Facebook Page
Twitter
RSS
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. MHB Apprentice

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    71
    Thanks
    27 times
    Thanked
    17 times
    #1
    Hi Folks,

    How does one get the surface normal of a sphere in terms ofthe original coordinates u and v sincethere are 3 vectors at each point as shown in the attachment? Is there a chain rule involved?

    Regards
    B













  2. MHB Seeker
    MHB Global Moderator
    MHB Math Scholar
    I like Serena's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    5,971
    Thanks
    4,021 times
    Thanked
    11,312 times
    Thank/Post
    1.894
    Awards
    MHB Model Helper Award (2016)  

MHB Best Ideas (2016)  

MHB LaTeX Award (2016)  

MHB Calculus Award (2014)  

MHB Discrete Mathematics Award (Jul-Dec 2013)
    #2
    Quote Originally Posted by bugatti79 View Post
    Hi Folks,

    How does one get the surface normal of a sphere in terms of the original coordinates u and v since there are 3 vectors at each point as shown in the attachment? Is there a chain rule involved?

    Regards
    B
    Hi bugatti!

    Can you clarify your confusion?

    The 3 vectors seem to be 2 vectors that describe the direction of the surface, and a third vector that is perpendicular to the surface. That "normal" vector is found by taking the cross product of the 2 directional vectors.
    In the case of the sphere, ultimately the normal vector is just the vector itself. That is, any vector from the origin to the sphere is also normal to the sphere - that's just a property of the sphere.

    There does not really seem to be a chain rule to be involved.

  3. MHB Apprentice

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    71
    Thanks
    27 times
    Thanked
    17 times
    #3 Thread Author
    Quote Originally Posted by I like Serena View Post
    Hi bugatti!

    Can you clarify your confusion?

    The 3 vectors seem to be 2 vectors that describe the direction of the surface, and a third vector that is perpendicular to the surface. That "normal" vector is found by taking the cross product of the 2 directional vectors.
    In the case of the sphere, ultimately the normal vector is just the vector itself. That is, any vector from the origin to the sphere is also normal to the sphere - that's just a property of the sphere.

    There does not really seem to be a chain rule to be involved.
    Hello :-)

    Thanks for the reply. Okay but this normal vector is in terms of s and w but apparently one can get the normal in terms of the original flat terrain variables u and v. Its not clear to me how to evaluate this because J(s,w,t) isa 3*3 matrix and tu and tv are 1*3 matrix.

    Here is the website link I am looking at.


  4. MHB Seeker
    MHB Global Moderator
    MHB Math Scholar
    I like Serena's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    5,971
    Thanks
    4,021 times
    Thanked
    11,312 times
    Thank/Post
    1.894
    Awards
    MHB Model Helper Award (2016)  

MHB Best Ideas (2016)  

MHB LaTeX Award (2016)  

MHB Calculus Award (2014)  

MHB Discrete Mathematics Award (Jul-Dec 2013)
    #4
    Quote Originally Posted by bugatti79 View Post
    Hello :-)

    Thanks for the reply. Okay but this normal vector is in terms of s and w but apparently one can get the normal in terms of the original flat terrain variables u and v. Its not clear to me how to evaluate this because J(s,w,t) isa 3*3 matrix and tu and tv are 1*3 matrix.

    Here is the website link I am looking at.

    Ah okay. Let me try to clarify.

    The 3x3 matrix is to transform a relief on the top face of a cube to a relief on the sphere.
    The coordinates on the top face of the cube are (s,t,1).
    The relief on that face are then (s,t,h), where h is the height as function of (s,t).
    Each point on the top face is transformed into a point on the sphere by simply normalizing the length of the vector (s,t,1) to 1 - now it has distance 1 to the origin, or in other words it's a point on the sphere.
    Then those point get transformed into (x,y,z) by scaling the point a little bit to obtain the relief given by h.

    Anyway, the J(s,t,h) matrix identifies the 2 directional vectors and the normal vector to the relief that we've mapped on top of the sphere.

