I have coordinates for 4 vectors defining a quad and another one for it's normal. I am trying to get the rotation of the quad. I get good results for rotation on X and Y just using the normal, but I got stuck getting the Z, since I've used just 1 vector.
Here's my basic test using Processing and toxiclibs(Vec3D and heading methods):
import toxi.geom.*;
Vec3D[] face = {new Vec3D(1.1920928955078125e-07, 0.0, 1.4142135381698608),new Vec3D(-1.4142134189605713, 0.0, 5.3644180297851562e-07),new Vec3D(-2.384185791015625e-07, 0.0, -1.4142135381698608),new Vec3D(1.4142136573791504, 0.0, 0.0),};
Vec3D n = new Vec3D(0.0, 1.0, 0.0);
print("xy: " + degrees(n.headingXY())+"\t");
print("xz: " + degrees(n.headingXZ())+"\t");
print("yz: " + degrees(n.headingYZ())+"\n");
println("angleBetween x: " + degrees(n.angleBetween(Vec3D.X_AXIS)));
println("angleBetween y: " + degrees(n.angleBetween(Vec3D.X_AXIS)));
println("angleBetween z: " + degrees(n.angleBetween(Vec3D.X_AXIS)));
println("atan2 x: " + degrees(atan2(n.z,n.y)));
println("atan2 y: " + degrees(atan2(n.z,n.x)));
println("atan2 z: " + degrees(atan2(n.y,n.x)));
And here is the output:
xy: 90.0 xz: 0.0 yz: 90.0
angleBetween x: 90.0
angleBetween y: 90.0
angleBetween z: 90.0
atan2 x: 0.0
atan2 y: 0.0
atan2 z: 90.0
How can I get the rotation(around it's centre/normal) for Z of my quad ?
OK. I am frankly still not really clear on what it is you're looking for, but let me try to clarify the problem and then address my best guess as to what you really want and see if that helps.
As mentioned in the comment thread, a rotation is a transformation that maps one set of stuff (eg, vectors A, B, C...) to a different set of stuff (A', B', C'...). We can fully define this transformation in terms of an angle (call it θ) and an axis of rotation we'll call R.
Note that R is not a vector, it is a line. That means it has a location as well as a direction -- it is anchored somewhere in space -- and so you need either two points or a point and a direction vector to define it. For simplicity we might assume that the anchor point is the origin (0,0,0), since the question talks about the major axes X, Y and Z. In general, however, this need not be the case - if you want to determine rotation about arbitrary lines you will usually need to translate everything first so that the axis passes through the origin. (If all you care about is the orientation of your objects, rather than its position, then you can probably gloss over this issue.)
Given a start position A, end position A' and an axis R, it is conceptually straightforward to determine the angle θ (or an angle θ, since rotation is periodic and there are infinitely many θs that will take A to A'), though it can be a little fiddly for general R. In the simplest case, where R is one of the major axes, you can do something like this (for R = Z):
theta0 = atan2(A.x, A.y);
theta1 = atan2(A_prime.x, A_prime.y);
theta = theta1 - theta0;
In any case, it looks from your code as if you have the tools to do this already -- I'm not familiar with toxiclibs, but I would imagine the Vec3D angleBetween method ought to take you most of the way to the answer you want.
However, that presupposes that you know A, A' and R, and it seems like this is the real sticking point with your question. In the first place, you mention only a single set of points, defining an arbitrary quad. In the second, you talk about the normal as defining the centre of rotation. Both of these indicate that you haven't properly specified the problem.
As I have repeated tediously several times, a rotation is from one thing to another. A single set of quad vertices may define either the first state or the second, but not both (unless θ is 0, in which case the question is trivial). If you want to determine "the rotation of the quad", you need also to say "from an earlier position P" or "to a subsequent position Q", which you have not done.
