Voronoi will allow more control and options, but for the PhysX demolition to limit the fragmentation to a radius area, Mir may have to add some new tools and systems to the engine, so we could customize a cutoff point for the fragmentation.
RayFire Tool
mir-vadim
#882
Hey, just came back from Moscow from CG seminar organized by RealTime School.
And here small rendered video demonstration of new Interactive Demoliion with Voronoi Fragmentation type. Simple scene, one metal box, one concrete column, and 3000 fragments at the end. 
HD - 4MB
http://www.mirvadim.com/videos/rend/RF143_column_HD.mov
LQ - 1MB
http://www.mirvadim.com/videos/rend/RF143_column_LQ.mov
As You can see new fragmentation type gives very realistic and PhysX “friendly” result.
So, one of the main problem of previous versions: realistic fragmentation and crazy simulation or not realistic fragmentation and stable simulation SOLVED.
Now we can do the both. :bounce:
Wicked
#884
Me too Hristo
First; very nice vid!
Second; what I see a lot in vids is that a object almost always gets 100% demolished. Is it possible to demolish, lets say, 50% of a object? Depending on the speed/mass of the impact object?
(Still haven’t worked with Rayfire…)
mir-vadim
#885
Well, for now only whole geometry can be demolished, but I already have few ideas how implement feature You asking. I guess it will be implemented in next minor or major build.
TwiiK
#886
Looks very nice, but the main issue I have with the realism of rayfire is how the secondary fractures happen. (I think I’m talking about fracture relative to object here)
Let’s say I launch an object at a pillar of concrete at insane speeds. I would either chip off some small pieces, break the pillar in half or pulverize the pillar. But no matter how hard I launched the object the pillar would still be concrete and no secondary fractures would happen from the pieces of concrete falling to the floor.
If you look at the last example how some of the pillar break into almost dust, even from just falling tiny distances, while other pieces remain big isn’t particularly realistic. It seems almost like it’s random and not like the fracturing is based of the velocity the piece of debris is traveling.
Not sure if i’m explaining what I mean properly or if this is already possible in rayfire.
btw, If I install a 32-bit copy of max will I then be able to utilize physX or is it depending on the OS itself? I want to test these things. 
mir-vadim
#887
Hey, there is Demolition depth level property which defines depth of objects fragmentation.
In this demo I used value 2. This mean that after Impact red box break column on 50 fragments as I remember. And value 2 means that each fragment with proper collision force can be demolished again, and so on. There is one property which can limit further demolition in case object is too small, and later I will add another few.
PhysX works nice with 32 bit max. but which OS You use?
TwiiK
#888
64-bit. I thought that was implied.
Guess that’s a no then seeing as you asked.
Vista btw, if that matters.
mir-vadim
#889
Oh, sorry.
PhysX plugin doesn’t care which OS (32 or 64 bit) You use.
32 bit Max is all what it wants.
#Edited for new page:
Column demolition:
HD - 4MB
http://www.mirvadim.com/videos/rend/RF143_column_HD.mov
LQ - 1MB
http://www.mirvadim.com/videos/rend/RF143_column_LQ.mov
TwiiK
#890
Great, guess I can test it out some myself later today then.
Do you have some specs for the pillar example? Simulation time, computer used for simulating, number of fragments?
Curious whether that is some of the more high end stuff you can get with a decent rig or just a quick test.
thomaskc
#891
Well I can tell you that latest I posted with the voronoi and the older (sorry for posting it again)
http://thomaskc.dk/wip/3dsmax/camp_test_.mov
Was both done on my laptop 2,5ghz core2 duo, and the camp test has around 8300 objects after fragmentation. still it only takes minutes to calculate!
The voronoi test was a bit slower, but only because the fragmentations were done while calculating and that there were lots of objects.
But basicly its not heavy at all in that kind of scale atleast.
Jake0
#892
Hey guys!
Quick question about using pflow with rayfire fragments, I know after telling raying to add seperate material id’s to the fragmented faces you can use pflow and position object with density by material to spawn particles from the “damage” faces, but I can only get it to cleanly work if the material applied to the damage faces is white, and the rest of the fragment is black. As I only want particles (debris) being spawning from the damage faces. It works, but how do you go about applying a texture to to the overal objects? As the density just changes due to the map… I’ve got it work by simply using the above method, caching it, then changing the maps for render… but just wondering if there’s a better way?
ArtiZta
#895
So, for now we still have to wait for PhysX support from Nvidia in 64Bit Max? Or I’m missing some plugins I have to install to use PhysX in RayFire with 64Bit Max?
Steve_Green
#896
You can use Rayfire with 64-bit Max, but only using Reactor, not PhysX.
Until there’s 64-bit PhysX support in general, that is.
- Steve
ArtiZta
#897
Yes, what I meant is the PhysX, strangely in this 64bit XP, physx is supported, it has the driver/software installed from nvidia. Running PhysX system software.
SoLiTuDe
#898
Physx works fine on 64-bit windows as a 32-bit application… meaning that while it will work on 64-bit windows, with other 32-bit applications, it won’t work with a 64-bit application such as 3ds max 64, but will with 3ds max 32.
ArtiZta
#900
I apologize, I made a post 2 minutes before I finally got the solution on my question… and can’t erase it.
The question was about breaking through and object with animated object where the animated object is not effected by the dynamic simulation.