I Frame Transformation in rigid bodies

AI Thread Summary
Understanding frame transformations in rigid body dynamics requires careful attention to notation and the distinction between active and passive transformations. When transforming linear and angular velocities from one reference frame, F_1, to another, F_2, the velocities in F_2 can be calculated using the transformation equations that incorporate the rotation matrix. Specifically, the linear velocity in F_2 is derived from the linear velocity in F_1 and the angular velocity, while the angular velocity in F_2 is obtained by applying the rotation matrix to the angular velocity in F_1. It is crucial to consider the handedness of the coordinate systems when performing these transformations, particularly for angular velocities. Properly applying these principles allows for accurate kinematic analysis in robotics.
Dunky
Messages
9
Reaction score
1
I'm using rigid body dynamics/kinematics in robotics stuff but I don't have a background in mechanics, I'm interested in understanding the kinematics of frame transformations for rigid bodies.

Suppose we have two reference frames fixed on a rigid body, F_1 and F_2 and a transformation T which takes F_1 to F_2. Suppose we have the linear and angular velocities of the object wrt F_1, how do we get them wrt to F_2?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You will want to search for rigid-body kinematics. The topic is straight forward, but requires rigor in notation to avoid mixing up the multitude of ways the direction of transform can be interpreted, and this notation often varies wildly so be careful when comparing sources. This notation complexity is especially true if you also want to venture into dynamics.

However, with the right assumptions what you seek is simple enough.
Assume you have a constant coordinate change rotation ##R^{B\gets C}## for two Cartesian coordinate systems B and C then any vector ##v## (including linear and angular velocity and acceleration) coordinated in C as ##v^C## transforms like ##v^B = R^{B\gets C} v^C##. In case you are using 4x4 matrices note you only need the 3x3 rotation part to transform vectors.

I note you said "a transformation T which takes F_1 to F_2" and this sounds to me like T could be an active transform and not a passive coordinate change (because the transform "moves" frames not changing coordinates). If so, the coordinate change you are looking for is the inverse of T. In a more rigorous notation that means ##T^{F_2\gets F_1} = (T_{F_2\gets F_1}^{F_1})^{-1}## where names in superscript indicate (passive) coordinate systems and subscript indicate (active) frames.
 
Last edited:
Dunky said:
...two reference frames fixed on a rigid body, F_1 and F_2 ... linear and angular velocities of the object wrt F_1
Since F_1 is fixed to the object, the velocities of the object wrt F_1 are always zero, which is probably not what you mean. As @Filip Larsen noted, you have to be very precise and explicit in describing what the transformations do.
 
Filip Larsen said:
Assume you have a constant coordinate change rotation ##R^{B\gets C}## for two Cartesian coordinate systems B and C then any vector ##v## (including linear and angular velocity and acceleration) coordinated in C as ##v^C## transforms like ##v^B = R^{B\gets C} v^C##.
@Dunky Just be careful if B and C have different handedness (left hand vs right hand system). Since angular velocity and angular acceleration are pseudo-vectors, they need to be negated when being transformed like that. This doesn't apply to linear velocity tough.
 
  • Like
Likes Filip Larsen
To obtain linear and angular velocities of an object relative to the second frame \(F_2\) based on data on velocities relative to the first frame \(F_1\), you can use formulas for changing kinematics. The linear speed \(v_2\) of the object relative to \(F_2\) is equal to \(v_2 = v_1 + \omega_1 \times r\), where \(v_1\) is the linear speed of the object relative to \(F_1\), \(\omega_1 \) is the angular velocity of the object relative to \(F_1\), and \(r\) is the distance vector from the beginning of \(F_1\) to the beginning of \(F_2\) in the system \(F_1\). The angular velocity of the object relative to \(F_2\), \(\omega_2\), is equal to \(\omega_2 = R \omega_1\), where \(R\) is the rotation matrix that transforms vectors from \(F_1\) to \( F_2\).
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top