Question on rotational transform matrix, I

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the derivation of equations related to rotational transformation matrices in robotics, specifically from Tadej Bajd's book. The user seeks clarification on the similarity of triangles referenced in the text and how to apply them to derive the equations for x and z. After sharing a screenshot and additional notes, the user successfully grasps the concepts, particularly how the equations relate to the angles and lengths involved. The conversation highlights the importance of visual aids in comprehending complex mathematical proofs. Ultimately, the user expresses gratitude for the assistance received, indicating a clearer understanding of the topic.
cncnewbee
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I'm reading a book called Robotics, written by Tadej Bajd on my own to learn about robotics and have no one else to put my questions other than to the forums.

Here the writer on 11th page writes:

"By considering the similarity of triangles in Figure 2.3, it is not difficult to derive
the following two equations
x..."

where I can't get which triangles to look for similarities as there could be various (I'm no expert in math) and also, can't get how the formula is derived. Please explain

screen shot of book:
i46.tinypic.com/30i9nih.png

Thank you in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
look at the attachment, I have added new points and lines to your picture to make the proof clear.

We have:x= AB+BC
but BC = x' cos (beta)
and AB = TM sin beta + Mx' sin beta
= (TM+Mx') sin beta
= Tx' sin(beta)
= z' sin (beta) (because Tx' parallel to z')

hence x= x' cos beta + z' sin beta

Similarly,

z = CK -zK
but CK= z' cos(beta)
and zK= z'D= Tz'sin(beta)= x' sin(beta)

hence

z= z'cos beta - (x'sin beta)
 

Attachments

  • 30i9nih-new.png
    30i9nih-new.png
    16.2 KB · Views: 450
Quantumjump said:
look at the attachment, I have added new points and lines to your picture to make the proof clear.

Thanks you very much! Now I understand it clearly!
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top