Given that the particular quad in question is a square, you might think that there's an intuitive other position involved, to wit: with the sides axis-aligned. And we can indeed rather easily determine the angle of rotation required to get to that orientation, if we can assume that the quad is a rectangle:
// A and B are adjacent corners of the square
// B - A is the direction of the edge joining them
// theta is the angle between that side and the X axis
// (rotating by -theta around Z should align the square)
theta = atan2(B.x - A.x, B.y - A.y);
But, you made a point of stating that you might be looking at any arbitrary quad, for which there would be no "natural" base position to compare against. And even in the square case it is frankly not good practice to presume a baseline without explicitly declaring it.
Which brings us back to my original question: what do you mean? If you can actually pin that down properly I suspect you will find the problem itself relatively easy to solve.
EDIT: Based on your comments below, what you really want to do is to find a rotation that aligns your quad with one of the major planes. This is equivalent to rotating the quad's normal to align with the axis perpendicular to that plane: eg, to get the quad parallel to the XY plane, align its normal with the Z axis.
This can notionally be done with a single rotation about some calculated axis, but in practice you will decompose it into two rotations about major axes. The first rotates about the target axis until the vector is in the plane containing that axis and one of the others; then rotate around the third axis to get the normal to its final alignment. A verbal description is inevitably clunky, so let's formalise a bit:
Let's say you have a planar object Q, with vertices {v1, v2, v3, ...} (in your quad case there will be four of these, but it could be any number as long as all the points are coplanar), with unit normal n = (x y z)T. For the sake of explanation, let's arbitrarily assume that we want to align the object with the XY plane, and hence to rotate n to the Z axis -- the process would be essentially the same for XZ/Y or YZ/X.
Rotate around Z to get n into the XZ plane. We can calculate the angle required like this:
theta1 = -atan2(x,y);
However, we only need the sine and cosine to build a rotation matrix, and we can calculate these directly without knowing the angle:
hypoXY = sqrt(x*x + y*y);
c1 = x/hypoXY;
s1 = y/hypoXY;
(Obviously, if hypoXY is 0 this fails, but in that case n is already aligned with Z.)
Our first rotation matrix R1 looks like this:
[ c1 s1 0 ]
[ -s1 c1 0 ]
[ 0 0 1 ]
Next, rotate around Y to get n parallel to Z. Note that the previous rotation has moved x to a new position x' = sqrt(x2 + y2), so we need to account for this in calculating our second angle:
theta2 = -atan2(z, sqrt(x*x + y*y));
Again, we don't actually need theta2. And because we defined n to be a unit vector, our next calculations are easy:
c2 = z;
s2 = hypoXY;
Our second rotation matrix R2 looks like this:
[ c2 0 -s2 ]
[ 0 1 0 ]
[ s2 0 c2 ]
Compose the two together to get R = R2.R1:
[ c2c1 c2s1 -s2 ]
[ -s1 c1 0 ]
[ s2c1 s2s1 c2 ]
If you apply this matrix to n, you should get the normal aligned with the Z axis. (If not, check the signs first -- this is all a bit back of an envelope and I could easily have got some of the directions wrong. I don't have time to code it up and check right now, but will try to give it a go later. I'll also try to look over your sketch code then.)
Once that works, apply the same transformation to all the points in your object Q and it should become parallel to (although likely offset from) the XY plane.
Here is the rotation matrix for the z axis
cos(theta) sin(theta) 0
-sin(theta) cos(theta) 0
0 0 1
your vector
the result is the rotated vector
Related
Perhaps the question title needs some work.
For context this is for the purpose of a Koch Snowflake (using C-like math syntax in a formula node in LabVIEW), thus why the triangle must be the correct way. (As given 2 points an equilateral triangle may be in one of two directions.)
To briefly go over the algorithm: I have an array of 4 predefined coordinates initially forming a triangle, the first "generation" of the fractal. To generate the next iteration, one must for each line (pair of coordinates) get the 1/3rd and 2/3rd midpoints to be the base of a new triangle on that face, and then calculate the position of the 3rd point of the new triangle (the subject of this question). Do this for all current sides, concatenating the resulting arrays into a new array that forms the next generation of the snowflake.
