Ok.... so I made a quick diagram to sorta explain what I'm hoping to accomplish. Sadly math is not my forte and I'm hoping one of you wizards can give me the correct formulas :) This is for a c++ program, but really I'm looking for the formulas rather than c++ code.
Ok, now basically, the red circle is our 0,0 point, where I'm standing. The blue circle is 300 units above us and at what I would assume is a 0 degree's angle. I want to know, how I can find a find the x,y for a point in this chart using the angle of my choice as well as a certain distance of my choice.
I would want to know how to find the x,y of the green circle which is lets say 225 degrees and 500 units away.
So I assume I have to figure out a way to transpose a circle that is 500 units away from 0,0 at all points than pick a place on that circle based on the angle I want? But yeah no idea where to go from there.
A point on a plane can be expressed in two main mathematical representations, cartesian (thus x,y) and polar : using a distance from the center and an angle. Typically r and a greek letter, but let's use w.
Definitions
Under common conventions, r is the distance from the center (0,0) to your point, and
angles are measured going counterclockwise (for positive values, clockwise for negative), with the 0 being the horizontal on the right hand side.
Remarks
Note a few things about angles in polar representations :
angles can be expressed with radians as well, with π being the same angle as 180°, thus π/2 90° and so on. π=3.14 (approx.) is defined by 2π=the perimeter of a circle of radius 1.
angles can be represented modulo a full circle. A full circle is either 2π or 360°, thus +90° is the same as -270°, and +180° and -180° are the same, as well as 3π/4 and -5π/4, 2π and 0, 360° and 0°, etc. You can consider angles between [-π,π] (that is [-180,180]) or [0,2π] (i.e. [0,360]), or not restrain them at all, it doesn't matter.
when your point is in the center (r=0) then the angle w is not really defined.
r is by definition always positive. If r is negative, you can change its sign and add half a turn (π or 180°) to get coordinates for the same point.
Points on your graph
red : x=0, y=0 or r=0 w= any value
blue : x=0, y=300 or r=300 and w=90°
green : x=-400, y=-400 or r=-565 and w=225° (approximate values, I didn't do the actual measurements)
Note that for the blue point you can have w=-270°, and for the green w=-135°, etc.
Going from one representation to the other
Finally, you need trigonometry formulas to go back and forth between representations. The easier transformation is from polar to cartesian :
x=r*cos(w)
y=r*sin(w)
Since cos²+sin²=1, pythagoras, and so on, you can see that x² + y² = r²cos²(w) + r²sin²(w) = r², thus to get r, use :
r=sqrt(x²+y²)
And finally to get the angle, we use cos/sin = tan where tan is another trigonometry function. From y/x = r sin(w) / (r cos(w)) = tan(w), you get :
w = arctan(y/x) [mod π]
tan is a function modulo π, instead of 2π. arctan simply means the inverse of the function tan, and is sometimes written tan^-1 or atan.
By inverting the tangent, you get a result betweeen -π/2 and π/2 (or -90° and 90°) : you need to eventually add π to your result. This is done for angles between [π/2,π] and [-π,π/2] ([90,180] and [-180,-90]). These values are caracterized by the sign of the cos : since x = r cos(w) you know x is negative on all these angles. Try looking where these angles are on your graph, it's really straightforward. Thus :
w = arctan(y/x) + (π if x < 0)
Finally, you can not divide by x if it is 0. In that corner case, you have
if y > 0, w = π/2
if y < 0, w = -π/2
What is seems is that given polar coordinates, you want to obtain Cartesian coordinates from this. It's some simple mathematics and should be easy to do.
to convert polar(r, O) coordinates to cartesian(x, y) coordinates
x = r * cos(O)
y = r * sin(O)
where O is theta, not zero
reference: http://www.mathsisfun.com/polar-cartesian-coordinates.html
Related
I am trying to draw a rotated ellipse not centered at the origin (in c++).
so far my code "works":
for (double i = 0; i <= 360; i = i + 1) {
theta = i*pi / 180;
x = (polygonList[compt]->a_coeff / 2) * sin(theta) + polygonList[compt]->centroid->datapointx;
y = (polygonList[compt]->b_coeff / 2) * cos(theta) + polygonList[compt]->centroid->datapointy;
xTmp = (x - polygonList[compt]->centroid->datapointx)* cos(angle1) - (y - polygonList[compt]->centroid->datapointy)*sin(angle1) + polygonList[compt]->centroid->datapointx;
yTmp = (x - polygonList[compt]->centroid->datapointx)* sin(angle1) + (y - polygonList[compt]->centroid->datapointy)*cos(angle1) + polygonList[compt]->centroid->datapointy;
}
PolygonList is a list of "bloc" which will be replaced by an ellipse of same area.
