Computer Science Canada Ball bouncing effect |
| Author: | NikG [ Mon May 15, 2006 6:57 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Ball bouncing effect | ||
Something I was just playing with... a ball falling and bouncing off the bottom of the screen. I tried to simulate friction and gravity.
Anything wrong with this approach? |
|||
| Author: | blaster009 [ Mon May 15, 2006 7:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Looks fine to me! |
|
| Author: | upthescale [ Mon May 15, 2006 7:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Cool man nice effect |
|
| Author: | Darkmantis [ Wed May 24, 2006 12:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
This is awesome! I've been trying to figure this out for so long, Yay my search is over |
|
| Author: | Remm [ Wed May 24, 2006 3:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
thats awsome; you should put somthing in so you can drag it up 'n drop it. |
|
| Author: | Aziz [ Wed May 24, 2006 8:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Good. Gravity is 9.8 though, in physics |
|
| Author: | TheOneTrueGod [ Wed May 24, 2006 9:30 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | |||
Yarr, what people don't realise is that gravity is 9.8 metres / second Code doesn't work in metres per second, it works in pixels per loop execution. You could do some calculations to convert it, but for a simple effect like this, it isn't worth it Also, the diminishing returns (I believe thats what its called) of the ball's movement doesn't work the way you have it. It should be something more along the lines of
|
|||
| Author: | Aziz [ Thu May 25, 2006 6:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yeah, I realized that. Figured that. And tried it. It just goes flump. You'd have to make a scale (1 metre = 50 px?) and then could would work |
|
| Author: | TheOneTrueGod [ Thu May 25, 2006 7:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
1 metre for 50 pixels? wow |
|
| Author: | Aziz [ Thu May 25, 2006 7:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Lol, no, sorry if I didn't clarify, I meant using a scale to represent 1 metre as 50 pixels (like you would do on a graph. Such as 'let 1cm represent 1m'). And the value of g isn't constant, you're right, but it's basically irrelevant to include to difference for this purpose |
|
| Author: | sylvester-27 [ Thu May 25, 2006 7:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
actually the maximum velocity for objects falling to earth is 9.81 m/s. |
|
| Author: | Aziz [ Thu May 25, 2006 2:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
sylvester-27 wrote: actually the maximum velocity for objects falling to earth is 9.81 m/s.
You mean acceleration |
|
| Author: | NikG [ Fri May 26, 2006 11:40 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | |||
I tried adding the Mouse drag code and it works for the most part:
There are a few problems though... for some reason, the ball seems to jump higher if you drop it from too high, and I still haven't gotten a good feel for friction. |
|||
| Author: | _justin_ [ Mon May 29, 2006 7:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
wow man thats pretty awesome real nice work keep it up |
|
| Author: | sylvester-27 [ Wed May 31, 2006 7:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
dunno, we just finished the Motion unit of gr 10 science. i can't believe i said maximum velocity. i think like the max v for a human is like 200 km/h. |
|
| Author: | TheOneTrueGod [ Wed May 31, 2006 1:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Terminal velocity changes based on the surface area of the object in question. Therefore, someone with very large surface area (Doesn't need to be 'heavy', just very wide) will have a different terminal velocity than someone with less surface area. (It is also dependant on density, I believe, and theres probably a few other things I missed out on, but eh. Thats the basics.) |
|
| Author: | Clayton [ Wed May 31, 2006 8:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
weight distribution also has to do with terminal velocity, if you have a paper with a stone tied to one side of it, the paper will obviously fall faster and more upright than one without |
|