Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

Making Animated Fluids Look More Realistic

By retooling physical equations, researchers are allowing computer-animated fluids to flow more naturally.

By Kate Greene

Wednesday, January 31, 2007

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

Behind the scenes of most movie special effects are computers crunching intense mathematical equations. And some of the most complex types of animation equations describe fluid motion: anything from lava flow to an explosion to the rise and disappearance of smoke rings. But many times, the equations available to animators aren't good enough to accurately represent and control fluids, says Mathieu Desbrun, professor of computer science at the California Institute of Technology, in Pasadena. In order to make fluid animation look good enough, he says, some animators opt to draw it by hand--a time-consuming process.

The spinning liquid in this snow globe obeys new equations for computer simulations developed at Caltech. The researchers claim that these equations render liquid motion that’s more realistic than what is possible with today’s computer animation software.
Credit: Mathieu Desbrun, Applied Geometry Lab, Caltech
Multimedia
•  Watch smoke obey the new fluid-dynamics equations
•  Watch a liquefying character obey the new fluid-dynamics equations

But Desbrun's research could make fluids flow more nicely on screen. He and his team are developing an entirely new approach to fluid motion, based on new mathematics called discrete differential geometry, that use equations designed specifically to be solved by computers rather than people. Ultimately, he says, they have the potential to cut the cost and time of making a piece of animation. "Now that we're using computers, it's a whole new ball game," he says.

Before computers, Desbrun explains, mathematicians and physicists developed equations for the motion of objects such as solids and fluids, and many of them were solvable by hand. Over the past few decades, it became clear that computers could be used to solve many of the more difficult equations, so computer scientists and mathematicians took the known set of equations and tried to modify them for the task. They reworked the equations explaining the physical rules, effectively breaking them into hundreds of numerous chunks so that the digital brain of a computer, which is good at working on a lot of these chunks at one time, could solve them.

While much successful work has been done using this approach, says Desbrun, these equations still only approximate motion, and they tend to produce unnaturally flowing liquids. For instance, in the case of a whirlpool, over time the traditional approach introduces errors into the motion, producing artificial viscosity: the visual result is a swirling whirlpool that slows down for no obvious reason. An animator must step in to modify the frames to make sure that the liquid keeps moving the right way.

Desbrun's approach is to write new equations that are based on physical properties that aren't expressed in the traditional equations. For instance, traditional equations include information about the velocity of a liquid, and this is used to approximate, or provide an inexact description of, a liquid's motion if it starts to swirl around. But Desbrun's equations bypass simple velocity and instead describe the swirling motion exactly, and in a way that computers can easily crunch. "Instead of just approximating them, we can capture the dynamics faithfully," he says. "And we show it pays off visually."

Tags

animation

Comments

  • isnt cfd the norm now
    i was under the impression that products such as real flow from nextlimit( and many others) allready use real physics on a day to day basis. i feel the art's community just needs more crunch power and make use of what the physics community would think of as the norm
    Rate this comment: 12345

    daviest
    02/02/2007
    Posts:7
    Avg Rating:
    2/5
    • Re: isnt cfd the norm now
      Shallowest article I have ever seen.

      Mechanical engineers have been solving the Navier-Stokes equations for decades.  There are no "new" equations.  Newton's laws tell you how things (including fluids) move.  Just because computer scientist have been guessing and doing it wrong for the last few years doesn't mean everyone else hasn't been doing it right for decades.  Search the Journal of Compuational Physics under Navier-Stokes and you will get millions of hits.  Desbrun is just a typical arrogant Caltech computer scientist.

      Kate - a pretty picture doesn't mean their is content or creativity, and Caltech means luck and politics not superior thought. 
      Rate this comment: 12345

      perot
      02/06/2007
      Posts:1

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement

Videos

Malleable Maps, Artistic Robots and Bubble Interfaces
Technology Review January/February 2010

Current Issue

Security in the Ether
Information technology's next grand challenge will be to secure the cloud--and prove we can trust it.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES
Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2010 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.