Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Is this a valid way to compute new points that are on a helix and if not what is it wrong?

The Cartesian coordinates of each new helix control point could be described by the following parametrization:

$x (u)= a n_x u + p_x + b((1- \cos{(u\theta)})/ \theta) $
$y (u)= an_y u + p_y + b(\sin{(u\theta)}/ \theta)$
$z (u)= a n_z u + p_z + u $

where $a$ is the length of the helix, $u$ is in $[0,a) $, $(p_x, p_y, p_z)$ is a given center of a triangle in 3D space, $(n_x, n_y, n_z)$ is the normal of the given center in the triangle, $b$ is the radius of the helix and $\theta$ controls the frequency of the helix's curls.

share|improve this question
why do you make x(u) equal 2 different things? –  Jorge Fernández Jul 18 '12 at 23:25
@ChuckFernández: I think that was a simple typo; fixed now. –  David Cary Jul 19 '12 at 1:05

1 Answer 1

Why don't you just make it $x(u)= a+m(\cos(u)),$ $y(u)=b+n(\sin(u))$ and $z(u)=k*u$?

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.