NVIDIA GameWorks Integration

[Andrew.Reidmeyer]

Looks for this '#define NVFLOW_SMP 0', set to 1, and see if it builds. Let me know if you hit any issues.

[MaximeDupart]

Should be possible to resolve the NvFlow/sea conflict by setting 'Translucency Sort Priority' so that the fire always renders on top of the sea.

Casting shadows onto the smoke will likely be added with a later release. The current self-shadowing is very self-contained, will require deeper engine interaction to receive and cast shadows with everything else.

Thanks for the heads-up Andrew ! Can't wait to see what's planned moving forward, i'll check this translucency priority.


edit: was catching up and read...

Just updated GitHub branch with moving grid support. Also includes refactored emitter substepping.

This is fantastic! can't wait to try this out !

[overfuze]

[MENTION=213912]Andrew.Reidmeyer[/MENTION], how should I set-up my assets to be collided with Flow ? I tried setting the collision to "block" under Flow checkbox, making convex collision inside the SM editor and using Distance Fields but for some reason the Flow simulation was ignoring it and kept simulating through it. Only thing I could get it to collide with were the stock UE cubes and spheres.

[MaximeDupart]

[MENTION=213912]Andrew.Reidmeyer[/MENTION], how should I set-up my assets to be collided with Flow ? I tried setting the collision to "block" under Flow checkbox, making convex collision inside the SM editor and using Distance Fields but for some reason the Flow simulation was ignoring it and kept simulating through it. Only thing I could get it to collide with were the stock UE cubes and spheres.

Have you tried adding flow emitter on collider with similar settings as the Sphere in the flame collision demo scene?

[Andrew.Reidmeyer]

[MENTION=213912]Andrew.Reidmeyer[/MENTION], how should I set-up my assets to be collided with Flow ? I tried setting the collision to "block" under Flow checkbox, making convex collision inside the SM editor and using Distance Fields but for some reason the Flow simulation was ignoring it and kept simulating through it. Only thing I could get it to collide with were the stock UE cubes and spheres.

The 'block' setting with the Flow collision channel is designed to provide a default collision configuration. Adding a Flow emitter component and using 'overlap' provides more tuning options.

I just tested the cone convex provided in the NvFlowPluginSamples with both block and overlap configurations and observed the simulation reacting to it.

The distance field part is orthogonal to basic collision. It is intended to supply low cost collision against static parts of the world, especially if GPU particles are already using it.

[andrewl0]

Looks for this '#define NVFLOW_SMP 0', set to 1, and see if it builds. Let me know if you hit any issues.

Hi Andrew,

I made the "#define NVFLOW_SMP 1" edit to my build and everything is now working great!

Many thanks for your help,

Andrew

BTW: If anyone is interested in a 4.15 Flow/VRWorks build please let me know and I'll post my branch to Github.

[Adolfo Domigues]

Hi guys, thanks for the great work.
I am creating a game using Flex and run into a problem. When using a flex softbody and an other object puts to much pressure on it the object clips inside the softbody. Is there any way to make the collision absolute so the other object just deforms the softbody more and more if the pressure gets more without ever clipping inside?

[Koniferus]

I'm playing around with Flow in a procedural generated level that is massive in size - one thing I'm quickly noticing is that flow requires the effects to take place inside of a grid asset.

I'm guessing for a large world, you would want to spawn a flow actor right before you use the effect? I'm not sure if that's better than keeping one flow grid and moving it every few frames to center on the player as he moves about. When I move the grid actor in game, all of the effects restart - so that seems incorrect to me as well...

For non-static, or large levels, how is everyone handling this?

[SteveElbows]

When I move the grid actor in game, all of the effects restart - so that seems incorrect to me as well...

Moving grid support was only added to the version on github a few days ago - have you got that version? If so there is an example scene where the position of the grid is continually changing but the effect renders as normal. The emitter in the example doesnt move so unless you have the grid selected and can see its bounds moving/see position values changing in the details pane it's not even obvious that its happening.

[Waroth]

Hey guys, sorry this is a bit unrelated to the main stream of topics --- but does anyone know what's causing this error I'm getting? I'm using tessellation on a material in the official VXGI 4.15 Branch: https://github.com/NvPhysX/UnrealEngine/tree/VXGI-4.15

Error [SM5] MobileBasePassVertexShader.usf(39,3-43): error X3000: unrecognized identifier 'FForwardShadingBasePassInterpolantsVSToPS'

GalaxyMan mentioned that FForwardShadingBasePassInterpolantsVSToPS was renamed in 4.13 but I couldn't find what it's supposed to be now, can anyone help me please?