My issue is that the angles are not quite exact, as if I had to put a protractor that'd fit the shape of my ellipse, the protractor would obviously get squeezed, and so would be the angles (is that clear ?)
Here is an example: I am trying to set a point on the top ellipse (E1) which would be lying on a line drawn between the centroid of E1, and any point on the second ellipse (E2).On this example, the point on E2 lies at an angle of ~220-230 degree. I am able to catch this angle, the angle seems ok.
The problem is that if I try to project this point on E1 by using this angle of ~225 degree, I end up on the second red circle on top. it looks like my angle is now ~265 degree, but in fact, if I shape the protractor to fit in my ellipse, I get the right angle (~225) ,cf img 2)
it is a bit hard to see the angle on that re-shaped protractor, but it does show ~225 degree.
My conclusion is that the ellipse is drawn like if I had to drew a circle and then I'd compress it, which changes the distance between the angles.
Could someone tell me how I could fix that ?
PS: to draw those ellipses I just use a for loop which plots a dot at every angle (from 0 to 360). we clearly see on the first picture that the distance between the dots are different whether we are at 0 or at 90 degree.
your parametrisation is exactly that, a circle is a case of ellipse with both axes are equal. It sounds like you need use rational representation of ellipse instead of standard: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellipse
So, I've asked the question above so that I could find a possible overlap between 2 ellipses by checking the distance between any point on E2 and its projection on E1: if the distance between the centroid of E1 and the projected dot on E1 is larger than the distance between the centroid of E1 to a dot on E2 I'll assume an overlap. I reckon this solution has never been tried (or I haven't search enough) and should work fine. But before working I needed to get those angles right.
I have found a way to avoid using angles and projected dots, by checking the foci:
the sum of the distance between the focus A and B to any point around an axis is constant (let's call it DE1 for E1).
I then check the distance between my foci and any point on E2. If that distance becomes less than DE1, I'll assume a connection.
So far it seems to work fine :)
I'll put that here for anyone in need.
Flo
Does anyone know some algorithm to calculate the number of sides required to approximate a circle using polygon, if radius, r of the circle and maximum departure of the polygon from circularity, D is given? I really need to find the number of sides as I need to draw the approximated circle in OpenGL.
Also, we have the resolution of the screen in NDC coordinates per pixel given by P and solving D = P/2, we could guarantee that our circle is within half-pixel of accuracy.
What you're describing here is effectively a quality factor, which often goes hand-in-hand with error estimates.
A common way we handle this is to calculate the error for a a small portion of the circumference of the circle. The most trivial is to determine the difference in arc length of a slice of the circle, compared to a line segment joining the same two points on the circumference. You could use more effective measures, like difference in area, radius, etc, but this method should be adequate.
Think of an octagon, circumscribed with a perfect circle. In this case, the error is the difference in length of the line between two adjacent points on the octagon, and the arc length of the circle joining those two points.
The arc length is easy enough to calculate: PI * r * theta, where r is your radius, and theta is the angle, in radians, between the two points, assuming you draw lines from each of these points to the center of the circle/polygon. For a closed polygon with n sides, the angle is just (2*PI/n) radians. Let the arc length corresponding to this value of n be equal to A, ie A=2*PI*r/n.
The line length between the two points is easily calculated. Just divide your circle into n isosceles triangles, and each of those into two right-triangles. You know the angle in each right triangle is theta/2 = (2*PI/n)/2 = (PI/n), and the hypotenuse is r. So, you get your equation of sin(PI/n)=x/r, where x is half the length of the line segment joining two adjacent points on your circumscribed polygon. Let this value be B (ie: B=2x, so B=2*r*sin(PI/n)).
Now, just calculate the relative error, E = |A-B| / A (ie: |TrueValue-ApproxValue|/|TrueValue|), and you get a nice little percentage, represented in decimal, of your error vector. You can use the above equations to set a constraint on E (ie: it cannot be greater than some value, say, 1.05), in order for it to "look good".
