A quaternion is obviously equivalent to a rotation matrix, but a 4x4 matrix does more than just rotation. It also does translation and scaling.
A matrix for affine transforms can actually be represented with 12 elements because the last row is constant:
a b c d
e f g h
i j k l
0 0 0 1
x' = a*x + b*y + c*z + d
y' = e*x + f*y + g*z + h
z' = i*x + j*y + k*z + l
A full transform therefore takes 9 multiplies and 9 adds.
For the three affine transforms: rotation, scale, and translation I would like to know if a quaternion-based system is competitive. I have looked all over and have not found one anywhere.
Given a quaternion p = (w,x,y,z)
For rotation, q' = pqp'. I could add a translation vector: t=(tx,ty,tz)
q' = pqp' + t
That is just 7 elements as compared to 12 with matrices, though it is slightly more operations.
That still does not support scaling though. Is there a complete equivalent?
Note: If the only answer is to convert the rotation to a matrix, then that is not really an answer. The question is whether a quaternion system can perform affine transform without matrices.
If there is an equivalence, can anyone point me to a java or c++ class so I can see how this works?
Related
What I have tried already: d = |v||PQ|sin("Theta")
Now, I need to determine what theta is, so I set up a position on a makeshift graph, the graph I made was on the xy plane only as the z plane complicates things needlessly for finding theta. So, I ended up with an acute angle, and if the angle is acute, then I have to find theta which according to dot product facts is greater than 0.
I do not have access to theta, so I used the same princples from cross dots. u * v = |u||v|cos("theta") but in this case, u and v are PQ and v. A vector is a vector, right?
so now I have theta = acos((v*PQ)/(|v||PQ))
with that I get (4sqrt(10))/15 = 32.5125173162 in degrees, so the angle is 32.5125173162 degrees.
So, now that I have theta, I plug it into my distance formula |v||PQ|sin(32.5125173162)
3*sqrt(10)*sin(32.5125173162) = 5.0990195136
or for the sake of simplicity, 5.1
I however want to know if this question is correct.
If it is NOT correct, what can I do to correct it? At what points did I use incorrect information?
This is not a question with a definitive answer in the back of the book, its a question on the side of a page that said: "try this!"
There are a couple of problems with this question.
From the context it looks like you mean for both v and PQ to be vectors. The "distance" between two vectors is an awkward (not well defined) question because vectors are not position bound.
You are using the cross product formula and I have no idea why:
|AxB| = |A||B|Sin(theta)
I think what you are actually trying to do is calculate the distance between the terminal points of the vectors, (2, 1, 2) and (1, 0, 3). Just use the Pythagorean Theorem (extended to 3D) for this.
d = sqrt( (x1 - x2)^2 + (y1 - y2)^2 + (z1 - z2)^2 )
d = sqrt( (2 - 1)^2 + (1 - 2)^2 + (2 - 3)^2 )
d = sqrt( 1^2 + (-1)^2 + (-1)^2 )
d = sqrt(3)
Edit:
If what you need really is the magnitude of the cross product, |AxB| then just find the cross product (using the determinant) and then calculate the magnitude of the result. There is no need for the formula you were using.
I had attached also the schematic to depict my question.
I need to rotate the vector V with the base point P by an angle and find the new vector V'.
The rotation axis is say for is about a local y axis at point P (which is parallel to global Y axis)
Subsequently, I need to rotate the initial vector V about x axis which is parallel to global Y axis.
The main reason for the rotation is to find the new vector V' at point P. Both the rotations are independent and each of the rotation provides a new V'. I'm programming this in VB.net and output is a double() of new vector V'.
