[net.graphics] parametric equations

garl@nlm-mcs.ARPA (Gary Letourneau) (04/24/86)

   I am beginning some work on graphing 2-d and 3-d curves and surfaces and
 I have run across the following problem:

 If given an equation of a 3-dimensional surface in the form 
   	
	f(x, y, z) = ...
 
 and a range of values for x, y, and z

	x1 < x < x2
	y1 < y < y2
	z1 < z < z2
 
 is there an algorith for determining the parametric equations for the
 same surface
		
		fx(t) = ...
		fy(t) = ...
		fz(t) = ...

  where 0 <= t <= 1


  In short, is there an algorithmic way of generating parametric equations
from nonparametric ones?
  
  I would appreciate any pointers, ideas, program code, etc. that anyone
would post.
					Thanks in advance,
					Gary Letourneau
					letourneau@nlm-mcs

majka@ubc-vision.UUCP (Marc Majka) (04/28/86)

The problem of finding parametric equations for a surface relies upon being
able to parameterize the surface.  A parameter, or more generally a set of
parameters form a new coordinate system in which you hope that the
description of the surface will be simple.  It is very difficult to find
such a coordinate system for a general surface.  For a curve (or a section
of a curve) the solution is easy: the parameter has an initial value at an
end point of the curve, and a unique path along which its value changes.  

Trying to extend this idea to surfaces lands one immediatly in deep water.
Where do the parameters have zero value (i.e. the origin of the new
coordinate system), and which way do they go?  The choices get very
arbitrary.  There are "local" solutions which work well.  By "local", I mean
that for any point on the surface, a coordinate system exists with that
point at the origin.  A good example is Riemannian normal coordinates (RNC),
which essentially are "polar" coordinates around that origin, with
"directions" and "lengths" based on the geodesics (shortest-path curves) at
that point.

Trouble is, there just are no good natural coordinate systems like RNC with
a global characterization.  You may be able to construct a principled way
(read algorithm) of making some arbitrary choices for some domain of
intrest, but you may end up with artifacts and secondary problems that are
painful.  Even then, you still will not be sure that your new coordinate
system will afford a "good" parameterization of the surface.

Grains of salt to be taken with this posting:

1) I am talking about a very general notion of surfaces. You may find easy
solutions for special cases.

2) For those of you with a background in Differential Geometry: please
excuse my cavalier use of terminology.  I am trying to make this simple.

---
Marc Majka

ken@turtlevax.UUCP (Ken Turkowski) (04/29/86)

In article <1450@nlm-mcs.ARPA> garl@nlm-mcs.ARPA (Gary Letourneau) writes:
> If given an equation of a 3-dimensional surface in the form 
>	f(x, y, z) = ...
> and a range of values for x, y, and z
>	x1 < x < x2, y1 < y < y2, z1 < z < z2
> is there an algorith for determining the parametric equations for the
> same surface
>	fx(t) = ... , fy(t) = ... , fz(t) = ... ,	0 <= t <= 1

First, you'll never get a full surface from a univariate function; you need
two variables:

	fx(u,v), fy(u,v), fz(u,v),		0 <= u <= 1,	0 <= v <= 1

Otherwise, you'll get a curve instead of a surface.
-- 
Ken Turkowski @ CIMLINC, Menlo Park, CA
UUCP: {amd,decwrl,hplabs,seismo}!turtlevax!ken
ARPA: turtlevax!ken@DECWRL.DEC.COM

acm@ucla-cs.ARPA (Assoc for Computing Machinery ) (04/30/86)

An excellent book that covers the mathematical representations of parametric
curves, surfaces, and solid plus their generation from non-parametric
objects is one entitled _Geometric Modeling_ by Michael E. Mortenson from
John Wiley & Sons (1985).  You should find everything you need in there
plus more about the analytical properties of these objects, transformations,
and some information on solid modeling.

David E. Lee
UCLA ACM Chairman