So, you could write a function that calculates A, B, and E from the above equations, and loop through values of n, and have it stop looping when the calculated value of E is less than your threshold.
I would say that you need to set the number of sides depending on two variables the radius and the zoom (if you allow zoom)
A circle or radius 20 pixels can look ok with 32 to 56 sides, but if you use the same number of sided for a radios of 200 pixels that number of sides will not be enough
numberOfSides = radius * 3
If you allow zoom in and out you will need to do something like this
numberOfSides = radiusOfPaintedCircle * 3
When you zoom in radiusOfPaintedCircle will be bigger that the "property" of the circle being drawn
I've got an algorithm to draw a circle using fixed function opengl, maybe it'll help?
It's hard to know what you mean when you say you want to "approximate a circle using polygon"
You'll notice in my algorithm below that I don't calculate the number of lines needed to draw the circle, I just iterate between 0 .. 2Pi, stepping the angle by 0.1 each time, drawing a line with glVertex2f to that point on the circle, from the previous point.
void Circle::Render()
{
glLoadIdentity();
glPushMatrix();
glBegin(GL_LINES);
glColor3f(_vColour._x, _vColour._y, _vColour._z);
glVertex3f(_State._position._x, _State._position._y, 0);
glVertex3f(
(_State._position._x + (sinf(_State._angle)*_rRadius)),
(_State._position._y + (cosf(_State._angle)*_rRadius)),
0
);
glEnd();
glTranslatef(_State._position._x, _State._position._y, 0);
glBegin(GL_LINE_LOOP);
glColor3f(_vColour._x, _vColour._y, _vColour._z);
for(float angle = 0.0f; angle < g_k2Pi; angle += 0.1f)
glVertex2f(sinf(angle)*_rRadius, cosf(angle)*_rRadius);
glEnd();
glPopMatrix();
}
This is quite complicated to explain, so I will do my best, sorry if there is anything I missed out, let me know and I will rectify it.
My question is, I have been tasked to draw this shape,
(source: learnersdictionary.com)
This is to be done using C++ to write code that will calculate the points on this shape.
Important details.
User Input - Centre Point (X, Y), number of points to be shown, Font Size (influences radius)
Output - List of co-ordinates on the shape.
The overall aim once I have the points is to put them into a graph on Excel and it will hopefully draw it for me, at the user inputted size!
I know that the maximum Radius is 165mm and the minimum is 35mm. I have decided that my base Font Size shall be 20. I then did some thinking and came up with the equation.
Radius = (Chosen Font Size/20)*130. This is just an estimation, I realise it probably not right, but I thought it could work at least as a template.
I then decided that I should create two different circles, with two different centre points, then link them together to create the shape. I thought that the INSIDE line will have to have a larger Radius and a centre point further along the X-Axis (Y staying constant), as then it could cut into the outside line.
So I defined 2nd Centre point as (X+4, Y). (Again, just estimation, thought it doesn't really matter how far apart they are).
I then decided Radius 2 = (Chosen Font Size/20)*165 (max radius)
So, I have my 2 Radii, and two centre points.
Now to calculate the points on the circles, I am really struggling. I decided the best way to do it would be to create an increment (here is template)
for(int i=0; i<=n; i++) //where 'n' is users chosen number of points
{
//Equation for X point
//Equation for Y Point
cout<<"("<<X<<","<<Y<<")"<<endl;
}
Now, for the life of me, I cannot figure out an equation to calculate the points. I have found equations that involve angles, but as I do not have any, I'm struggling.
I am, in essence, trying to calculate Point 'P' here, except all the way round the circle.
(source: tutorvista.com)
Another point I am thinking may be a problem is imposing limits on the values calculated to only display the values that are on the shape.? Not sure how to chose limits exactly other than to make the outside line a full Half Circle so I have a maximum radius?
So. Does anyone have any hints/tips/links they can share with me on how to proceed exactly?
Thanks again, any problems with the question, sorry will do my best to rectify if you let me know.
Cheers
UPDATE;
R1 = (Font/20)*130;
R2 = (Font/20)*165;
for(X1=0; X1<=n; X1++)
{
Y1 = ((2*Y)+(pow(((4*((pow((X1-X), 2)))+(pow(R1, 2)))), 0.5)))/2;
Y2 = ((2*Y)-(pow(((4*((pow((X1-X), 2)))+(pow(R1, 2)))), 0.5)))/2;
cout<<"("<<X1<<","<<Y1<<")";
cout<<"("<<X1<<","<<Y2<<")";
}
Opinion?