The array of coordinates is in a clockwise order, e.g. each vertex travelling clockwise around the shape corresponds to the next item in the array, something like this for the 2nd generation:
This means that when going to add a triangle to a face, e.g. between, in that image, the vertices labelled 0 and 1, you first get the midpoints which I'll call "c" and "d", you can just rotate "d" anti-clockwise around "c" by 60 degrees to find where the new triangle top point will be (labelled e).
I believe this should hold (e.g. 60 degrees anticlockwise rotating the later point around the earlier) for anywhere around the snowflake, however currently my maths only seems to work in the case where the initial triangle has a vertical side: [(0,0), (0,1)]. Else wise the triangle goes off in some other direction.
I believe I have correctly constructed my loops such that the triangle generating VI (virtual instrument, effectively a "function" in written languages) will work on each line segment sequentially, but my actual calculation isn't working and I am at a loss as to how to get it in the right direction. Below is my current maths for calculating the triangle points from a single line segment, where a and b are the original vertices of the segment, c and d form new triangle base that are in-line with the original line, and e is the part that sticks out. I don't want to call it "top" as for a triangle formed from a segment going from upper-right to lower-left, the "top" will stick down.
cx = ax + (bx - ax)/3;
dx = ax + 2*(bx - ax)/3;
cy = ay + (by - ay)/3;
dy = ay + 2*(by - ay)/3;
dX = dx - cx;
dY = dy - cy;
ex = (cos(1.0471975512) * dX + sin(1.0471975512) * dY) + cx;
ey = (sin(1.0471975512) * dX + cos(1.0471975512) * dY) + cy;
note 1.0471975512 is just 60 degrees in radians.
Currently for generation 2 it makes this: (note the seemingly separated triangle to the left is formed by the 2 triangles on the top and bottom having their e vertices meet in the middle and is not actually an independent triangle.)
I suspect the necessity for having slightly different equations depending on weather ax or bx is larger etc, perhaps something to do with how the periodicity of sin/cos may need to be accounted for (something about quadrants in spherical coordinates?), as it looks like the misplaced triangles are at 60 degrees, just that the angle is between the wrong lines. However this is a guess and I'm just not able to imagine how to do this programmatically let alone on paper.
Thankfully the maths formula node allows for if and else statements which would allow for this to be implemented if it's the case but as said I am not awfully familiar with adjusting for what I'll naively call the "quadrants thing", and am unsure how to know which quadrant one is in for each case.
This was a long and rambling question which inevitably tempts nonsense so if you've any clarifying questions please comment and I'll try to fix anything/everything.
Answering my own question thanks to #JohanC, Unsurprisingly this was a case of making many tiny adjustments and giving up just before getting it right.
The correct formula was this:
ex = (cos(1.0471975512) * dX + sin(1.0471975512) * dY) + cx;
ey = (-sin(1.0471975512) * dX + cos(1.0471975512) * dY) + cy;
just adding a minus to the second sine function. Note that if one were travelling anticlockwise then one would want to rotate points clockwise, so you instead have the 1st sine function negated and the second one positive.
I have two 3D vectors called A and B that both only have a 3D position. I know how to find the angle along the unit circle ranging from 0-360 degrees with the atan2 function by doing:
EDIT: (my atan2 function made no sense, now it should find the "y-angle" between 2 vectors):
toDegrees(atan2(A.x-B.x,A.z-B.z))+180
But that gives me the Y angle between the 2 vectors.
I need to find the X angle between them. It has to do with using the x, y and z position values. Not the x and z only, because that gives the Y angle between the two vectors.
I need the X angle, I know it sounds vague but I don't know how to explain. Maybe for example you have a camera in 3D space, if you look up or down than you rotate the x-axis. But now I need to get the "up/down" angle between the 2 vectors. If I rotate that 3D camera along the y-axis, the x-axis doens't change. So with the 2 vectors, no matter what the "y-angle" is between them, the x-angle between the 2 vectors wil stay the same if y-angle changes because it's the "up/down" angle, like in the camara.
