I How to model and resolve a static non-interpenetration constraint

fermipasta
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
*Constraints (sorry the title got mangled)

I want to model N spherical points pi in R3 with masses mi and bounding radii of ri for 1 <= i <= N.

So I can write (N2-N)/2 inequality constraints:

Ci,j : ||pi - pj|| - ri - rj >= 0

for unique pairs of i,j.

Looking at the same problem for three independent "spheres" (intervals) in 1D, it is possible to visualize clearly since the configuration space is then R3, the solution is a geometric projection to the "planes" defined by each unique pair, and to take into account the mass is just to project the point in configuration space along the "mass plane" which is perpendicular to the "mass vector" (m1, m2, m3) to the solution. The solution (if the configuration point is inside one of these forbidden regions) is the nearest "external" point defined by these planes intersecting in the configuration space. This is not too hard to do, it's either the nearest plane (one contact) or a line defined by the intersection of two planes (two contacts).

I'm not sure how think about the configuration space for N spheres in R3. A single pair of spheres would create a 6D configuration space. My thinking may be: if two spheres are in contact, they have either 4 or 5 degrees of freedom in which they "stay in contact", so the configuration manifold for that constraint would be either 4D or 5D. Either sphere may move in two dimensions tangent to the contact point (4 total degrees of freedom). They could both move perpendicular to the contact in the same direction, maybe giving a 5th degree of freedom?

Anyway it seems (?) like a well-defined problem, I'm just not familiar with the usual formulation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I guess the solution surface is not a hyperplane! If I write the constraint explicitly in terms of x,y,z:
$$
(x_1-x_2)^2 + (y_1-y_2)^2 + (z_1-z_2)^2 - C = 0
$$
I think it defines some kind of hypercylinder. So at least it seems that its not a system of linear equations, maybe it's a quadratic programming problem.
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
Back
Top