Just apply the two rotations independently (see Wikipedia). The base point does not play any role in this because it is just a constant offset that never changes. If I got your description right, you want the following:
//rotation about y-axis
iAfterRot1 = cos(phi1) * i + sin(phi1) * k
jAfterRot1 = j
kAfterRot1 = -sin(phi1) * i + cos(phi) * k
//rotation about x-axis
iAfterRot2 = iAfterRot1
jAfterRot2 = cos(phi2) * jAfterRot1 - sin(phi2) * kAfterRot1
kAfterRot2 = sin(phi2) * jAfterRot1 + cos(phi2) * kAfterRot1
I'm a little confused about the difference between the DLT algorithm described here and the homography estimation described here. In both of these techniques, we are trying to solve for the entries of a 3x3 matrix by using at least 4 point correspondences. In both methods, we set up a system where we have a "measurement" matrix and we use SVD to solve for the vector of elements that make up H. I was wondering why there are two techniques that seem to do the same thing, and why one might be used over the other.
You have left-right image correspondences {p_i} <-> {p'_i}, where p_i = (x_i, y_i), etc.
Normalizing them to the unit square means computing two shifts m=(mx, my), m'=(mx', my'), and two scales s=(sx,sy), s'=(sx',sy') such that q_i = (p_i - m) / s and q_i' = (p_i' - m') / s', and both the {q_i} and the {q'_i} transformed image points are centered at (0,0) and approximately contained within a square of unit side length. A little math shows that a good choice for the m terms are the averages of the x,y coordinates in each set of image points, and for the s terms you use the standard deviations (or twice the standard deviation) times 1/sqrt(2).
You can express this normalizing transformation in matrix form: q = T p,
where T = [[1/sx, 0, -mx/sx], [0, 1/sy, -my/sy], [0, 0, 1]], and likewise q' = T' p'.
You then compute the homography K between the {q_i} and {q'_i} points: q_i' = K q_i.
Finally, you denormalize K into the origina (un-normalized) coordinates thus: H = inv(T') K T, and H is the desired homography that maps {p} into {p'}.
I have a green vehicle which will shortly collide with a blue object (which is 200 away from the cube)
It has a Kinect depth camera D at [-100,0,200] which sees the corner of the cube (grey sphere)
The measured depth is 464 at 6.34° in the X plane and 12.53° in the Y plane.
I want to calculate the position of the corner as it would appear if there was a camera F at [150,0,0], which would see this:
in other words transform the red vector into the yellow vector. I know that this is achieved with a transformation matrix but I can't find out how to compute the matrix from the D-F vector [250,0,-200] or how to use it; my high-school maths dates back 40 years.
math.se has a similar question but it doesn't cover my problem and I can't find anything on robotices.se either.
I realise that I should show some code that I've tried, but I don't know where to start. I would be very grateful if somebody could help me to solve this.
ROS provides the tf library which allows you to transform between frames. You can simply set a static transform between the pose of your camera and the pose of your desired location. Then, you can get the pose of any point detected by your camera in the reference frame of your desired point on your robot. ROS tf will do everything you need and everything I explain below.
The longer answer is that you need to construct a transformation tree. First, compute the static transformation between your two poses. A pose is a 7-dimensional transformation including a translation and orientation. This is best represented as a quaternion and a 3D vector.
Now, for all poses in the reference frame of your kinect, you must transform them to your desired reference frame. Let's call this frame base_link and your camera frame camera_link.
I'm going to go ahead and decide that base_link is the parent of camera_link. Technically these transformations are bidirectional, but because you may need a transformation tree, and because ROS cares about this, you'll want to decide who is the parent.
