2

I am trying to derive the formulas given in this book titled Atmoshperic and Spaceflight Dynamics by Ashish Tewari. I found questions related to finding the rotation matrices online but nothing that was meant for deriving these formulas for the euler axis. So, in chapter 2 Tewari writes how any combination of rotations can be expressed as a single rotation about a different axis called the euler axis, and that the euler axis is really just the eigenvector corresponding to the eigenvalue of 1. I followed this, but then he quickly shows that explicit formulas for the three components in R^3 are $$e_1=\frac{c_{23}-c_{32}}{2sin\Theta}$$ $$e_2=\frac{c_{31}-c_{13}}{2sin\Theta}$$ $$e_3=\frac{c_{12}-c_{21}}{2sin\Theta}$$ Tewari says he uses the following two equations can be used to solve for the components: $$Cc_1=c_1$$ $$Trace(C)=\lambda_1+\lambda_2+\lambda_3=1+e^{i\Theta}+e^{-i\Theta}=1+2cos\Theta $$ $$cos\Theta=\frac{1}{2}(Trace(C)-1)$$ Where $C$ is an orthonormal rotation matrix, and $c_1=(e_1,e_2,e_3)$ is the eigenvector with eigenvalue of 1. I was able to follow his explanations to this point, and I tried using the equations he points to, my work looks like the following.

$$Cc_1=1 \ c_1$$ Now solving for the corresponding eigenvector $$(C-I)c_1=0$$ $$\pmatrix{c_{11}-1 & c_{12} & c_{13} \\ c_{21} & c_{22}-1 & c_{23} \\ c_{31} & c_{32} & c_{33}-1 } \pmatrix{e_1 \\ e_2 \\ e_3}=0$$ After some experimentation I found these elimination matrices, soI didn't have to repeat Guassian Elimination every time I restarted from the beginning; they are $$E_1=\pmatrix{1 & 0 & 0 \\ -c_{21}/(c_{11}-1) & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1}$$ $$E_2=\pmatrix{1 & 0 &0 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 \\ -c_{31}/(c_{11}-1) & 0 & 1}$$ then defining $$C_2=E_2 E_1 (C-I) $$ $$C_2= \pmatrix{c_{11}-1 & c_{12} & c_{13} \\ 0 & c_{22}-\frac{c_{12}c_{21}}{c_{11}-1}-1 & c_{23}-\frac{c_{13}c_{21}}{c_{11}-1} \\ 0 & c_{32}-\frac{c_{12}c_{13}}{c_{11}-1} & c_{33}-\frac{c_{13}c_{21}}{c_{11}-1}-1 }$$

and $$E_3= \pmatrix{1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0& \frac{ c_{32}-\frac{c_{12}c_{31}}{c_{11}-1} } { \frac{c_{12}c_{21}}{c_{11}-1} -c_{22}+1 } & 1 }$$

finally combining the three elimination matrices into $C_3$

$$ C_3 = \pmatrix{c_{11}-1 & c_{12} & c_{13} \\ 0 & c_{22}-\frac{c_{12}c_{21}}{c_{11}-1}-1 & c_{23}-\frac{c_{13}c_{21}}{c_{11}-1} \\ 0 & 0 & c_{33}+ \frac{(c_{23}-\frac{c_{13}c_{21}}{c_{11}-1})( c_{32}-\frac{c_{12}c_{31}}{c_{11}-1}) } {1-c_{22}-\frac{c_{12}c_{21}}{c_{11}-1}} -\frac{c_{13}c_{31}}{c_{11}-1} -1 }$$ and the following still holds $$C_3 c_1=E_3 C_2 = E_3 E_2 E_1 (C-I)c_1 =0$$ which is the same as $$\pmatrix{c_{11}-1 & c_{12} & c_{13} \\ 0 & c_{22}-\frac{c_{12}c_{21}}{c_{11}-1}-1 & c_{23}-\frac{c_{13}c_{21}}{c_{11}-1} \\ 0 & 0 & c_{33}+ \frac{(c_{23}-\frac{c_{13}c_{21}}{c_{11}-1})( c_{32}-\frac{c_{12}c_{31}}{c_{11}-1}) } {1-c_{22}-\frac{c_{12}c_{21}}{c_{11}-1}} -\frac{c_{13}c_{31}}{c_{11}-1} -1 } \pmatrix{e_1\\e_2\\e_3}=0$$

This is where I get stuck. Normally when solving for the eigenvectors we could set the third unknown variable ($e_3$ in this case) equal to $1$ and there would be some kind of relationship we could make between $e_3$ and $e_2$ and $e_1$. But here I'm not sure what relationship we can find. If we set $e_3=1$ it would mean $e_3$ would NOT be equal to the formula $e_3=\frac{c_{12}-c_{21}}{2sin\Theta}$

I also tried to use related information not mentioned by Tewari, such as the fact that the eigenvector's magnitude should be equal to 1, giving $$e_3 = (1-e_2^2-e_1^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}$$ and that $sin\Theta$ might be related to the $Trace(C)$ by $$sin\Theta = \sqrt{1-cos^2\Theta} = \sqrt{1- (\frac{1}{2}(Trace(C)-1))^{2}}=\\ = \sqrt{1-\frac{1}{4}(Trace(C)^2-2Trace(C)+1)} =\\ = \frac{1}{2}\sqrt{-Trace(C)^2+2Trace(C)+3}$$ But I am still stumped.