Please help? I just need a line of math/pseudocode, or explanation. :)
atan2(crossproduct.length,scalarproduct)
The reason for using atan2 instead of arccos or arcsin is accuracy. arccos behaves very badly close to 0 degrees. Small computation errors in argument will lead to disproportionally big errors in result. arcsin has same problem close to 90 degrees.
Computing the altitude angle
OK, it might be I finally understood your comment below about the result being independent of the y angle, and about how it relates to the two vectors. It seems you are not really interested in two vectors and the angle between these two, but instead you're interested in the difference vector and the angle that one forms against the horizontal plane. In a horizontal coordinate system (often used in astronomy), that angle would be called “altitude” or “elevation”, as opposed to the “azimuth” you compute with the formula in your (edited) question. “altitude” closely relates to the “tilt” of your camera, whereas “azimuth” relates to “panning”.
We still have a 2D problem. One coordinate of the 2D vector is the y coordinate of the difference vector. The other coordinate is the length of the vector after projecting it on the horizontal plane, i.e. sqrt(x*x + z*z). The final solution would be
x = A.x - B.x
y = A.y - B.y
z = A.z - B.z
alt = toDegrees(atan2(y, sqrt(x*x + z*z)))
az = toDegrees(atan2(-x, -z))
The order (A - B as opposed to B - A) was chosen such that “A above B” yields a positive y and therefore a positive altitude, in accordance with your comment below. The minus signs in the azimuth computation above should replace the + 180 in the code from your question, except that the range now is [-180, 180] instead of your [0, 360]. Just to give you an alternative, choose whichever you prefer. In effect you compute the azimuth of B - A either way. The fact that you use a different order for these two angles might be somewhat confusing, so think about whether this really is what you want, or whether you want to reverse the sign of the altitude or change the azimuth by 180°.
Orthogonal projection
For reference, I'll include my original answer below, for those who are actually looking for the angle of rotation around some fixed x axis, the way the original question suggested.
If this x angle you mention in your question is indeed the angle of rotation around the x axis, as the camera example suggests, then you might want to think about it this way: set the x coordinate to zero, and you will end up with 2D vectors in the y-z plane. You can think of this as an orthogonal projection onto said plain. Now you are back to a 2D problem and can tackle it there.
Personally I'd simply call atan2 twice, once for each vector, and subtract the resulting angles:
toDegrees(atan2(A.z, A.y) - atan2(B.z, B.y))
The x=0 is implicit in the above formula simply because I only operate on y and z.
I haven't fully understood the logic behind your single atan2 call yet, but the fact that I have to think about it this long indicates that I wouldn't want to maintain it, at least not without a good explanatory comment.
I hope I understood your question correctly, and this is the thing you're looking for.
Just like 2D Vectors , you calculate their angle by solving cos of their Dot Product
You don't need atan, you always go for the dot product since its a fundamental operation of vectors and then use acos to get the angle.
double angleInDegrees = acos ( cos(theta) ) * 180.0 / PI;
Ok, I know this sounds really daft to be asking here, but it is programming related.
I'm working on a game, and I'm thinking of implementing a system that allows users to triangulate their 3D coordinates to locate something (eg for a task).
I also want to be able to let the user make the coordinates of the points they are using for triangulation have user-determined coordinates (so the location's coordinate is relative, probably by setting up a beacon or something).
I have a method in place for calculating the distance between the points, so essentially I can calculate the lengths of the sides of the triangle/pyramid as well as all but the coordinate I am after.
It has been a long time since I have done any trigonometry and I am rusty with the sin, cos and tan functions, I have a feeling they are required but have no clue how to implement them.
Can anyone give me a demonstration as to how I would go about doing this in a mathematical/programatical way?
extra info:
My function returns the exact distance between the two points, so say you set two points to 0,0,0 and 4,4,0 respectively, and those points are set to scale(the game world is divided into a very large 3d grid, with each 'block' area being represented by a 3d coordinate) then it would give back a value at around 5.6.