As per Code-Guru's comments on the question, the inner circle looks more like a half circle than the outer. Use the equation in Code-Guru's answer to calculate the points for the inner circle. Then, have a look at this question for how to calculate the radius of a circle which intersects your circle, given the distance (which you can set arbitrarily) and the points of intersection (which you know, because it's a half circle). From this you can draw the outer arc for any given distance, and all you need to do is vary the distance until you produce a shape that you're happy with.
This question may help you to apply Code-Guru's equation.
The equation of a circle is
(x - h)^2 + (y - k)^2 = r^2
With a little bit of algebra, you can iterate x over the range from h to h+r incrementing by some appropriate delta and calculate the two corresponding values of y. This will draw a complete circle.
The next step is to find the x-coordinate for the intersection of the two circles (assuming that the moon shape is defined by two appropriate circles). Again, some algebra and a pencil and paper will help.
More details:
To draw a circle without using polar coordinates and trig, you can do something like this:
for x in h-r to h+r increment by delta
calculate both y coordinates
To calculate the y-coordinates, you need to solve the equation of a circle for y. The easiest way to do this is to transform it into a quadratic equation of the form A*y^2+B*y+C=0 and use the quadratic equation:
(x - h)^2 + (y - k)^2 = r^2
(x - h)^2 + (y - k)^2 - r^2 = 0
(y^2 - 2*k*y + k^2) + (x - h)^2 - r^2 = 0
y^2 - 2*k*y + (k^2 + (x - h)^2 - r^2) = 0
So we have
A = 1
B = -2*k
C = k^2 + (x - h)^2 - r^2
Now plug these into the quadratic equation and chug out the two y-values for each x value in the for loop. (Most likely, you will want to do the calculations in a separate function -- or functions.)
As you can see this is pretty messy. Doing this with trigonometry and angles will be much cleaner.
More thoughts:
Even though there are no angles in the user input described in the question, there is no intrinsic reason why you cannot use them during calculations (unless you have a specific requirement otherwise, say because your teacher told you not to). With that said, using polar coordinates makes this much easier. For a complete circle you can do something like this:
for theta = 0 to 2*PI increment by delta
x = r * cos(theta)
y = r * sin(theta)
To draw an arc, rather than a full circle, you simply change the limits for theta in the for loop. For example, the left-half of the circle goes from PI/2 to 3*PI/2.
I have a function in my program which rotates a point (x_p, y_p, z_p) around another point (x_m, y_m, z_m) by the angles w_nx and w_ny.
The new coordinates are stored in global variables x_n, y_n, and z_n. Rotation around the y-axis (so changing value of w_nx - so that the y - values are not harmed) is working correctly, but as soon as I do a rotation around the x- or z- axis (changing the value of w_ny) the coordinates aren't accurate any more. I commented on the line I think my fault is in, but I can't figure out what's wrong with that code.
void rotate(float x_m, float y_m, float z_m, float x_p, float y_p, float z_p, float w_nx ,float w_ny)
{
float z_b = z_p - z_m;
float x_b = x_p - x_m;
float y_b = y_p - y_m;
float length_ = sqrt((z_b*z_b)+(x_b*x_b)+(y_b*y_b));
float w_bx = asin(z_b/sqrt((x_b*x_b)+(z_b*z_b))) + w_nx;
float w_by = asin(x_b/sqrt((x_b*x_b)+(y_b*y_b))) + w_ny; //<- there must be that fault
x_n = cos(w_bx)*sin(w_by)*length_+x_m;
z_n = sin(w_bx)*sin(w_by)*length_+z_m;
y_n = cos(w_by)*length_+y_m;
}
What the code almost does:
compute difference vector
convert vector into spherical coordinates
add w_nx and wn_y to the inclination and azimuth angle (see link for terminology)
convert modified spherical coordinates back into Cartesian coordinates
There are two problems:
the conversion is not correct, the computation you do is for two inclination vectors (one along the x axis, the other along the y axis)
even if computation were correct, transformation in spherical coordinates is not the same as rotating around two axis
Therefore in this case using matrix and vector math will help:
b = p - m
b = RotationMatrixAroundX(wn_x) * b
b = RotationMatrixAroundY(wn_y) * b
n = m + b
basic rotation matrices.