[MaximeDupart]

Hey guys, sorry this is a bit unrelated to the main stream of topics --- but does anyone know what's causing this error I'm getting? I'm using tessellation on a material in the official VXGI 4.15 Branch: https://github.com/NvPhysX/UnrealEngine/tree/VXGI-4.15

Error [SM5] MobileBasePassVertexShader.usf(39,3-43): error X3000: unrecognized identifier 'FForwardShadingBasePassInterpolantsVSToPS'

GalaxyMan mentioned that FForwardShadingBasePassInterpolantsVSToPS was renamed in 4.13 but I couldn't find what it's supposed to be now, can anyone help me please?

yes, i submitted a fix for this on github. In GalaxyMan merge to 4.13 he actually skipped this (this is a hard thing to catch really, unless being extremely precise), i was looking to solve the particle emitter issue with VXGI on 4.15 and stepped onto this while checking previous build update. If you go on the VXGI branch and check the pull request you should see a "Fix for VXGI 4.15" which should solve your issue.
But if you want a fully working VXGI build, i'll suggest using the 4.14.3 version and apply this same fix.

This is the actual fix to bypass the Tesselation issue someone asked about a couple pages earlier.

[Koniferus]

Moving grid support was only added to the version on github a few days ago - have you got that version? If so there is an example scene where the position of the grid is continually changing but the effect renders as normal. The emitter in the example doesnt move so unless you have the grid selected and can see its bounds moving/see position values changing in the details pane it's not even obvious that its happening.

Awesome and thank you! I didn't expect such a simple answer. I downloaded the .zip from github like a week ago so I bet I'm missing it!

So when it comes to grids, are multiple grids bad? Meaning if I have two dragons walking around breathing fire, should each have a grid? Or should I make something that logically creates the grid between the two.

For my FPS character, I want his spells to be flow, so I know he'll need a grid. Anyone that comes into range would automatically be in it, but what about multiple NPCs firing Flow effects at each other? Or two dragons that are far apart - each would need a grid, but as they came closer together, they would share one? I feel like I'm getting a grip on this lol. Please let me know if I'm totally off here.

EDIT: I got movable grids working after downloading the latest version! Thank you!!!

[Rafał Potoczek]

Hi, I have a question. Has anyone was able to make water using Flex looking amazing? Here it's awsome: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEX13W-IuLA But in demos in UE4 water looks strange: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nsD88vqNbI
I tried change some properites, but it could't get good effect. In my opinion all fluids looks very dense and like everthing else is hydrofobic.

[Koniferus]

Hi, I have a question. Has anyone was able to make water using Flex looking amazing? Here it's awsome: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEX13W-IuLA But in demos in UE4 water looks strange: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nsD88vqNbI
I tried change some properites, but it could't get good effect. In my opinion all fluids looks very dense and like everthing else is hydrofobic.

After looking at your video, it looks like the velocity of the flex particles is way to high. "Behind the scenes" flex is just a bunch of little collision spheres and the water mesh is generated around them, meshing together if balls are close enough to each other. In your video, it looks like the balls are flying violently out of the sprout and agitating all of the other balls in the pool and also causing a lot of them to bounce high into the air.

If you turn down the 'nozzle velocity' does the water flow more elegantly into the room?

I'm looking at this, and this guy seems to have his pouring out far less violently, resulting in smoother water.

Also, if you turn of the flex emitter, does the water calm down or does it continue to act so wild?

[Nigkdo]

Hi guys especially from Nvidia team.

Did anybody tried to enable physx grb in ue4? According to physxinfo, switching to grb should be relatively easy. In latest 4.16 preview is this "Fixed! UE-44486 Enable physx libs GPU hooks", so i asked "What does UE-44486 Enable physx libs GPU hooks mean? Can we enable physx GRB? " and answer was "No - this just adds the relevant hooks in the UE4 version of PhysX, so it is more possible to get GPU PhysX libs from NVIDIA. You'd still need to talk to them though, GRB is not something that we support at the moment. ". So here I am. Any comment from Nvidia team on GRB? Is it planned for ue4? Thanks in advance for reply.