The key point about it varying is that the user can set the points, so say they set a point to read 0,0,0, the actual location could be something like 52, 85, 93. However, providing they then count the blocks and set their other points correctly (eg, set a point 4,4,0 at the real point 56, 89, 93) then the final result will return the relative position (eg the object they are trying to locate is at real point 152, 185, 93, it will return the relative value 100,100,0). I need to be able to calculate it knowing every point but the one it's trying to locate, as well as the distances between all points.
Also, please don't ask why I can't just calculate it by using the real coordinates, I'm hoping to show the equation up on screen as it calculates the result.7
Example:
Here is a diagram
Imagine these are points in my game on a flat plain.
I want to know the point f.
I know the values of points d and e, and the sides A,B and C.
Using only the data I know, I need to find out how to do this.
Answered Edit:
After many days of working on this, Sean Kenny has provided me with his time, patience and intellect, and thus I have now got a working implementation of a triangulation method.
I hope to place the different language equivalents of the code as I test them so that future coders may use this code and not have the same problem I have had.
I spent a bit of time working on a solution but I think the implementer, i.e you, should know what it's doing, so any errors encountered can be tackled later on. As such, I'll give my answer in the form of strong hints.
First off, we have a vector from d to e which we can work out: if we consider the coordinates as position vectors rather than absolute coordinates, how can we determine what the vector pointing from d to e is? Think about how you would determine the displacement you had moved if you only knew where you started and where you ended up? Displacement is a straight line, point A to B, no deviation, not: I had to walk around that house so I walked further. A straight line. If you started at the point (0,0) it would be easy.
Secondly, the cosine rule. Do you know what it is? If not, read up on it. How can we rearrange the form given in the link to find the angle d between vectors DE and DF? Remember you need the angle, not a function of the angle (cos is a function remember).
Next we can use a vector 'trick' called the scalar product. Notice there is a cos function in there. Now, you may be thinking, we've just found the angle, why are we doing it again?
Define DQ = [1,0]. DQ is a vector of length 1, a unit vector, along the x-axis. Which other vector do we know? Do we know of two position vectors?
Once we have two vectors (I hope you worked out the other one) we can use the scalar product to find the angle; again, just the angle, not a function of it.
Now, hopefully, we have 2 angles. Could we take one from the other to get yet another angle to our desired coordinate DF? The choice of using a unit vector earlier was not arbitrary.
The scalar product, after some cancelling, gives us this : cos(theta) = x / r
Where x is the x ordinate for F and r is the length of side A.
The end result being:
theta = arccos( xe / B ) - arccos( ( (A^2) + (B^2) - (C^2) ) / ( 2*A*B ) )
Where theta is the angle formed between a unit vector along the line y = 0 where the origin is at point d.
With this information we can find the x and y coordinates of point f relative to d. How?
Again, with the scalar product. The rest is fairly easy, so I'll give it to you.
x = r.cos(theta)
y = r.sin(theta)
From basic trigonometry.
I wouldn't advise trying to code this into one value.
Instead, try this:
//pseudo code
dx = 0
dy = 0 //initialise coordinates somehow
ex = ex
ey = ey
A = A
B = B
C = C
cosd = ex / B
cosfi = ((A^2) + (B^2) - (C^2)) / ( 2*A*B)
d = acos(cosd) //acos is a method in java.math
fi = acos(cosfi) //you will have to find an equivalent in your chosen language
//look for a method of inverse cos
theta = fi - d
x = A cos(theta)
y = A sin(theta)
Initialise all variables as those which can take decimals. e.g float or double in Java.
The green along the x-axis represents the x ordinate of f, and the purple the y ordinate.
The blue angle is the one we are trying to find because, hopefully you can see, we can then use simple trig to work out x and y, given that we know the length of the hypotenuse.
This yellow line up to 1 is the unit vector for which scalar products are taken, this runs along the x-axis.
We need to find the black and red angles so we can deduce the blue angle by simple subtraction.
Hope this helps. Extensions can be made to 3D, all the vector functions work basically the same for 3D.
If you have the displacements from an origin, regardless of whether this is another user defined coordinate or not, the coordinate for that 3D point are simply (x, y, z).
