Another Step Forward

[DaveRoot]

Here's a thought!  Consider tweaking FCB so that a variety of games can be played with it!

For example, display a photo of a knot and the player tries to diagram the knot in the shortest time.  On the "easy" level you could display a photo of a knot as well as a diagram of the knot, and the player tries to find and fix the errors in the diagram.

If you can get some basic animation to work, you could show an ant crawling along the rope in a diagram of a knot.  The diagram contains a number of erroneous crossings, and the player tries to fix the crossings before the ant reaches them so that the ant follows an unbroken path from start to finish.

Might stimulate some interest in knotting for the kiddos!

Dave

[DaveRoot]

FYI - Some interesting 3D photo technologies on the way!

http://make3d.stanford.edu/

http://mobile-stuffed.blogspot.com/2008/02/stanford-camera-chip-can-see-in-3d.html

Dave

[SS369]

Adding an "Undo" function would be a delightful boon to me, since I am impatient and subject to impetuous button pushing.
Once that is added to the program I will use is a bit more often.
S

[DerekSmith]

Well, there is a new 'kid' on the block and his wonderful KnotTyer3D program has blown away FCB42.

It includes an ultra simple click to draw utility, creates a small text based KT3 file for transfer, but most importantly, it renders the knot in 3D and even shows the knot 'growing' and then you can spin the knot around to view it from any perspective, above, below, end on etc etc.

This is an amazing little utility, it's free and if you have Win 2000 or XP then it is a very small download that runs without any need for messy 'Installation'.

Get the program and a load of sample diagrams here http://www.abbott.demon.co.uk/knottyer3d.html

From nothing to two programs and 3D animation in just a few short months - amazing.

Derek

[TheTreeSpyder]

i applaud all of your efforts and force thrown forwards.

The 3d effect in these 2dimensions has all ways been tough.  Especially the amount of times a line has to change depth and proving it by wrapping around, through other lines in a knot lacing, then hold and not move (where the eye can really take scrutiny).  i also think until Flash etc. comes up with a vectorized real time 3d, the file sizes will be large (and thus slow download speed).  But, then vectorized, gives computer commands, not pictures, so it is more cpu intensive/draining on resources in trade for the small filesize (of commands) that give the lower download speeds.  So, this all depends on the end user, and what their strengths are (cpu and or connection speed) in ratio to demands of the particular strategy.  Real time 3d has a lot steeper l-earning curve too IMLHO.  Thus, presently i think the 2 dimensions faked to 3 with masking and shading is presently

As far as categorizing; i think it should be a front of the shop/ back of the shop type.   In an electronics shop, the sorting for the customer sales and use, might not be the same as the back of the shop.   A rope to me, is like a conducting device; like a wire is to electricity.  The conducting device, carries the force if there is the equal and opposite calling it on the other end.   A front of the shop, might have a more external, end user sorting.  But the back of the shop, might sort stuff apart in components, or how those components lace together. They might know stuff down to the resistor, and how each resistor can take such a load and have such an effect to train and focus power to their bidding.   Also, how this component can be bound with others.  i think if you look at knots to understand them, you should do so into families by their properties and base components, like a periodic table, just to begin.  Then, also; this would bear out families suited to different things, or component strategies that are added to other knot base configurations to alter, add to, or just be named different.  The proper categorizing is important to get those borders in head, to then share observations of one amongst like types; thereby increasing all observations assigned for each; and making each observation more worthy to be taken.  Then, keep taking this knwledge to higher levels as it is unwrapped and digested, rinse and repeat as necessary.  As we have done with all else we take seriously in the sciences.  For, to me; this is science, with sines, cosines, frictions, efficiencies, deformations etc.; only the conducted force through the rope pipeline is in this case mechanical; just not the more familiar animations to see of electrical, water, pneumatic nor hydraulic conducted forces.  For force, is the only thing that can cause something to move, or stop something from moving.  And once ya know the ropes, they certainly do that!