Try to use vector math. Decide in which order you rotate, first along x, then along y perhaps.
If you rotate along z-axis, [z' = z]
x' = x*cos a - y*sin a;
y' = x*sin a + y*cos a;
The same repeated for y-axis: [y'' = y']
x'' = x'*cos b - z' * sin b;
z'' = x'*sin b + z' * cos b;
Again rotating along x-axis: [x''' = x'']
y''' = y'' * cos c - z'' * sin c
z''' = y'' * sin c + z'' * cos c
And finally the question of rotating around some specific "point":
First, subtract the point from the coordinates, then apply the rotations and finally add the point back to the result.
The problem, as far as I see, is a close relative to "gimbal lock". The angle w_ny can't be measured relative to the fixed xyz -coordinate system, but to the coordinate system that is rotated by applying the angle w_nx.
As kakTuZ observed, your code converts point to spherical coordinates. There's nothing inherently wrong with that -- with longitude and latitude, one can reach all the places on Earth. And if one doesn't care about tilting the Earth's equatorial plane relative to its trajectory around the Sun, it's ok with me.
The result of not rotating the next reference axis along the first w_ny is that two points that are 1 km a part of each other at the equator, move closer to each other at the poles and at the latitude of 90 degrees, they touch. Even though the apparent purpose is to keep them 1 km apart where ever they are rotated.
if you want to transform coordinate systems rather than only points you need 3 angles. But you are right - for transforming points 2 angles are enough. For details ask Wikipedia ...
But when you work with opengl you really should use opengl functions like glRotatef. These functions will be calculated on the GPU - not on the CPU as your function. The doc is here.
Like many others have said, you should use glRotatef to rotate it for rendering. For collision handling, you can obtain its world-space position by multiplying its position vector by the OpenGL ModelView matrix on top of the stack at the point of its rendering. Obtain that matrix with glGetFloatv, and then multiply it with either your own vector-matrix multiplication function, or use one of the many ones you can obtain easily online.
But, that would be a pain! Instead, look into using the GL feedback buffer. This buffer will simply store the points where the primitive would have been drawn instead of actually drawing the primitive, and then you can access them from there.
This is a good starting point.
I have a point in 3D space and two angles, I want to calculate the resulting line from this information. I have found how to do this with 2D lines, but not 3D. How can this be calculated?
If it helps: I'm using C++ & OpenGL and have the location of the user's mouse click and the angle of the camera, I want to trace this line for intersections.
In trig terms two angles and a point are required to define a line in 3d space. Converting that to (x,y,z) is just polar coordinates to cartesian coordinates the equations are:
x = r sin(q) cos(f)
y = r sin(q) sin(f)
z = r cos(q)
Where r is the distance from the point P to the origin; the angle q (zenith) between the line OP and the positive polar axis (can be thought of as the z-axis); and the angle f (azimuth) between the initial ray and the projection of OP onto the equatorial plane(usually measured from the x-axis).
Edit:
Okay that was the first part of what you ask. The rest of it, the real question after the updates to the question, is much more complicated than just creating a line from 2 angles and a point in 3d space. This involves using a camera-to-world transformation matrix and was covered in other SO questions. For convenience here's one: How does one convert world coordinates to camera coordinates? The answers cover converting from world-to-camera and camera-to-world.
The line can be fathomed as a point in "time". The equation must be vectorized, or have a direction to make sense, so time is a natural way to think of it. So an equation of a line in 3 dimensions could really be three two dimensional equations of x,y,z related to time, such as:
x = ax*t + cx
y = ay*t + cy
z = az*t + cz
To find that set of equations, assuming the camera is at origin, (0,0,0), and your point is (x1,y1,z1) then
ax = x1 - 0
ay = y1 - 0
az = z1 - 0
cx = cy = cz = 0
so
x = x1*t
y = y1*t
z = z1*t
Note: this also assumes that the "speed" of the line or vector is such that it is at your point (x1,y1,z1) after 1 second.
So to draw that line just fill in the points as fine as you like for as long as required, such as every 1/1000 of a second for 10 seconds or something, might draw a "line", really a series of points that when seen from a distance appear as a line, over 10 seconds worth of distance, determined by the "speed" you choose.