If you are defining these lengths from a point, which also has a coordinate to take into account, you can simply write (x, y, z) + (x1, y1, z1) = (x2, y2, z2) where x2, y2 and z2 are the displacements from the (0, 0, 0) origin.
If you wish to find the length of this vector, i.e if you defined the line from A to B to be the x axis, what would the x displacement be, you can use Pythagoras for 3D vectors, it works just the same as with 2D:
Length l = sqrt((x^2) + (y^2) + (z^2))
EDIT:
Say you have a user defined point A (x1, y1, z1) and you want to define this as the origin (0,0,0). You have another user chosen point B (x2, y2, z2) and you know the distance from A to B in the x, y and z plane. If you want to work out what this point is, in relation to the new origin, you can simply do
B relative to A = (x2, y2, z2) - (x1, y1, z1) = (x2-x1, y2-y1, z2-z1) = C
C is the vector A>B, a vector is a quantity which has a magnitude (the length of the lines) and a direction (the angle from A which points to B).
If you want to work out the position of B relative to the origin O, you can do the opposite:
B relative to O = (x2, y2, z2) + (x1, y1, z1) = (x1+x2, y1+y2, z1+z2) = D
D is the vector O>B.
Edit 2:
//pseudo code
userx = x;
usery = y;
userz = z;
//move origin
for (every block i){
xi = xi-x;
yi = yi - y;
zi = zi -z;
}
I am trying to generate a 3d tube along a spline. I have the coördinates of the spline (x1,y1,z1 - x2,y2,z2 - etc) which you can see in the illustration in yellow. At those points I need to generate circles, whose vertices are to be connected at a later stadium. The circles need to be perpendicular to the 'corners' of two line segments of the spline to form a correct tube. Note that the segments are kept low for illustration purpose.
[apparently I'm not allowed to post images so please view the image at this link]
http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/6863/18720019.jpg
I am as far as being able to calculate the vertices of each ring at each point of the spline, but they are all on the same planar ie same angled. I need them to be rotated according to their 'legs' (which A & B are to C for instance).
I've been thinking this over and thought of the following:
two line segments can be seen as 2 vectors (in illustration A & B)
the corner (in illustraton C) is where a ring of vertices need to be calculated
I need to find the planar on which all of the vertices will reside
I then can use this planar (=vector?) to calculate new vectors from the center point, which is C
and find their x,y,z using radius * sin and cos
However, I'm really confused on the math part of this. I read about the dot product but that returns a scalar which I don't know how to apply in this case.
Can someone point me into the right direction?
[edit]
To give a bit more info on the situation:
I need to construct a buffer of floats, which -in groups of 3- describe vertex positions and will be connected by OpenGL ES, given another buffer with indices to form polygons.
To give shape to the tube, I first created an array of floats, which -in groups of 3- describe control points in 3d space.
Then along with a variable for segment density, I pass these control points to a function that uses these control points to create a CatmullRom spline and returns this in the form of another array of floats which -again in groups of 3- describe vertices of the catmull rom spline.
On each of these vertices, I want to create a ring of vertices which also can differ in density (amount of smoothness / vertices per ring).
All former vertices (control points and those that describe the catmull rom spline) are discarded.
Only the vertices that form the tube rings will be passed to OpenGL, which in turn will connect those to form the final tube.
I am as far as being able to create the catmullrom spline, and create rings at the position of its vertices, however, they are all on a planars that are in the same angle, instead of following the splines path.
[/edit]
Thanks!
Suppose you have a parametric curve such as:
xx[t_] := Sin[t];
yy[t_] := Cos[t];
zz[t_] := t;
Which gives:
The tangent vector to our curve is formed by the derivatives in each direction. In our case
Tg[t_]:= {Cos[t], -Sin[t], 1}
The orthogonal plane to that vector comes solving the implicit equation:
Tg[t].{x - xx[t], y - yy[t], z - zz[t]} == 0
In our case this is:
-t + z + Cos[t] (x - Sin[t]) - (y - Cos[t]) Sin[t] == 0
Now we find a circle in that plane, centered at the curve. i.e:
c[{x_, y_, z_, t_}] := (x - xx[t])^2 + (y - yy[t])^2 + (z - zz[t])^2 == r^2
Solving both equations, you get the equation for the circles:
HTH!