[DerekSmith]

Charles Hamel recently challenged me to draw out this knot using the diagramming tool.


It took about ten minutes and of course, it is not as pretty as the hand crafted version, but here is the result:-



It has the impressive signature of 100110101010111100101010101110101010101000110010101000

If you load the attached cypher file into FCB utility and click Find, it will use the signature to take you right to the library webpage featuring the knot here http://theknotlibrary.wikidot.com/100110101010111100101010101110101010101000110010101000

Derek

[DerekSmith]

Hi KC,

I very much agree with your line of thinking.

In conversation with Charles Hamel, I have been trying to find ways of identifying a knot by its components.  The FCB utility has been useful in helping to visualise these aspects.  Take for example the simple Overhand Knot, normally depicted with the signature 101010 as in the side view shown here



But as you will see, in the plan view, it has a totally different signature 10011001 and in the 'end on' view it simply has the signature of 10.

Clearly the signature method is severely restricted to describing a knot from one perspective only and this is meaningless when in reality a knot exists in all perspectives at once.

Moving on from this, I have been experimenting with describing a knot as a number of components.

The principle component for the OH is the primary 'S' laid wrap of the two loaded lines which make a complete turn around one another.  Then each line makes a half turn and performs a single line 'Z' wrap over the the double line 'S' wrap section.

This is a better description of structure, yet it still totally fails to formulate the flows of forces within the knot when it goes to work.

I am intuitively led to believe that some marriage of force vectors based upon the the 'S' and 'Z' and turns structures will be where we eventually have to be able to describe, before we are indeed describing the essence of the knot itself.

My head hurts !!

Derek

[TheTreeSpyder]

i think we must see the curves as if pulley mounts; just with extra frictions.  Then we should speak in as you say a round turn around itself / another leg of line.  Then assess that the round turn would have 2 or 3 pulley bends at such and such a deflection.  Then assess; if this round turn would meet it's mount at a perpendicular angle (turns close together) or an inline angle (turns spread apart, longer distance for same amount of turns) like a splice, or yet even some mixture there of.  Then moderate for gradients in between.  Like by so much influence of each, like a sine/cosine scaling (for so much perpendicular and inline force together for total force potential at a given angle) to make up the whole assessed forces.

Then we have to look at the initiating force(s) and their directions, to then assess what direction the pulls are in these systems.  For example, if we have a U shape turn around a straight line at near a perpendicular angle.  It makes a difference if the force is coming in to the U shape and bending the straight line, or if the straight line is leaning back into the U in my mind.  Also, on which side of the friction buffer is higher tension, etc.  Thus, once again, just a microcosm of a larger rigging system with pulleys etc.; with some of the friction values etc. changed.  The same mechanics as all else, for under the same forces and the same math, on the same planet..

 

[DaveRoot]

7. For me, the dotted-line tiles make it easy to visualize that the rope is behind a spar.  Similarly, I suspect that dotted-line tiles would make it easy to visualize that the rope is behind another section of rope.  The current "crossing" tiles cause me to do some extra mental processing since they look different than the "spar crossing" tiles.

   This would be my #1 choice.  I'd like to see this in order to compare it with the current implementation of the "rope crossing" tiles.  This will bring consistency between the "spar crossing" tiles and the "rope crossing" tiles, and I think it will be visually clearer than the current implementation of the "rope crossing" tiles.

Derek,

Are you still making enhancements to the FCB utility?  If so, would it be difficult to add an option which will read in the pallet tiles from separate BMP files (instead of only being able to use the pallet tiles which are built into FCB)?

This would allow people to make their own BMP files (of the appropriate size) containing various sections of cord for building diagrams.  I have a few ideas to try out, but didn't want to re-build the wheel in .Net!   

Dave

[DerekSmith]

Hi Dave,

There seemed to be no interest in the utility, so although I use it myself, I stopped flogging the proverbial 'dead horse', especially as I think the next enhancements would have to be moving to 3D.  Then we had the recent release of two excellent 3D initiatives which I had hoped would take over the baton (albeit that they were lacking in structural identity analysis and library lookup functions).  Sadly, neither seems to be getting any more attention.

