It’s against the rules to post the same topic many times, so I’ve removed the duplicates and just kept this one since it’s in the most appropriate category.
Sorry about that, I didnt see the issue because one was in “Announcements” … which is what it was… and one was in “Assets and Asset Store”… which is what its for… It seemed an appropriate use of the forum.
I will keep that in mind in the future, thanks for the feedback.
I’m guessing this is 2D, as in it occurs on a 2D plane, am i right? I think this could be very useful to drive other effects if so, in a 3D sense, rendering the sim to texture for use as a texture elsewhere, stuff like that, does that sound about right? If im wrong im sorry for jumping to conclusions, but if not i have further questions to ask
Losing potential customers by not posting a demo to prevent people (who wouldn’t purchase anyway) from crabing this serms to make 0commercial sense to me. I’ve seen other people say the same thing but really. No. Today people pay to be ok with licencing, those who want to pirate it won’t pay either way
They’re going to have to buy your work to make any money from anything that uses it anyways. Unity’s a toy for most, so you cant expect money from those who use it like a toy, its pretty imperative you buy the things you use if you plan to make something of your efforts, so if its not money now, its money later
But i’m finding this very interesting in terms of what it could do along with other systems, i was thinking like, pollutants pouring into a water surface and things like that, maybe even using it to help create dynamic flow maps (somehow)
@ lazygunn
Correct, it currently renders to a 2d texture buffer. it renders into this buffer using a 2d grid in the level to determine where actors should exists. If actors are not needed and just "starting textures are used, then the grid doesnt matter.
If you have more questions, shoot away.
Based on your second post,
yes, you have great ideas for how it can be used. It could be used like you suggest, or even just as a painting system for adding objects to buffers etc.
The system is setup to output Color, collision, or velocity buffers to a “target” shader. but really any of the buffers could be output. (color, collision, velocity, pressure, divergence, etc.)
My current plans, although i really dont have a timeline for them, are to try adding shuriken influence and “unlimted” resolution. I dont know how well they will work out, but you have to try, right?
Does it do mass conservation and and allow large differences in fluid weight (liquid vs air) so you could do a side view fluid simulation with gravity?
Is there anything in particular you are interested in that you are not seeing in the video, stills, or description?
I would be happy to try and answer any questions you have. Or setup a video showing something specific.
Off the top of my head, the only thing i can think that hasnt been talk about, is performance.
On my desktop which as a Nvidia 500 series video card, the scenes in the video achieve over 2000 fps (GPU).
On my super slow laptop which has a Radeon 6310 mobile integrated chip, the scenes in the video achieve over 700 fps. (when the laptop is plugged in)(GPU)
The influence actors batch in sets of either 4, 8 , or 16 depending on the number of them. There is no limit to the max number of influences. Texture influences are not batched, but are rendered individually.
Non texture influences are a procedural fall off which allows control over the sharpness of the falloff.
Procedural inputs are slightly cheaper than texture inputs, but a texture input can represent complex shapes and replace many procedural inputs.
@sabba2u
I have not tried it on mobile to see its performance. The display of Fluidsim should run very fast since its just a texture in a material. Most of the work in FluidSim is behind the scene and highly tunable.
The mobile platform would require rendertexture support to use the Unity Pro features and achieve the best performance. Since FluidSim supports either GPU or CPU it should work regardless of rendertexture support, but cpu performance will almost always be slower.
I have seen CPU calculated fluid sims on mobile that run at an efficient speed. Typically they are only 64 by 64 pixels or at most 128 pixels.
FluidSim is designed to allow maximum tunability. I expect the resolution, update rate and pressure iteration rate could be set to values that would make it run well on mobile.
I would be happy to work with someone who has access to mobile to make changes to FluidSim that are mobile specific.
Running FluidSim 1.1 with Unity 4.0.1f2, Pro with iPhone Pro (I’m targeting iOS)
I get this problem when running your example scene and a basic scene of my own with the grid and one actor:
RenderTexture.Create failed: format unsupported.
UnityEngine.RenderTexture:Create()
FluidSimScript:Start() (at Assets/FluidSim/Scripts/FluidSimScript.js:425)
I don’t get this when targeting desktop. Do you need to update to reflect slight differences in RenderTexture facilities on iOS (I do use RenderTexture in iOS apps available on the App Store)?
@kirkbowe
I have not seen or heard of that problem yet, thanks for reporting it. I am still on 4.0.0. I will try to track down an answer for you. FluidSim isnt doing anything different than what unity provides, so its interesting to me that other render textures are working for you.
Have you tried change any settings in the sim to narrow down the problem area?
I wonder if unity changed their supported formats for ios in f2…?
Once I know more, I will post, please let me know if you find any new information as I have not heard of anyone else with this issue.
@SimtropBuggi
3d is not currently implimented, but its “possible”. 3d has a very very high increase in perf cost so I focused first on 2d. for example, a 256x256 sim space turned 3d is 256 times the cost! (256x256x256). Adding 3d would be a matter of expanding the sim lookups to include up/down, etc. not impossible and there are many papers on it.
It could be used for rivers, but its not 100% the correct tool. you can see in the video that it “could” be used for that, but its similates something closer to gas than it does fluid. one of the reasons is that there isnt a difference between where there is “fluid” and where there isnt. where there is zero visible fluid is really just invisible fluid. A river is the iteraction between fluid, collision and air. FluidSim is closer to an interaction between smoke, collision and air.