Edit
And by drawing a lot of circles, you may get a (not efficient) tube:
Or with a good Graphics 3D library:
Edit
Since you insist :) here is a program to calculate the circle at junctions.
a = {1, 2, 3}; b = {3, 2, 1}; c = {2, 3, 4};
l1 = Line[{a, b}];
l2 = Line[{b, c}];
k = Cross[(b - a), (c - b)] + b; (*Cross Product*)
angle = -ArcCos[(a - b).(c - b)/(Norm[(a - b)] Norm[(c - b)])]/2;
q = RotationMatrix[angle, k - b].(a - b);
circle[t_] := (k - b)/Norm[k - b] Sin#t + (q)/Norm[q] Cos#t + b;
Show[{Graphics3D[{
Red, l1,
Blue, l2,
Black, Line[{b, k}],
Green, Line[{b, q + b}]}, Axes -> True],
ParametricPlot3D[circle[t], {t, 0, 2 Pi}]}]
Edit
Here you have the mesh constructed by this method. It is not pretty, IMHO:
I don't know what your language of choice is, but if you speak MatLab there are already a few implementations available. Even if you are using another language, some of the code might be clear enough to inspire a reimplementation.
The key point is that if you don't want your tube to twist when you connect the vertices, you cannot determine the basis locally, but need to propagate it along the curve. The Frenet frame, as proposed by jalexiou, is one option but simpler stuff works fine as well.
I did a simple MatLab implementation called tubeplot.m in my formative years (based on a simple non-Frenet propagation), and googling it, I can see that Anders Sandberg from kth.se has done a (re?)implementation with the same name, available at http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/Ray/Tubeplot/tubeplot.html.
Edit:
The following is pseudocode for the simple implementation in tubeplot.m. I have found it to be quite robust.
The plan is to propagate two normals a and b along the curve, so
that at each point on the curve a, b and the tangent to the curve
will form an orthogonal basis which is "as close as possible" to the
basis used in the previous point.
Using this basis we can find points on the circumference of the tube.
// *** Input/output ***
// v[0]..v[N-1]: Points on your curve as vectors
// No neighbours should overlap
// nvert: Number of vertices around tube, integer.
// rtube: Radius of tube, float.
// xyz: (N, nvert)-array with vertices of the tube as vectors
// *** Initialization ***
// 1: Tangent vectors
for i=1 to N-2:
dv[i]=v[i+1]-v[i-1]
dv[0]=v[1]-v[0], dv[N-1]=v[N-1]-v[N-2]
// 2: An initial value for a (must not be pararllel to dv[0]):
idx=<index of smallest component of abs(dv[0])>
a=[0,0,0], a[idx]=1.0
// *** Loop ***
for i = 0 to N-1:
b=normalize(cross(a,dv[i]));
a=normalize(cross(dv[i],b));
for j = 0 to nvert-1:
th=j*2*pi/nvert
xyz[i,j]=v[i] + cos(th)*rtube*a + sin(th)*rtube*b
Implementation details: You can probably speed up things by precalculating the cos and sin. Also, to get a robust performance, you should fuse input points closer than, say, 0.1*rtube, or a least test that all the dv vectors are non-zero.
HTH
You need to look at Fenet formulas in Differential Geometry. See figure 2.1 for an example with a helix.
Surfaces & Curves
Taking the cross product of the line segment and the up vector will give you a vector at right-angles to them both (unless the line segment points exactly up or down) which I'll call horizontal. Taking the cross product of horizontal and the line segment with give you another vector that's at right angles to the line segment and the other one (let's call it vertical). You can then get the circle coords by lineStart + cos theta * horizontal + sin theta * vertical for theta in 0 - 2Pi.
Edit: To get the points for the mid-point between two segments, use the sum of the two line segment vectors to find the average.
