Velocities due to angular rates

  • Thread starter Thread starter steenaap
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Angular
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the velocity of a point on a rotating body using angular rate sensors. Two approaches were proposed for deriving the relationship between the cross product of vectors in different reference frames. It was established that the transformation of cross products is valid only when the transformation matrix is orthogonal. The mathematical representation of the cross product using a matrix operator was also discussed, highlighting its implications in dynamic mechanics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of angular rate sensors and their applications in dynamics.
  • Familiarity with vector cross products and their properties.
  • Knowledge of transformation matrices, particularly orthogonal matrices.
  • Basic proficiency in MATLAB for computational validation of concepts.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of orthogonal matrices and their role in transformations.
  • Learn about vector calculus, specifically focusing on cross products and their applications in physics.
  • Explore MATLAB functions for matrix operations and vector transformations.
  • Investigate the implications of angular motion in rigid body dynamics.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for mechanical engineers, physicists, and students studying dynamics, particularly those interested in rotational motion and vector analysis.

steenaap
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Dear all, I am missing some insight concerning dynamic mechanics:

1. Problem statement
A angular rate sensor is attached to a massive body. I would like to calculate the velocity of a certain point on that body due to rotational motion of the body itself.

Homework Equations


The whole problem, equations and question have been described in detail in a http://members.lycos.nl/eyefragm/question.pdf" file

The Attempt at a Solution


I proposed two approaches. Who can tell me which one is wrong and why. I cannot figure it out myselve.

Many thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
They are both correct. The cross product of two vectors in represented in some frame A is another vector in that frame. Transforming this into another frame B,

[tex](\mathbf u \times \mathbf v)_B =<br /> \boldsymbol T_{A\to B} \, (\mathbf u_A \times \mathbf v_A)[/tex]

Reference frames are just a representation technique. The position vector from point a to point b is the same vector in all reference frames; it just has different representations in difference frames. he cross product is a pseudo vector rather than a true vector. Pseudo transforms from one frame to another given a proper transformation. (They do not transform under reflection, which is why they are called pseudo vectors). Assuming a transformation from one right-handed system to another, we must have

[tex] \mathbf u_B \times \mathbf v_B<br /> = (\boldsymbol T_{A\to B}\,\mathbf u_A) \times (\boldsymbol T_{A\to B}\,\mathbf v_A)<br /> = \boldsymbol T_{A\to B}(\mathbf u_A \times \mathbf v_A)[/tex]One way to look at the cross product is to view [itex]\mathbf u \times[/itex] as an operator that acts on some vector [itex]\mathbf v[/itex] that produces the cross product of the two vectors:

[tex](\mathbf u \times) \mathbf v = \mathbf u \times \mathbf v[/tex]

This in turns suggests determining if a corresponding matrix operator exists that yields the exact same vector for all vectors v as does the cross product operator. The cross product matrix generated from some vector

[tex]\mathbf u = \bmatrix u_x \\ u_y \\u_z\endbmatrix[/tex]

is

[tex]\boldsymbol X(\mathbf u) \equiv<br /> \bmatrix<br /> 0 & -u_z & \phantom{-}u_y \\<br /> \phantom{-}u_z & 0 & -u_x \\<br /> -u_y & \phantom{-}u_x & 0\endbmatrix[/tex]

does exactly that. This matrix transforms the vector cross product into a matrix-vector product:

[tex]\mathbf u \times \mathbf v<br /> = (\mathbf u \times) \mathbf v<br /> = \boldsymbol X(\mathbf u)\,\mathbf v[/tex]

A column vector transforms from frame A to frame B via

[tex]\mathbf u_B = \boldsymbol T_{A\to B} \, \mathbf u_A[/tex]

The cross product matrix, on the other hand, transforms via the matrix transformation rule

[tex]\boldsymbol X(\mathbf u_B) =<br /> \boldsymbol T_{A\to B} \,<br /> \boldsymbol X(\mathbf u_A) \,<br /> \boldsymbol T_{A\to B}^{\;\;\;T}<br /> = \boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol T_{A\to B}\,\mathbf u_A)[/tex]

The proof of the above is left as an exercise to the reader. With this one can examine whether

[tex] (\boldsymbol T_{A\to B}\,\mathbf u_A) \times (\boldsymbol T_{A\to B}\,\mathbf v_A)<br /> = \boldsymbol T_{A\to B}(\mathbf u_A \times \mathbf v_A)[/tex]

Step by step,

[tex] \begin{aligned}<br /> (\boldsymbol T_{A\to B}\,\mathbf u_A) \times<br /> (\boldsymbol T_{A\to B}\,\mathbf v_A)<br /> &=<br /> ((\boldsymbol T_{A\to B}\,\mathbf u_A) \times)<br /> (\boldsymbol T_{A\to B}\,\mathbf v_A) \\<br /> &=<br /> (\boldsymbol X(\boldsymbol T_{A\to B}\,\mathbf u_A))\,<br /> (\boldsymbol T_{A\to B}\,\mathbf v_A) \\<br /> &=<br /> (\boldsymbol T_{A\to B} \,<br /> \boldsymbol X(\mathbf u_A) \,<br /> \boldsymbol T_{A\to B}^{\;\;\;T}) \,<br /> (\boldsymbol T_{A\to B}\,\mathbf v_A) \\<br /> &=<br /> \boldsymbol T_{A\to B} \,<br /> \boldsymbol X(\mathbf u_A) \,<br /> \boldsymbol T_{A\to B}^{\;\;\;T} \,<br /> \boldsymbol T_{A\to B}\,\mathbf v_A \\<br /> &=<br /> \boldsymbol T_{A\to B} \,<br /> \boldsymbol X(\mathbf u_A) \, \mathbf v_A \\<br /> &= \boldsymbol T_{A\to B} (\mathbf u_A \times \mathbf v_A)<br /> \end{aligned}[/tex]
 
Thanks.

However, in your derivation, you say nothing about the necessary orthogonal property of the transformation matrix.

Just try in matlab:

C(AxB)
(CA)x(CB)

Once with C a non-orthogonal matrix and once with C a orthogonal matrix. In first case both results will be different, in second case both results will be equal.

[edit]: from the third last line till the second last line of previous reply, the orthogonal property of the transformation matrix is supposed. Conclusion of the story in a pure algebraic way:

C(AxB)==(CA)x(CB) only if C is orthogonal
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K