To convert rotation from camera_link to base_link, you need to compute the rotational difference. This can be done by multiplying the quaternion of base_link's orientation by the conjugate of camera_link's orientation. Here's a super quick Python example:
def rotDiff(self,q1: Quaternion,q2: Quaternion) -> Quaternion:
"""Finds the quaternion that, when applied to q1, will rotate an element to q2"""
conjugate = Quaternion(q2.qx*-1,q2.qy*-1,q2.qz*-1,q2.qw)
return self.rotAdd(q1,conjugate)
def rotAdd(self, q1: Quaternion, q2: Quaternion) -> Quaternion:
"""Finds the quaternion that is the equivalent to the rotation caused by both input quaternions applied sequentially."""
w1 = q1.qw
w2 = q2.qw
x1 = q1.qx
x2 = q2.qx
y1 = q1.qy
y2 = q2.qy
z1 = q1.qz
z2 = q2.qz
w = w1 * w2 - x1 * x2 - y1 * y2 - z1 * z2
x = w1 * x2 + x1 * w2 + y1 * z2 - z1 * y2
y = w1 * y2 + y1 * w2 + z1 * x2 - x1 * z2
z = w1 * z2 + z1 * w2 + x1 * y2 - y1 * x2
return Quaternion(x,y,z,w)
Next, you need to add the vectors. The naive approach is to simply add the vectors, but you need to account for rotation when calculating these. What you really need is a coordinate transformation. The position of camera_link relative to base_link is some 3D vector. Based on your drawing, this is [-250, 0, 200]. Next, we need to reproject the vectors to your points of interest into the rotational frame of base_link. I.e., all the points your camera sees at 12.53 degrees that appear at the z = 0 plane to your camera are actually on a 12.53 degree plane relative to base_link and you need to find out what their coordinates are relative to your camera as if your camera was in the same orientation as base_link.
For details on the ensuing math, read this PDF (particularly starting at page 9).
To accomplish this, we need to find your vector's components in base_link's reference frame. I find that it's easiest to read if you convert the quaternion to a rotation matrix, but there is an equivalent direct approach.
To convert a quaternion to a rotation matrix:
def Quat2Mat(self, q: Quaternion) -> rotMat:
m00 = 1 - 2 * q.qy**2 - 2 * q.qz**2
m01 = 2 * q.qx * q.qy - 2 * q.qz * q.qw
m02 = 2 * q.qx * q.qz + 2 * q.qy * q.qw
m10 = 2 * q.qx * q.qy + 2 * q.qz * q.qw
m11 = 1 - 2 * q.qx**2 - 2 * q.qz**2
m12 = 2 * q.qy * q.qz - 2 * q.qx * q.qw
m20 = 2 * q.qx * q.qz - 2 * q.qy * q.qw
m21 = 2 * q.qy * q.qz + 2 * q.qx * q.qw
m22 = 1 - 2 * q.qx**2 - 2 * q.qy**2
result = [[m00,m01,m02],[m10,m11,m12],[m20,m21,m22]]
return result
Now that your rotation is represented as a rotation matrix, it's time to do the final calculation.
Following the MIT lecture notes from my link above, I'll arbitrarily name the vector to your point of interest from the camera A.
Find the rotation matrix that corresponds with the quaternion that represents the rotation between base_link and camera_link and simply perform a matrix multiplication. If you're in Python, you can use numpy to do this, but in the interest of being explicit, here is the long form of the multiplication:
def coordTransform(self, M: RotMat, A: Vector) -> Vector:
"""
M is my rotation matrix that represents the rotation between my frames
A is the vector of interest in the frame I'm rotating from
APrime is A, but in the frame I'm rotating to.
"""
APrime = []
i = 0
for component in A:
APrime.append(component * M[i][0] + component * M[i][1] + component * m[i][2])
i += 1
return APrime
Now, the vectors from camera_link are represented as if camera_link and base_link share an orientation.
Now you may simply add the static translation between camera_link and base_link (or subtract base_link -> camera_link) and the resulting vector will be your point's new translation.
Putting it all together, you can now gather the translation and orientation of every point your camera detects relative to any arbitrary reference frame to gather pose data relevant to your application.
You can put all of this together into a function simply called tf() and stack these transformations up and down a complex transformation tree. Simply add all the transformations up to a common ancestor and subtract all the transformations down to your target node in order to find the transformation of your data between any two arbitrary related frames.
Edit: Hendy pointed out that it's unclear what Quaternion() class I refer to here.