I need to calculate the 2 angles (yaw and pitch) for a 3D object to face an arbitrary 3D point. These rotations are known as "Euler" rotations simply because after the first rotation, (lets say Z, based on the picture below) the Y axis also rotates with the object.
This is the code I'm using but its not working fully. When on the ground plane (Y = 0) the object correctly rotates to face the point, but as soon as I move the point upwards in Y, the rotations don't look correct.
// x, y, z represent a fractional value between -[1] and [1]
// a "unit vector" of the point I need to rotate towards
yaw = Math.atan2( y, x )
pitch = Math.atan2( z, Math.sqrt( x * x + y * y ) )
Do you know how to calculate the 2 Euler angles given a point?
The picture below shows the way I rotate. These are the angles I need to calculate.
(The only difference is I'm rotating the object in the order X,Y,Z and not Z,Y,X)
This is my system.
coordinate system is x = to the right, y = downwards, z = further back
an object is by default at (0,0,1) which is facing backward
rotations are in the order X, Y, Z where rotation upon X is pitch, Y is yaw and Z is roll
Here are my working assumptions:
The coordinate system (x,y,z) is such that positive x is to the right, positive y is down, and z is the remaining direction. In particular, y=0 is the ground plane.
An object at (0,0,0) currently facing towards (0,0,1) is being turned to face towards (x,y,z).
In order to accomplish this, there will be a rotation about the x-axis followed by one around the y-axis. Finally, there is a rotation about the z-axis in order to have things upright.
(The terminology yaw, pitch, and roll can be confusing, so I'd like to avoid using it, but roughly speaking the correspondence is x=pitch, y=yaw, z=roll.)
Here is my attempt to solve your problem given this setup:
rotx = Math.atan2( y, z )
roty = Math.atan2( x * Math.cos(rotx), z )
rotz = Math.atan2( Math.cos(rotx), Math.sin(rotx) * Math.sin(roty) )
Hopefully this is correct up to signs. I think the easiest way to fix the signs is by trial and error. Indeed, you appear to have gotten the signs on rotx and roty correct -- including a subtle issue with regards to z -- so you only need to fix the sign on rotz.
I expect this to be nontrivial (possibly depending on which octant you're in), but please try a few possibilities before saying it's wrong. Good luck!
Here is the code that finally worked for me.
I noticed a "flip" effect that occurred when the object moved from any front quadrant (positive Z) to any back quadrant. In the front quadrants the front of the object would always face the point. In the back quadrants the back of the object always faces the point.
This code corrects the flip effect so the front of the object always faces the point. I encountered it through trial-and-error so I don't really know what's happening!
rotx = Math.atan2( y, z );
if (z >= 0) {
roty = -Math.atan2( x * Math.cos(rotx), z );
}else{
roty = Math.atan2( x * Math.cos(rotx), -z );
}
Rich Seller's answer shows you how to rotate a point from one 3-D coordinate system to another system, given a set of Euler angles describing the rotation between the two coordinate systems.
But it sounds like you're asking for something different:
You have: 3-D coordinates of a single point
You want: a set of Euler angles
If that's what you're asking for, you don't have enough information. To find the Euler angles,
you'd need coordinates of at least two points, in both coordinate systems, to determine the rotation from one coordinate system into the other.
You should also be aware that Euler angles can be ambiguous: Rich's answer assumes the
rotations are applied to Z, then X', then Z', but that's not standardized. If you have to interoperate with some other code using Euler angles, you need to make sure you're using the same convention.
You might want to consider using rotation matrices or quaternions instead of Euler angles.
This series of rotations will give you what you're asking for:
About X: 0
About Y: atan2(z, x)
About Z: atan2(y, sqrt(x*x + z*z))
I cannot tell you what these are in terms of "roll", "pitch" and "yaw" unless you first define how you are using these terms. You are not using them in the standard way.
EDIT:
All right, then try this:
About X: -atan2(y, z)
About Y: atan2(x, sqrt(y*y + z*z))
About Z: 0
Talking about the rotation of axes, I think step 3 should have been the rotation of X'-, Y''-, and Z'-axes about the Y''-axis.