  5. MHB Apprentice

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    71
    Thanks
    27 times
    Thanked
    17 times
    #5 Thread Author
    Quote Originally Posted by I like Serena View Post
    Ah okay. Let me try to clarify.

    The 3x3 matrix is to transform a relief on the top face of a cube to a relief on the sphere.
    The coordinates on the top face of the cube are (s,t,1).
    The relief on that face are then (s,t,h), where h is the height as function of (s,t).
    Each point on the top face is transformed into a point on the sphere by simply normalizing the length of the vector (s,t,1) to 1 - now it has distance 1 to the origin, or in other words it's a point on the sphere.
    Then those point get transformed into (x,y,z) by scaling the point a little bit to obtain the relief given by h.

    Anyway, the J(s,t,h) matrix identifies the 2 directional vectors and the normal vector to the relief that we've mapped on top of the sphere.
    Hi!,

    I believe I get the idea but I am interested to see thecalculation of tu and tv in order to get n.

    Tu=J(s,t,h)*tuhow is this calculated because J is a 3*3and tu is a 1*3.

  6. MHB Apprentice

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    71
    Thanks
    27 times
    Thanked
    17 times
    #6 Thread Author
    Quote Originally Posted by bugatti79 View Post
    Hi!,

    I believe I get the idea but I am interested to see thecalculation of tu and tv in order to get n.

    Tu=J(s,t,h)*tuhow is this calculated because J is a 3*3and tu is a 1*3.
    In other words, how is the following calculated?

  7. MHB Seeker
    MHB Global Moderator
    MHB Math Scholar
    I like Serena's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    5,971
    Thanks
    4,021 times
    Thanked
    11,312 times
    Thank/Post
    1.894
    Awards
    MHB Model Helper Award (2016)  

MHB Best Ideas (2016)  

MHB LaTeX Award (2016)  

MHB Calculus Award (2014)  

MHB Discrete Mathematics Award (Jul-Dec 2013)
    #7
    Quote Originally Posted by bugatti79 View Post
    Hi!,

    I believe I get the idea but I am interested to see thecalculation of tu and tv in order to get n.

    Tu=J(s,t,h)*tuhow is this calculated because J is a 3*3and tu is a 1*3.
    Quote Originally Posted by bugatti79 View Post
    In other words, how is the following calculated?
    What is intended, is:
    $$\mathbf t_u' = \mathbf t_u J(s,t,h)$$
    I don't know why it was written the other way around with a $*$.

    Note that if we ony look at the first component of both $\mathbf t_u'$ and $\mathbf t_u$, we'll get:
    $$\pd x u = \pd x s \pd s u + \pd x t \pd t u + \pd x h \pd h u$$
    which is the chain rule as it should.
    If we do it any other way, we won't get the result we need.

    Usually we write vectors as 3x1 matrices, that we multiply on the right of a 3x3 matrix, such as $A\mathbf v$.
    Some text books however make the choice to write vectors as 1x3 matrices, which we then have to multiply on the left as in $\mathbf v^T A^T$. The result is the transpose of what we would otherwise have, which is again a 1x3 matrix.
    Last edited by I like Serena; May 25th, 2016 at 02:42. Reason: Fix coordinates

  8. MHB Apprentice

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    71
    Thanks
    27 times
    Thanked
    17 times
    #8 Thread Author
    Quote Originally Posted by I like Serena View Post
    What is intended, is:
    $$\mathbf t_u' = \mathbf t_u J(s,t,h)$$
    I don't know why it was written the other way around with a $*$.

    Note that if we ony look at the first component of both $\mathbf t_u'$ and $\mathbf t_u$, we'll get:
    $$\pd x u = \pd x s \pd s u + \pd y t \pd t u + \pd z h \pd h u$$
    which is the chain rule as it should.
    If we do it any other way, we won't get the result we need.

