2D construction made of square blocks. Breaking by gravity

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around creating a computer program that simulates a construction system using a single type of block on a grid, where gravity affects the blocks' stability. Key challenges include calculating the pressure each block experiences from those above it and determining the torque or pulling forces on blocks in horizontal constructions. The user has developed a method for identifying which blocks support others but encounters issues when using wider supporting pillars, as they fail to distribute weight evenly. Additionally, they seek guidance on measuring the cumulative forces acting on blocks, particularly in irregular shapes. The conversation emphasizes the need for resources to better understand these physical principles and improve the algorithm's accuracy.
thomasvt
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hi,

Imagine: a computer program like 2D Lego with only 1 type of block (a small square one) with which you can create constructions.

Blocks can be placed on an invisible grid. There is gravity, and boxes can't fly, so you need to build any construction from the ground up. Boxes are always "glued" to their immediate neighbours, so you can create anything you like, as long as you abide by some simplified physics that will be explained below.

Blocks have mass, and hence, weight.

Blocks don't leave their gridcell position because of bending or deforming, that does not exist. They only can do a few things for which I need to:

* calculate the pressure for each block due to the mass of blocks that it supports.
* calculate torque or pulling forces due to vertically hanging boxes or horizontal constructions with groundsupport only on one end so the other side causes a torque due to gravity.

For now, I actually would like some directions in reading material that could help solving the mini-problems in this system to combine them in an iterative system with cumulating forces.

Due to a lack of knowing how this physically works in reality, I think, I'm making mistakes in the abstraction of reality to my simplified system because i get some problems.

I have done a lot myself already, but have some anomalies in my algorithm. But because a session time-out deleted my last big attempt to post the entire story, I don't feel like redoing that work unless someone is interested in guiding me through this.

So for now I'm hoping for some magical resource that explains me some questions:

* when creating a construction with boxes resting on one or more supporting walls of boxes, how can I generically (iteratively) find out which block supports which other blocks so each block knows its pressure.

I had a system for this, but it has a flaw when using a supporting pillar of width > 2. Only the left and rightmost columns of boxes of the pillar support almost the entire structure above, the middle columns of boxes does almost nothing.

My system uses a shortest-path-to-ground technique to find out what boxes carry whichother boxes. And if a wide construction is put on a pillar of 3 boxes width, the entire left side of the construction rests on the leftmost column of the pillar, and the right side of the construction rests on the rightmost column op the pillar. Both, because that is their shortest path to the ground. Any middle column of the pillar is ignored and carries almost nothing.

* when creating a horizontal construction, the further you go horizontally, the more weight is wanting to go down which causes a torque on each box which cumulates depending on how many boxes are hanging further down the road. I want to know how to measure this cumulating force by seeing how two boxes that are glued together react on each other in function of gravity. I have a system now that keeps track of forces in the four corners of each box, and deals with most of the problem, but something tells me it's not entirely correct.

So, thanks for reading 'til here, thanks even more for answering :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let me replace the question above by its essence:

I have irregularly (and unpredicatbly) shaped objects. These objects are composed of square boxes with all the same mass m.

The boxes are glued together to form the irregular object.

Two examples:

http://www.redarcher.net/examples.gif

These two objects are glued to the ground (the line below each example).

Now, I need a generic way to calculate for each box of such objects:
* the pressure it is enduring (due to the mass above) e.g the blue box in the upper example carries about 1/3 of the total mass, but how do I know this?
* hanging boxes pull downward: this makes the glue between boxes endure a pulling force (green lines) or a torque (red lines). Can i calculate this?

The second one will have to do with keeping track of the forces in the four corners of each box.


I have solved quite a bit of the puzzle already, but have some problems, so I would like your ideas.

Any solutions or suggestions on things i can read to understand this better?

thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top