Widawensen
  • 8,517

1 Answers1

1

The simplest way to derive the mentioned formula for components of axis is to use directly Rodrigues formula.

$$C(e,\theta) =I+\sin(\theta)S(e)+(1-\cos(\theta))S^2(e)$$

where $S(e)$ is a skew-symmetric matrix corresponding to the axis vector $e$

$$S(e)=\begin{bmatrix} 0 & -e_3 & e_2 \\ e_3 & 0 & -e_1 \\ -e_2 & e_1 & 0 \end{bmatrix}$$

Additionally we have $$S^2(e)=ee^T-I$$ ($e$ has to be unit vector i.e $e_1^2+e_2^2+e_3^2=1$)

The formula for $e_1,e_2,e_3$ is derived from skew-symmmetrical part of Rodrigues formula i.e.

$$\dfrac{1}{2}(C -C^T)= \sin(\theta)S(e)$$,

btw the formula for cosine of rotation angle $\text{tr}(C)=1+2\cos(\theta)$ can be derived from the rest (symmetrical) part of rotation matrix i.e.

$$I+ (1-\cos(\theta))(ee^T-I)= (1-\cos(\theta)) ee^T +I\cos(\theta) $$

(trace of skew-symmetric part is equal to $0$ so we can neglect this part).

Widawensen
  • 8,517
  • I accepted your answer, it took me a while to prove the Rodrigues formula and all the relevant things linked in the wikipedia article. But I am going to keep searching for an answer via the original method, because solving for the eigenvector to eigenvalue 1 works numerically, so I think it should be possible to solve for the components analytically this way too, otherwise I think the numeric approach would fail, and may be more relevant historically. Thank you, that was helpful and insightful. I hope you don't mind if I ask similar questions in the future. :) – betafractal Jun 18 '18 at 03:45
  • @betafractal The proof of Rodrigues formula is placed directly in the mentioned Wikipedia. This is very useful formula and give much insight into many problems concerning rotations. I think I'm quite familiar with it, so If you have additional questions don't hesitate. Also very useful is mentioned skew-symmetric matrix $S(e)$ and its connection with rotation, it's very worth to study also .. (for example the columns of it span the plane of rotation perpendicular to axis) ... – Widawensen Jun 19 '18 at 07:48
  • @betafractal Maybe you would be interested also in rotations in n dimensions. In this question https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/197772/generalized-rotation-matrix-in-n-dimensional-space-around-n-2-unit-vector see the comment of Robert Israel how to use Rodrigues formula in n-dimensional space.. – Widawensen Jun 19 '18 at 07:58
  • I saw the proof in the Wikipedia article but I had to really study it and and prove to myself every piece, example, that k.cross(v) was really just a rotation of v_perpendicular. I see that allof it is true now, I had to read and make sure I really understood. Oh thanks for the n dimension will check it out! – betafractal Jun 19 '18 at 15:40
  • @ Widawensen, I noticed that Ce=e and C^Te=e, so 1/2(C-C^T)e=0, then we can solve for e_i in similar to the form above, I get as exampl: e_3=(a_2_1-a_1_2)/sqrt((a_2_3-a_3_2)^2+(a_1_3-a_3_1)^2), when before we got e_3=(a_2_1-a_1_2)/(2*sin(theta)). I thought I could show this was true if theta was equal both times from an example in Tewaris book but it wasn't the same as his example. Would you have idea why? Should I ask another question or is this okay here? – betafractal Jun 22 '18 at 23:39
  • @ Widawensen He uses dtr=pi/180;alfa=-45*dtr;beta=45*dtr; C1=[1 0 0;0 cos(alfa) sin(alfa);0 -sin(alfa) cos(alfa)] C2=[cos(beta) 0 -sin(beta);0 1 0;sin(beta) 0 cos(beta)] C3=[cos(alfa) sin(alfa) 0;-sin(alfa) cos(alfa) 0;0 0 1] C=C3*C2*C1 %rotation matrix for the final orientation – betafractal Jun 22 '18 at 23:40
  • @betafractal You could try to ask another question, however some guys from here might think that it would be a duplicate ... but try.. – Widawensen Jun 26 '18 at 09:47