I have a surface given by z-values on an xy-grid (a 2D-array of values).
To calculate surface tension, I need to calculate mean curvature in every point.
To calculate mean curvature, I need to calculate principal curvature.
Since principal curvature lies in a plane containing the surface-normal-vector, this is where it gets tricky.

My current approach is very brute force:

  1. take a point and it's surrounding 8 points
  2. calculate gradient at central point
  3. rotate all points so that gradient is now in the xy-plane (moving all points off the grid!)
  4. calculate intersection of triangles defined by these 8 points and a sample of planes normal to the xy-plane
  5. find maximum

This is of course very cumbersome and slow. I'm furthermore not sure how many normal plains I should sample and weather there are special planes that give better estimates (e.g. planes containing the rotated points). Is there a more elegant way to do this?

This may be a duplicate: Numerical computation of surface curvature
However, that question didn't receive an answer.

  • $\begingroup$ I found somewhat of a solution to this problem, though I'm not sure it's applicable: math.rug.nl/~veldman/Scripties/Lam-MasterTechWisk.pdf (chapter 4) This thesis uses value-fractions to calculate curvature on a purely 2D grid. Since I require this algorithm only for pretty graphics, I'll use it. I believe it isn't an actual solution to the problem, though! (Since the curvature is taken along x-y orientation instead of applying principal curvature calculations) $\endgroup$
    – GammaSQ
    Aug 6 '18 at 7:10

Finally found the time to do the legwork and calculate the curvature by hand.

Curvature defined as $\nabla \vec{e}_n$ can be calculated with a suitably defined $\vec n$. Having a grid of Z-values, a vector normal to the surface can be found by using the gradient: $$\vec n = \binom{1}{\vec \nabla Z } $$ With $\vec \nabla z$ supplying $x$ and $y$ values of $\vec n$ and $z=1$. Thereby: $$\vec e _n = {\vec{n}\over{|\vec n|}} = {\vec{n}\over \sqrt{1+(\vec \nabla Z)^2}}$$

Since the z-component doesn't depend on z, the divergence is nearly the same, the only difference being the added one in the square root. Therefore, the curvature will be overestimated slightly, if the method portrayed in this linked paper (Chapter 4) is used.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I've edited your answer to include a link to the paper from your previous comment. Comments are, by design, ephemeral and ultimately subject to deletion. Putting the link in the answer helps to ensure that the link is not lost at some point in the future. $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson
    Nov 20 '18 at 17:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I admire your tenacity in addressing this question, GammaSQ! $\endgroup$
    – amWhy
    Nov 20 '18 at 17:50
  • $\begingroup$ @XanderHenderson: Thank you for the advice, will keep that in mind. $\endgroup$
    – GammaSQ
    Nov 21 '18 at 11:18
  • $\begingroup$ @amWhy: Thx for the compliment! $\endgroup$
    – GammaSQ
    Nov 21 '18 at 11:18

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.