Re your enquiry for the option to utilise customised tiles and import a 'user bmp set'.  When I first wrote the utility, back at issue 1, I used the system whereby the selected bmp image was pasted onto the working grid, and had I stayed with that system, then indeed it would have been very easy to add the feature of using any user edited bmp set.  But very early on, Frank wanted the use of coloured cords to differentiate between two cord systems.  At that point, I completely rewrote the utility so that now it draws the lines instead of painting in a gif.  This gave me the option of being able to adapt the colour of the crossings to reflect the individual cord above or behind.  To have achieved this with bmp tiles I would have had to have made available six alternative colour combinations just for three cord colours and it would have made changing cord colours and thickness very hard to adopt in later revisions.

The gif tile panel now is simply a link to a descriptor set which defines entry and exit faces and calls the line draw routine to create that diagram wherever the paint mouse is clicked, plus a little bit of additional logic which looks at adjacent cells to identify a face entry from a cord of a different colour, then paint the over/under lines in the appropriate colours.  You may have noticed that the displayed shape does not exactly match the gif tile image, this is why.   At the moment, all these are hard coded, and to enable user modification, I would probably have to start off with producing a tile creator utility which allowed the user to create a pallet gif and drawing rule set for inclusion in a custom pallet, then mod the FCB utility to utilise a custom pallet instead of a hard coded pallet.  It would actually be easier to customise the code to match new gif tiles you develop.

Are you programming in Delphi?  I understand that Delphi has a .Net 'flavour'.

It would be good to have someone else involved in developing the utility, either in collaboration or even totally independently.  It is valuable to have someone to discuss options with when developing a new function.  Actually, I think there is considerable merit in rebuilding the wheel, in fact the next version of FCB will be a total rewrite based on utilising the lessons I have learnt from the work so far and the sort of functionality I need from a tool like this.  My first step would be to move from a simple flat cell matrix to a vector diagram model, because in truth, there are no such things as 'crossings', these are simply visualisations dependant upon viewing perspective.  Strangely, I have learnt a lot about knots since I started to develop this utility.  If you can spare the time, I would certainly recommend the journey to create your own flavour of 'wheel' and should you want company on the trip, you can count me in.

Let me know which way you would like to proceed.

Derek

[DaveRoot]

I use VB.Net at work, but I've never used Delphi.

I like how "clean-looking" the FCB diagrams are, but I don't find the crossings to be as easy to visualize as they are in a picture of a knot tied in rope.  In order to test out a different way to draw the lines, I used MS Paint to create 4 BMP files, then I simply copied and pasted them into Paint (rotating as necessary).  It wasn't as convenient and quick as using FCB, but it got the job done for my test case.

Here is a diagram of a Bowline which I did in FCB, plus another diagram which uses a different approach for drawing the lines.  To me, this new approach makes it easier and quicker to visualize the crossings.  In the third diagram I just wanted to see how the new idea would look with colors.

This line-drawing approach would require a few more "Line" commands than your current approach does, but it should be do-able without needing a "user bmp set."

Anyway, just another idea to toss into the mix!

Dave

[DerekSmith]

Dave,

Such a small change but such an amazing improvement, and relatively easy to implement into the present utility.  I will implement it and let you have the mod to play with and give me your feedback.

Derek

[DerekSmith]

Hi Dave,

Mod made as follows



I tried to email you the file but it bounced straight back, I guess because it is an exe file, so if you would like a play you can download it from here http://knotbox1.pbwiki.com/Dave-Root-FCB-Mod

I have only implemented the style for the connectors, curves and crossovers, so let me know what you think before I do any more work on it.

Derek

[DerekSmith]

Even the TH diagram from above is improved

[DaveRoot]

Nice!  You even added some shading!

I'll try out the new version today.

Dave