MHB How is Radius of Curvature Computed for a Given Curve?

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the computation of the radius of curvature for a given curve, specifically addressing a potential typo in the formula presented. It clarifies that the relationship between the derivatives is correctly defined, with the term 2 being expressed as $\upsilon^2 \frac{d\hat{T}}{d\psi}\rho$. The radius of curvature, denoted as $\rho$, is defined as the ratio of arc length $ds$ to the angle $d\psi$, leading to $\frac{d\psi}{ds} = \frac{1}{\rho}$. The participants confirm that while the definition was misquoted, the actual application of the definition in the equations remains accurate. Understanding these relationships is crucial for correctly computing the radius of curvature.
WMDhamnekar
MHB
Messages
378
Reaction score
30
How did the author compute the highlighted term 2 from the highlighted term 1 in the following answer to the given question?

If $\rho =\frac{d\psi}{ds}$, then the term 2 should be $\upsilon^2 \frac{d\hat{T}}{d\psi}\rho$, but instead, it was written $\frac{\upsilon^2}{\rho}\frac{d\hat{T}}{d\psi}$

How is that computed? How to compute radius of curvature($\kappa$) if $\frac{d\hat{T}}{ds}= \kappa\hat{N}$

1626960504370.png

1626960525120.png
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It's a typo. Look at the units real quick. s has units of length and [math]\psi[/math] in is radians (or so I suppose, to make the derivatives right), which means [math]\psi[/math] is essentially unitless. So [math]\dfrac{d \psi }{ds}[/math] has units of 1 / length. Thus it's reasonable to suppose that [math]\dfrac{d \psi }{ds} = \dfrac{1}{ \rho }[/math]. You can look up the formula online... I checked it.

-Dan
 
To add to topsquark's answer, the radius of curvature is the radius of the circle that "fits" the curve.
If we traverse an angle $d\psi$ on a circle with radius $\rho$, we traverse an arc length of $ds=\rho\,d\psi$.
In other words, by definition we have $\rho = \frac{ds}{d\psi}$, which we can also write as $\frac{d\psi}{ds}=\frac 1\rho$ by the inverse function theorem.

This is also what the actual equation (4) and subsequent equations show. They just misquoted the definition of radius of curvature, but they did apply the real definition correctly.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
879
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
583
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
2K