Angular velocity and rotation matrix

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on expressing angular velocity \(\omega\) as a function of parameters \(\xi\) using rotation matrices. It establishes that the variation of vector \(r\) can be represented in two ways, leading to the expression for \(\omega\) as \(\omega = \frac{\delta \varphi}{dt}\). The angular velocity tensor \(W(t)\) is introduced, which operates similarly to the cross product with \(\vec{r}\). The relationship between the time derivative of the orientation matrix \(A(t)\) and the angular velocity tensor is also explored, concluding that \(W\) is a pseudotensor rather than a true tensor. This discussion provides a mathematical framework for understanding angular velocity in relation to rotation matrices.
srpvx
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hello. Sorry for my English

There are R - rotation matrix (that performs transformation from associated coordinate system IE to static coordinate system OI) and \omega - angular velocity. The matrix R depends on parameters \xi (for example, Euler angles). I need to express \omega as function of \xi.

Let r^e - components of vector r in the associated coordinate system: r=Rr^{e} and r^{e}=R^{T}r. Than variation of vector r:
\delta r=\sum_{i}\frac{\partial Rr^{e}}{\partial\xi_{i}}\delta\xi_{i}= \sum_{i}\left(\frac{\partial R}{\partial\xi_{i}}\delta\xi_{i}\right)r^{e}= \sum_{i}\left(\frac{\partial R}{\partial\xi_{i}}\delta\xi_{i}\right)R^{T}r

On the other hand if I rotate r about l on angle \Delta\varphi then variation of r equals: \delta r=\Delta\varphi\left[l\times r\right]=\delta\varphi\times r, where \delta\varphi = \Delta \varphi l.

Comparing \delta r=\delta\varphi\times r with \delta r=\sum_{i}\left(\frac{\partial R}{\partial\xi_{i}}\delta\xi_{i}\right)R^{T}r, we get the following expression for omega:
\omega = \frac{\delta \varphi}{d t}
\left[\omega\times\right]=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0 &amp; -\omega_{3} &amp; \omega_{2}\\<br /> \omega_{3} &amp; 0 &amp; -\omega_{1}\\<br /> -\omega_{2} &amp; \omega_{1} &amp; 0\end{array}\right)=\sum_{i}\left(\frac{\partial R}{\partial\xi_{i}}\dot{\xi_{i}}\right)R^{T}

Is it right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I found the answer on my question at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_velocity" :
It can be introduced from rotation matrices. Any vector \vec r that rotates around an axis with an angular speed vector \vec \omega (as defined before) satisfies:

\frac {d \vec r(t)} {dt} = \vec{\omega} \times\vec{r}

We can introduce here the '''angular velocity tensor''' associated to the angular speed \omega:

W(t) = \begin{pmatrix}<br /> 0 &amp; -\omega_z(t) &amp; \omega_y(t) \\<br /> \omega_z(t) &amp; 0 &amp; -\omega_x(t) \\<br /> -\omega_y(t) &amp; \omega_x(t) &amp; 0 \\<br /> \end{pmatrix}

This tensor W(t) will act as if it were a (\vec \omega \times) operator :

\vec \omega(t) \times \vec{r}(t) = W(t) \vec{r}(t)

Given the orientation matrix A(t) of a frame, we can obtain its instant '''angular velocity tensor''' W as follows. We know that:

\frac {d \vec r(t)} {dt} = W \cdot \vec{r}

As angular speed must be the same for the three vectors of a rotating frame A(t), we can write for all the three:

\frac {dA(t)} {dt} = W \cdot A (t)

And therefore the angular velocity tensor we are looking for is:

W = \frac {dA(t)} {dt} \cdot A^{-1}(t)

But W is not a tensor, W is a pseudotensor: W_{ij} = e_{iwj} \omega_{w}.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top