1
$\begingroup$

I want to derivate a matrix $A$ w.r.t. a rotation matrix numerically.

The rotation matrix I am talking about is $R_i \in SO(3)$ and it is coming from a choice of Euler angles sequence $(1,2,3)$. The angles involved are the so called roll-pitch-yaw angles $\phi_i,\theta_i,\psi_i$ (or Cardan Angles, or Tait-Bryan angles).

Therefore:

$R_i(\phi_i,\theta_i,\psi_i)=R_i=R_x(\phi_i)R_y(\theta_i)R_z(\psi_i) \;\;\;\;\;\;(1)$

If I would need to derivate the matrix $A$ numerically w.r.t. a scalar $\alpha$ I would do:

$\frac{A(\alpha)-A(\alpha+\delta)}{\delta}\;\;\;\;\;\;(2)$

Instead in my case I was thinking to do, since I can write a rotation matrix as $R(\omega,\beta)=exp(\hat{\omega}\beta)$ (where $\hat{\omega}$ is the skew-symmetric matrix associated to the vector $\omega \in \mathbb{R}^3$):

$\frac{A(R_i)-A(R_i\cdot exp(e_i\delta))}{\delta}\;\;\;\;\;\; \forall i \in\{1,2,3\}\;\;\;\;\;\;(3)$

with $ e_1= \left( \begin{array}{c} 1\\0\\0 \end{array} \right) \;\; , e_2= \left( \begin{array}{c} 0\\1\\0 \end{array} \right) , e_3= \left( \begin{array}{c} 0\\0\\1 \end{array} \right) $

I am not sure the $(3)$ is correct and I am not sure its denominator is correct.

Could you please help me?

Thanks a lot.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

If you have a sequence of rotations about the local axes $\mathbf{z}_1$, $\mathbf{z}_2$ and $\mathbf{z}_3$ with angles $q_1$, $q_2$ and $q_3$ then you have the following properties

$$ \begin{align} \mathtt{R} &= \mathrm{Rot}(\mathbf{z}_1,q_1)\mathrm{Rot}(\mathbf{z}_2,q_2) \mathrm{Rot}(\mathbf{z}_3,q_3) \\ \dot{\mathtt{R}} & = [\boldsymbol{\omega} \times] \mathtt{R} \\ \boldsymbol{\omega} & = \mathbf{z}_1 \dot{q}_1 + \mathrm{Rot}(\mathbf{z}_1,q_1) \left( \mathbf{z}_2 \dot{q}_2 + \mathrm{Rot}(\mathbf{z}_2,q_2) \mathbf{z}_3 \dot{q}_3 \right) \end{align} $$

NOTE: The $[\omega \times]$ notation is the 3x3 anti-symmetric cross product operator matrix. $$ [ \begin{pmatrix} x\\y\\z \end{pmatrix} \times ] = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & -z & y \\ z & 0 & -x \\ -y& x & 0 \end{bmatrix} $$

You can easily prove the above with two rotations if you accept the rules on how to differentiate vectors that ride on rotating frames: (search rotating frame derivative). Expanding it to three rotations is more tedious, but following the same logic. $$ \dot{\mathtt{R}} = \dot{\rm R}_1 {\rm R}_2 {\rm R}_3 +{\rm R}_1 \dot{\rm R}_2 {\rm R}_3+{\rm R}_1 {\rm R}_2 \dot{\rm R}_3 $$

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Hi thanks for the reply which is interesting but it is not what I was looking for. Here I explicitly asked for a numerical method to make a derivative of a matrix which is a function of a rotation matrix which is something different from what you are proposing. You are giving me a way to compute the analytical derivative of a rotation matrix. $\endgroup$ – kalmanIsAGameChanger Mar 22 '17 at 20:35
  • $\begingroup$ I can only speak for analytical methods (that is what I trained for) so I apologize if this is answer wasn't helpful to you. I hope you get what you are asking for. $\endgroup$ – ja72 Mar 23 '17 at 13:25
1
$\begingroup$

The gradient you seek is a 4th order tensor$,\,{\mathcal F},\,$ which satisfies $$\eqalign{ dA_{ij} &= {\mathcal F}_{ijkl}\,dR_{kl} \cr\cr }$$ Since $dR$ has 9 independent elements, you'll to calculate need 9 numerical derivatives $$\eqalign{ \frac{A(R+hE_{kl})-A(R)}{h} }$$ where $E_{kl}$ is the matrix which has the $(k,l)$ element equal to unity, and all other elements equal to zero. The $h$ parameter should be chosen to balance round-off error against accuracy. For IEEE double precision its around $10^{-8}$

Update

Here's an explicit version of the proposed technique $$\eqalign{ {\mathcal F}_{ijkl} &= \frac{A_{ij}(R+hE_{kl})-A_{ij}(R)}{h} }$$

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Hi thanks a lot for your answer but I need to understand it a bit better. What is $dR_{kl}$ for you? and how can you define the $\mathcal{F_{ijkl}}$? thanks for your time $\endgroup$ – kalmanIsAGameChanger Mar 27 '17 at 20:58
  • $\begingroup$ @minidiable I've updated my answer with explicit index notation. $\endgroup$ – lynn Mar 28 '17 at 19:00

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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