For the purposes of this answer, this is all that's necessary:
class Quaternion():
def __init__(self, qx: float, qy: float, qz: float, qw: float):
self.qx = qx
self.qy = qy
self.xz = qz
self.qw = qw
But if you want to make this class super handy, you can define __mul__(self, other: Quaternion and __rmul__(self, other: Quaternion) to perform quaternion multiplication (order matters, so make sure to do both!). conjugate(self), toEuler(self), toRotMat(self), normalize(self) may also be handy additions.
Note that due to quirks in Python's typing, the above other: Quaternion is only for clarity. You'll need a longer-form if type(other) != Quaternion: raise TypeError('You can only multiply quaternions with other quaternions) error handling block to make that into valid python :)
The following definitions are not necessary for this answer, but they may prove useful to the reader.
import numpy as np
def __mul__(self, other):
if type(other) != Quaternion:
print("Quaternion multiplication only works with other quats")
raise TypeError
r1 = self.qw
r2 = other.qw
v1 = [self.qx,self.qy,self.qz]
v2 = [other.qx,other.qy,other.qz]
rPrime = r1*r2 - np.dot(v1,v2)
vPrimeA = np.multiply(r1,v2)
vPrimeB = np.multiply(r2,v1)
vPrimeC = np.cross(v1,v2)
vPrimeD = np.add(vPrimeA, vPrimeB)
vPrime = np.add(vPrimeD,vPrimeC)
x = vPrime[0]
y = vPrime[1]
z = vPrime[2]
w = rPrime
return Quaternion(x,y,z,w)
def __rmul__(self, other):
if type(other) != Quaternion:
print("Quaternion multiplication only works with other quats")
raise TypeError
r1 = other.qw
r2 = self.qw
v1 = [other.qx,other.qy,other.qz]
v2 = [self.qx,self.qy,self.qz]
rPrime = r1*r2 - np.dot(v1,v2)
vPrimeA = np.multiply(r1,v2)
vPrimeB = np.multiply(r2,v1)
vPrimeC = np.cross(v1,v2)
vPrimeD = np.add(vPrimeA, vPrimeB)
vPrime = np.add(vPrimeD,vPrimeC)
x = vPrime[0]
y = vPrime[1]
z = vPrime[2]
w = rPrime
return Quaternion(x,y,z,w)
def conjugate(self):
return Quaternion(self.qx*-1,self.qy*-1,self.qz*-1,self.qw)
I have solid object that is spinning with a torque W, and I want to calculate the force F applied on a certain point that's D units away from the center of the object. All these values are represented in Vector3 format (x, y, z)
I know until now that W = D x F, where x is the cross product, so by expanding this I get:
Wx = Dy*Fz - Dz*Fy
Wy = Dz*Fx - Dx*Fz
Wz = Dx*Fy - Dy*Fx
So I have this equation, and I need to find (Fx, Fy, Fz), and I'm thinking of using the Simplex method to solve it.
Since the F vector can also have negative values, I split each F variable into 2 (F = G-H), so the new equation looks like this:
Wx = Dy*Gz - Dy*Hz - Dz*Gy + Dz*Hy
Wy = Dz*Gx - Dz*Hx - Dx*Gz + Dx*Hz
Wz = Dx*Gy - Dx*Hy - Dy*Gx + Dy*Hx
Next, I define the simplex table (we need <= inequalities, so I duplicate each equation and multiply it by -1.
Also, I define the objective function as: minimize (Gx - Hx + Gy - Hy + Gz - Hz).
The table looks like this:
Gx Hx Gy Hy Gz Hz <= RHS
============================================================
0 0 -Dz Dz Dy -Dy <= Wx = Gx
0 0 Dz -Dz -Dy Dy <= -Wx = Hx
Dz -Dz 0 0 Dx -Dx <= Wy = Gy
-Dz Dz 0 0 -Dx Dx <= -Wy = Hy
-Dy Dy Dx -Dx 0 0 <= Wz = Gz
Dy -Dy -Dx Dx 0 0 <= -Wz = Hz
============================================================
1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 0 = Z
The problem is that when I run it through an online solver I get Unbounded solution.
