A Euler, Tait-Bryan, Tait, proper, Improper

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter Trying2Learn
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Euler
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the confusion surrounding the naming conventions of rotation angles, specifically Euler and Tait-Bryan angles. There are 12 possible rotations classified as Euler angles, with distinctions made based on whether the third axis is repeated. Proper and improper rotations are defined by whether they occur about internal or external axes, leading to four classifications: improper Euler, proper Euler, improper Tait-Bryan, and proper Tait-Bryan. The conversation highlights the inconsistency in terminology across different sources and the importance of understanding the definitions used in describing these rotations. Additionally, it notes that Tait-Bryan angles are often associated with aircraft movements (pitch, yaw, roll), while the conventions for ships remain unclear.
Trying2Learn
Messages
375
Reaction score
57
TL;DR Summary
Euler, Tait-Bryan, Tait, proper, Improper: total confusion
Can I try again?

I have seen (on the web), all these names, DISTINCTLY: Euler, Tait-Bryan, Tait, proper, Improper

I am still trying to make sense of this and am facing some strange naming conventions. I now can see this (the actual math does not concern me--it is only the names that cause me confusion):

There are 12 possible rotations

121 131 212 232 313 323
123 132 213 231 312 321

All are called Euler angles (which is odd to me)

If the third axis is NOT repeated (red ones, above): they are called Tait-Bryan angles
If third one is repeated, they are called Euler angles (YES; USING THE SAME NAME--should this have been called Euler ROTATION PROCESS to distinguish from Euler Angles)

Then there are proper/intrinsic vs improper/extrinsic:

When the rotations are improper/ EXtrinsic: it means they happen about fixed spatial axes (the axes are EXternal to the body)

When the rotations are proper/INtrinsic: it means they happen about fixed spatial axes (the axes are INternal to the body--attached to it)

This suggests FOUR cases:
  1. Improper Euler
  2. Proper Euler
  3. Improper Tait-Bryan
  4. Proper Tait-Bryan

Sometimes, I read about Tait angles (without any mention of Bryan) and some seem to call them Euler, but I assume they are referencing the very nature of angles (12 sets) and not the distinction on whether an axis is repeated. I think.

Can someone comment on this?
I cannot quote a source but so many websites do this.
It seems to me that Wikipedia gets it right: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler_angles
But they fail to address other possibilities
And they fail to explain how and why each is used (limits, advantages)

Do I have it correctly?

Finally, with planes, we talk about Tait-Bryan, but with a condition: 1-faces forward, 2-to the right and 3-down In other words, these angles are mapped to how planes fly, and the names, in order of the sentence just above this one, is: pitch, yaw, roll

What is the convention with ships?

My head his spinning. ChatGPT, I think, makes this even worse and gets it all wrong.

I now also think that one cannot discuss steady precession when an axis is repeated: it only happens in the BLUE set, above.
In other words, there is no corresponding notion of steady precession with Tait-Bryan because all axes are different.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Naming conventions are just, well, conventions and may depend on the author using them. One just has to make sure to check the definition of the angles used to describe rotations.
 
Consider an extremely long and perfectly calibrated scale. A car with a mass of 1000 kg is placed on it, and the scale registers this weight accurately. Now, suppose the car begins to move, reaching very high speeds. Neglecting air resistance and rolling friction, if the car attains, for example, a velocity of 500 km/h, will the scale still indicate a weight corresponding to 1000 kg, or will the measured value decrease as a result of the motion? In a second scenario, imagine a person with a...
Scalar and vector potentials in Coulomb gauge Assume Coulomb gauge so that $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A}=0.\tag{1}$$ The scalar potential ##\phi## is described by Poisson's equation $$\nabla^2 \phi = -\frac{\rho}{\varepsilon_0}\tag{2}$$ which has the instantaneous general solution given by $$\phi(\mathbf{r},t)=\frac{1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\int \frac{\rho(\mathbf{r}',t)}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}'|}d^3r'.\tag{3}$$ In Coulomb gauge the vector potential ##\mathbf{A}## is given by...
Dear all, in an encounter of an infamous claim by Gerlich and Tscheuschner that the Greenhouse effect is inconsistent with the 2nd law of thermodynamics I came to a simple thought experiment which I wanted to share with you to check my understanding and brush up my knowledge. The thought experiment I tried to calculate through is as follows. I have a sphere (1) with radius ##r##, acting like a black body at a temperature of exactly ##T_1 = 500 K##. With Stefan-Boltzmann you can calculate...
Back
Top