What is the purpose of Arc-Length Parameterization?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the purpose and implications of arc-length parameterization in the context of curves and the Frenet-Serret frames (TNB). Participants explore its mathematical convenience, applications in trajectory motion, and its role in understanding curvature and motion along curves.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that arc-length parameterization is useful for describing trajectory motion, particularly in contexts like aviation, where TNB frames provide a reference for pilots.
  • Others question the mathematical convenience of using arc length instead of time, suggesting that it may complicate certain calculations.
  • A participant notes that parametrization with respect to arc length isolates the contribution of curvature from changes in speed, allowing for a clearer measurement of curvature.
  • Some contributions highlight the relationship between arc length and the shape of the curve, with specific references to curvature formulas in two dimensions.
  • There are discussions about the practicality of using 2-D versus 3-D formalism, with some participants finding the 2-D approach more accessible for certain problems.
  • A participant mentions the potential for arc-length parameterization to avoid issues with multiple-valued functions, using the example of a spiral curve.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the utility and implications of arc-length parameterization, with no clear consensus on whether it is superior to time-based parameterization. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach for different contexts.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that certain arc length integrals can be challenging to solve, which may affect the choice of parameterization. There is also mention of the dependence on specific applications, such as airplane or rocket trajectories.

Sho Kano
Messages
372
Reaction score
3
My teacher just briefly introduced arc length parameterization and went on to frenet serret frames, without any explanation or motivation. What is the purpose of arc length parameterization? What role does it play in TNB? What is the purpose of TNB frames anyways?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
From my recollection, the parametrization was for use in describing trajectory motion where you could imagine an airplane flying a path matching the curve and the TNB (tangent, normal and binormal) described a convenient frame of reference for the pilot of the plane.

You can get a better description on Wikipedia:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenet–Serret_formulas
 
Is it convenient mathematically speaking? Why is TNB given with respect to arc length and not time?
 
Sho Kano said:
Is it convenient mathematically speaking? Why is TNB given with respect to arc length and not time?
The parametrization w.r.t. arc length will tell the shape of the curve. In two dimensions ## \kappa=d \phi / ds=1/r ## where ## r ## is the instantaneous radius of curvature. ## ds/dt ## gives the speed that the path is being traversed. Even in two dimensions the TNB formulation is quite useful where it just uses T and N. I first saw the TNB formalism in 2-D in a calculus book by Purcell. It always helps when a useful application is found that uses the formalism. I can give you a problem you might find of interest in two dimensions that I came up with that I solved using the TNB. Start with object mass m that has velocity ## v_0 ## (in the x-direction) and experiences a force perpendicular to its path that increases linearly with time, so that acceleration ## \vec{a}=(bt) \, \hat{N} ## for some constant b. ## \ ## ## \ ## ## \ ## 1) Does the speed of the object change? and ## \ ## 2) Determine its path. Starting with ## \vec{v}=(ds/dt) \, \hat{T} ##, ## \ ## where ## \hat{T}=\cos(\phi) \hat{i}+\sin(\phi) \hat{j} ##, and writing out the expression for ## \vec{a}=d \vec{v} /dt ##, the TNB formalism allowed for a simple solution. In particular, ## d \hat{T}/dt=(d \hat{T}/ds)(ds/dt)=(d \hat{T}/d \phi)( d \phi /ds)(ds/dt) =(\hat{N}) \kappa (ds/dt) ## is a very useful result that I first saw in the Purcell calculus book. Thereby ## \vec{a}=(d^2 s/dt^2) \hat{T}+(ds/dt)^2 \kappa \hat{N} ##. A couple months ago, someone posted about the Frenet equations: https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...t-equations-using-the-vector-gradient.876724/
 
Last edited:
to add to the previous answer, in motion along a curve, acceleration comes from two sources, change in speed along the curve, and change in direction of the curve, i.e. curvature. If we parametrize by arc length, i.e. move at constant unit speed, we remove the contribution from change of speed and thus isolate out the contribution from the shape of the curve, thus allowing us to measure its curvature.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Charles Link and jedishrfu
Integrating over the arc length parameter gives distance traveled. Also arc length parameter can always be replaced by a function involving time.
 
OK, so calculating TNB gives us a coordinate system wrt to the cur, and we can get at the TNB using only the equation of the curve. Basically, the curve at any instant in time is resolved into 3 components (TNB), and the derivatives of these components gives us the information about how the curve is changing with arc length or time? Wouldn't defining the Frenet apparatus with respect to time be easier because some arc length integrals are hard to solve?
 
Last edited:
Sho Kano said:
OK, so calculating TNB gives us a coordinate system wrt to the cur, and we can get at the TNB using only the equation of the curve. Basically, the curve at any instant in time is resolved into 3 components (TNB), and the derivatives of these components gives us the information about how the curve is changing with arc length or time? Wouldn't defining the Frenet apparatus with respect to time be easier because some arc length integrals are hard to solve?
To date, I have found the 2-D formalism of more use than the complete 3-D formalism. In any case, I think you would find the calculation I presented in post #4 of interest if you tried working it. If you are doing airplane or rocket trajectories the 3-D formalism is likely to be useful, but the 2-D is easier to solve, and a very practical problem is the one that has a centripetal force that increases linearly with time (presented in post #4). The solution is a spiral. Perhaps you might try solving it.
 
Sho Kano said:
What is the purpose of arc length parameterization?

I'm not sure of the context in which your teacher introduced arc length parameterization, but it's useful to avoid dealing with multiple-valued functions (which are not functions in the normal sense). As an example, consider a spiral centered at the origin. For any value of x, there are multiple values of y. You can parameterize the curve by using arc length, s, with two functions x(s) and y(s).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Charles Link

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
10K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
23K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
5K