some work ahead of you. That rotation looks a lot >like what I got from my first attempts. In fact, I only got mine working >when I switched to using quaternions to describe the orientations of my >objects... but I digress. :) > >I would suggest that you use a top (large moment of inertia on one axis, >a much smaller one on the other two) to test the rotation. If you can >make the top spin and precess stably by giving it a large initial angular >momentum on the axis with the large moment of inertia, and small >momentums on the other two, your code is probably working. >

Shucks, thought I had it until I let it run for awhile. Sometimes, it almost stops, then suddenly whips around 180 degrees or so. I'll try the spinning top idea and see what it does. Thanks a lot for your help Petri! Todd Wasson --- Performance Simulations Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction Software http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

The best is to use winmm.lib and the multimedia timers : timeBeginPeriod timeSetEvent timeKillEvent timeEndPeriod Use MSDN help for more info. i'm calling dynmamic under time interruption to guarantee a real time processing ... even if display is slow. Be aware of re-entrence calling ! Seb Game Developer GPLRank -36.24 http://magicfr.multimania.com

On Wed, 10 Jan 2001 13:11:12 +0100, Gregor Veble <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>Ruud van Gaal wrote: >> >> Do try to get it into OOP when you have some (long, lol) spare >> moments. Matrices, vectors etc really do very well in an OOP >> environment. >> >> Ruud van Gaal, GPL Rank +53.25 >> Pencil art : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/ >> Car simulation: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/racer/ > >Well, I'd say that for matrices and vectors the operator overloading >possibility is much more important than objects. However, if you have an >elegant way of treating them as objects, I'd love to hear more about it.

It seems there are a billion ways of implementing vectors. Operator overloading to get cross and dot products I don't like very much, because everyone seems to use different operators (and using * for either cross or dot both seem reason in the end for confusion). First, the fact that vectors etc contain the members and some functions to operate upon (like matrix.RotateX(float angle)) already works good enough for me to recommend it. Second, the first version I hacked together on vectors used a lot of friend functions with overloaded operators. But it seems you can bring these seemingly static (outside) functions inside the class, like DVector3& operator*=(const dfloat &s); I'm still finding out nice ways that are fast and don't use stack copies so much, as this seems a waste of CPU. Ruud van Gaal, GPL Rank +53.25 Pencil art : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/ Car simulation: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/racer/

On 10 Jan 2001 22:20:47 GMT, [email hidden] (J. Todd Wasson) wrote: > Right, I'm not even using WM_PAINT, beginpaint, or endpaint :-) It just goes >into a sub right after the WM_TIMER message and draws on the bitmap, then >bitblts it. I'm pretty sure this is what causes the Win2K problem. >InvalidateRect would fire a WM_PAINT message, then I should really call the >graphics section from there. Oh well, it works on my system anyway ;-) That's the main thing. Windows has a lot of ways to get messages across (the internals are complex but sensible). You wouldn't be using WM_PAINT anyway if you were to make an actual sim for people out there (although I'm still using normal key events in Racer, but at 150fps for non-vsync'ed track parts I'm not complaining, lol). Ruud van Gaal, GPL Rank +53.25 Pencil art : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/ Car simulation: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/racer/

On 05 Jan 2001 06:20:25 GMT, [email hidden] (J. Todd Wasson) wrote: > Ok, can anybody help me out on this one? My project is not using inertia >tensors because I don't understand how to use them. Very late (still have to run your Win95 vector3b.exe), but I've been concentrating on other things. Check out: http://www.chaney.karoo.net/ And download the PDF file which explains in fastest gear how to use quaternions to get your 3x3 rotation matrix without the normalization hassle. Also does precession (and gives formulas for it). I'll have to sweep my Racer library to get this in sometime. The demo is also very nice; has a nice feel and looks good. Ruud van Gaal, GPL Rank +53.25 Pencil art : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/ Car simulation: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/racer/