    Usually we write vectors as 3x1 matrices, that we multiply on the right of a 3x3 matrix, such as $A\mathbf v$.
    Some text books however make the choice to write vectors as 1x3 matrices, which we then have to multiply on the left as in $\mathbf v^T A^T$. The result is the transpose of what we would otherwise have, which is again a 1x3 matrix.
    So the normal vector would be calculated as follows?

    $ \displaystyle n=t_u' \times t_v'=\begin{vmatrix}
    1&1 &1 \\
    x_s+f_uz_s&x_t+f_uz_t &x_h+f_uz_h \\
    y_s+f_vz_s&y_t+f_vz_t &y_h+f_vz_h
    \end{vmatrix}=....etc$

  9. MHB Seeker
    MHB Global Moderator
    MHB Math Scholar
    I like Serena's Avatar
    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    5,971
    Thanks
    4,021 times
    Thanked
    11,312 times
    Thank/Post
    1.894
    Awards
    MHB Model Helper Award (2016)  

MHB Best Ideas (2016)  

MHB LaTeX Award (2016)  

MHB Calculus Award (2014)  

MHB Discrete Mathematics Award (Jul-Dec 2013)
    #9
    Quote Originally Posted by bugatti79 View Post
    So the normal vector would be calculated as follows?

    $ \displaystyle n=t_u' \times t_v'=\begin{vmatrix}
    1&1 &1 \\
    x_s+f_uz_s&x_t+f_uz_t &x_h+f_uz_h \\
    y_s+f_vz_s&y_t+f_vz_t &y_h+f_vz_h
    \end{vmatrix}=....etc$
    I should probably do this more carefully, but I think it should be:
    $ \displaystyle \mathbf n'=\mathbf t_u' \times \mathbf t_v'=\begin{vmatrix}
    \mathbf{\hat x}& \mathbf{\hat y} & \mathbf{\hat z} \\
    x_s+f_uz_h&y_t+f_uz_h &z_h+f_uz_h \\
    x_s+f_vz_h&y_t+f_vz_h &z_h+f_vz_h
    \end{vmatrix}=...$

  10. MHB Apprentice

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    71
    Thanks
    27 times
    Thanked
    17 times
    #10 Thread Author
    Quote Originally Posted by I like Serena View Post
    I should probably do this more carefully, but I think it should be:
    $ \displaystyle \mathbf n'=\mathbf t_u' \times \mathbf t_v'=\begin{vmatrix}
    \mathbf{\hat x}& \mathbf{\hat y} & \mathbf{\hat z} \\
    x_s+f_uz_h&y_t+f_uz_h &z_h+f_uz_h \\
    x_s+f_vz_h&y_t+f_vz_h &z_h+f_vz_h
    \end{vmatrix}=...$
    I think there was an error in my calculation....

    $ \displaystyle t_u'=t_u \times J(s,t,h)=\begin{vmatrix}
    1&0 &f_u
    \end{vmatrix} \begin{vmatrix}
    x_s& y_s & z_s \\
    x_t&y_t &z_t \\
    x_h&y_h &z_h
    \end{vmatrix}=\begin{vmatrix}
    x_s+f_u x_h&y_s+f_u y_h &z_s+f_u z_h
    \end{vmatrix}$ and similarly for $ \displaystyle t'_v$

    This should enable us get the correct normal vector...?

    Thanks
    B

Similar Threads

  1. normal vector of a sphere
    By brunette15 in forum Calculus
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: May 8th, 2016, 04:58
  2. [SOLVED] Surface area of sphere increase at a constant rate
    By Nemo in forum Calculus
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: April 26th, 2016, 01:35
  3. Minimizing the surface of a sphere and cylinder
    By leprofece in forum Calculus
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: February 15th, 2014, 19:18
  4. Replies: 9
    Last Post: January 30th, 2014, 17:09
  5. [SOLVED] Implicit surface area, sphere cut by two plane
    By skatenerd in forum Calculus
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: May 3rd, 2013, 15:23

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Math Help Boards