Can anyone please point me to what I'm doing wrong ?
Thanks in advance.
edit: I'm sure I messed up some signs somewhere (for example the Z should be defined as a max), but I'm sure I'm wrong when defining something more important.
There exists no unique solution to the problem as posed. You can only solve for the tangential projection of the force. This comes from the properties of the vector (cross) product - it is zero for collinear vectors and in particular for the vector product of a vector by itself. Therefore, if F is a solution of W = r x F, then F' = F + kr is also a solution for any k:
r x F' = r x (F + kr) = r x F + k (r x r) = r x F
since the r x r term is zero by the definition of vector product. Therefore, there is not a single solution but rather a whole linear space of vectors that are solutions.
If you restrict the solution to forces that have zero projection in the direction of r, then you could simply take the vector product of W and r:
W x r = (r x F) x r = -[r x (r x F)] = -[(r . F)r - (r . r)F] = |r|2F
with the first term of the expansion being zero because the projection of F onto r is zero (the dot denotes scalar (inner) product). Therefore:
F = (W x r) / |r|2
If you are also given the magnitude of F, i.e. |F|, then you can compute the radial component (if any) but there are still two possible solutions with radial components in opposing directions.
Quick dirty derivation...
Given D and F, you get W perpendicular to them. That's what a cross product does.
But you have W and D and need to find F. This is a bad assumption, but let's assume F was perpendicular to D. Call it Fp, since it's not necessarily the same as F. Ignoring magnitudes, WxD should give you the direction of Fp.
This ignoring magnitudes, so fix that with a little arithmetic. Starting with W=DxF applied to Fp:
mag(W) = mag(D)*mag(Fp) (ignoring geometry; using Fp perp to D)
mag(Fp) = mag(W)/mag(D)
Combining the cross product bit for direction with this stuff for magnitude,
Fp = WxD / mag(WxD) * mag(Fp)
Fp = WxD /mag(W) /mag(D) *mag(W) /mag(D)
= WxD / mag(D)^2.
Note that given any solution Fp to W=DxF, you can add any vector proportional to D to Fp to obtain another solution F. That is a totally free parameter to choose as you like.
Note also that if the torque applies to some sort of axle or object constrained to rotate about some axis, and F is applied to some oddball lever sticking out at a funny angle, then vector D points in some funny direction. You want to replace D with just the part perpendicular to the axle/axis, otherwise the "/mag(D)" part will be wrong.
So from your comment is clear that all rotations are spinning around center of gravity
in that case
F=M/r
F force [N]
M torque [N/m]
r scalar distance between center of rotation [m]
this way you know the scalar size of your Force
now you need the direction
it is perpendicular to rotation axis
and it is the tangent of the rotation in that point
dir=r x axis
F = F * dir / |dir|
bolds are vectors rest is scalar
x is cross product
dir is force direction
axis is rotation axis direction
now just change the direction according to rotation direction (signum of actual omega)
also depending on your coordinate system setup
so ether negate F or not
but this is in 3D free rotation very unprobable scenario
the object had to by symmetrical from mass point of view
or initial driving forces was applied in manner to achieve this
also beware that after first hit with any interaction Force this will not be true !!!
so if you want just to compute Force it generate on certain point if collision occurs is this fine
but immediately after this your spinning will change
and for non symmetric objects the spinning will be most likely off the center of gravity !!!
if your object will be disintegrated then you do not need to worry
if not then you have to apply rotation and movement dynamics
Rotation Dynamics
M=alpha*I
M torque [N/m]
alpha angular acceleration
I quadratic mass inertia for actual rotation axis [kg.m^2]
epislon''=omega'=alpha
' means derivation by time
omega angular speed
epsilon angle