How do I rotate an inertia tensor in Cartesian coordinates?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bugatti79
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix Operations
AI Thread Summary
To rotate an inertia tensor D in Cartesian coordinates through +90 degrees in the y-axis and -90 degrees in the z-axis, the rotation matrices N_y and N_z are defined. The order of multiplication is crucial, with N_R being the product of N_z and N_y. The discussion centers on whether the new system tensor is represented as N_R D N'_R or N'_R D N_R. It is established that N_R D N'_R correctly transforms the tensor, maintaining the relationship between the axes, particularly noting that I_{zz} in the new system corresponds to I_{xx} in the old system. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding vector transformations in this context.
bugatti79
Messages
786
Reaction score
4
Hi Folks,

I have an inertia tensor D in the old Cartesian system which i need to rotate through +90 in y and -90 in z to translate to the new system. I am using standard right hand rule notation for this Cartesian rotation.

##D= \mathbf{\left(\begin{array}{lll}I_{xx}&I_{xy}&I_{xz}\\I_{yx}&I_{yy}&I_{yz}\\I_{zx}&I_{zy}&I_{zz}\\\end{array}\right)}##, ##N_y(+90)=\mathbf{\left(\begin{array}{lll}0&0&1\\0&1&0\\-1&0&0\\\end{array}\right)}##, ##N_z(-90)=\mathbf{\left(\begin{array}{lll}0&1&0\\-1&0&0\\0&0&1\\\end{array}\right)}##

If we let

##N_R=N_z N_y## (I am pre-multiplying ##N_y## by ##N_z## because that is the order) and the transpose ##N'_R=N_R^T##.

Is the the new system tensor ##N_RDN'_R## or ##N'_RDN_R##...?

Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Imagine how a vector in the new system would come in: the matrix on the right side would transform this vector to your old system, then the old matrix is applied, then the matrix on the left side transforms it back to your new coordinate system.
 
mfb said:
Imagine how a vector in the new system would come in: the matrix on the right side would transform this vector to your old system, then the old matrix is applied, then the matrix on the left side transforms it back to your new coordinate system.
Hi mbf,

Not sure I follow. Can you clarify a bit?
Thanks
 
If v is a vector in your new coordinate system, does ##N_R v## or ##N'_R v## represent the vector in the original coordinate system?
This will be used in the product ##N_R D N_R v## (with the right ' added).
 
mfb said:
Imagine how a vector in the new system would come in: the matrix on the right side would transform this vector to your old system, then the old matrix is applied, then the matrix on the left side transforms it back to your new coordinate system.

I still haven't grasp your idea of a vector to cross-check. However, I know from a clue that the value of ##I_{zz}## in the new system has to be the same as ##I_{xx}## in the old system because "z axis new" lines up with "x axis old" and so ##N_R D N'_R## does this for me.

However, in the event of no clue, I am still not clear how to use a vector...

Thanks
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Back
Top