Figures
Abstract
This study investigates fixed-axis spacelike ruled surfaces and their evolute offset counterparts within (Minkowski 3-space). The analysis utilizes the Blaschke frame associated with the striction curves of these surfaces. Spacelike ruled surfaces play a crucial role in various fields of both classical and modern physics. The research begins by introducing the fundamental concepts of fixed-axis spacelike ruled surfaces and defining a height function that establishes the necessary criteria for a ruled surface to be classified as a fixed-axis spacelike ruled surface. Subsequently, the study derives parameterization for both the fixed-axis spacelike ruled surfaces and their evolute offsets. Finally, several surface models are extended and visually represented through graphical illustrations.
Citation: Almoneef AA, Abdel-Baky RA (2025) Fixed-axis spacelike ruled surfaces and their evolute offsets. PLoS One 20(6): e0325051. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0325051
Editor: Xuebo Zhang, Whale Wave Technology Inc., CHINA
Received: November 27, 2024; Accepted: May 5, 2025; Published: June 6, 2025
Copyright: © 2025 Almoneef, Abdel-Baky. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper.
Funding: This study was financially supported by Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University Researchers Supporting Project in the form of a grant (PNURSP2025R337) received by AAA. No additional external funding was received for this study.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
1 Introduction
In the context of movable frames, the most commonly used are the Frenet–Serret frame () for space curves and the Blaschke frame (
) for ruled surfaces. The Blaschke frame is determined by the velocity of the striction curve and the normal vector of the associated sphere, whereas the Frenet–Serret frame is defined by the velocity and acceleration of the curve. By differentiating these movable frames with respect to their own basis vectors, certain real-valued functions emerge. These functions are known as curvature and torsion in the case of the Frenet–Serret frame and as the Blaschke invariants for the Blaschke frame (see, for example, [1–3]).
In the realm of line geometry, the set of oriented lines embedded in a moving solid body primarily generates ruled surfaces. The geometry of ruled surfaces has been extensively applied in various fields, including Computer-Aided Manufacturing (), Computer-Aided Geometric Design (
), geometric modeling, and motion analysis [3–7]. In recent years, the properties of ruled surfaces and their offset counterparts have been extensively studied in both Euclidean and non-Euclidean spaces. For example, Ravani and Ku [8] explored the theory of Bertrand curves for Bertrand ruled surface offsets using line geometry. They demonstrated that a ruled surface can possess an infinite number of Bertrand ruled surface offsets, similar to how a plane curve can have an infinite number of Bertrand mates. Building upon this work, Küçük and G ürsoy provided several examples of Bertrand offsets of trajectory ruled surfaces, analyzing their interrelations through projection domains and the corresponding spherical curve invariants [9]. In [10], Kasap and Kuruoğlu explored the relationships between the integral invariants of Bertrand ruled surfaces in Euclidean 3-space. In [11], they extended this research to the Bertrand offsets of ruled surfaces in
. The involute-evolute offsets of the ruled surfaces were studied by Kasap et al. in [12]. Orbay et al. [13] introduced the study of Mannheim offsets for ruled surfaces, while Önder and Uğurlu investigated the invariants of Mannheim offsets for timelike (
) ruled surfaces and provided conditions for these surface offsets to be non-skew [14]. These offset surfaces are analyzed using the Blaschke frame, as defined in [8]. Based on the involute-evolute offsets of ruled surfaces in [12], Şentürk and Yüce computed the integral invariants of these offsets in relation to the geodesic
[15]. Recently, Yoon examined evolute offsets of ruled surfaces in both Euclidean and Minkowski 3-spaces, considering stationary Gaussian and mean curvatures [16, 17]. There is a substantial body of literature on these topics, including various treatises such as [18–20].
Subsequently, to consolidate interdisciplinary papers, we wish to highlight some significant studies on ruled surfaces and surface families in various spaces [21–23].
To the best of our knowledge, there has been no prior work on the construction of evolute offsets for a fixed-axis skew -ruled surface in
. This study aims to identify a set of invariants that describe the local shape of a fixed-axis
-ruled surface and its evolute offsets. The conditions for two
-ruled surfaces to be evolute offsets are developed, and the results are illustrated using computer-aided models. The findings presented in this paper offer valuable insight into surface theory, which could contribute to fields that require surface analysis.
2 Basic concepts
To meet the demands in the next sections, here, the crucial elements of the theory of curves in are briefly presented [1–4, 24, 25]. For vectors
and
, we know that
is named Lorentzian inner product. The cross product produces a vector given by
Since is an indefinite metric, recall that a vector
can possess one of three causal natures; it can be
if
or
,
if
and null or lightlike if
and
. The norm of
is pointed by
, then the hyperbolic and Lorentzian (de Sitter space) unit spheres are:
and
A line
can be attended by a point
and a
unit vector
on it, that is,
. A parametric equation of
is
Thus, we set the moment with reference to a fixed origin point as
where
Wherefore, we can write that . Let
be two
lines assigned with
and
linearly independent. Then the distance
among
,
is
The Lorentzian distance in the customary sense will then be . The angle among
,
is specified as follows:
1) If they span a plane; there is a unique angle
;
such that
2) If they span a plane, there is a unique angle
;
such that
The spatial distance between ,
is located to be a relationship of real numbers.
2.1 Ruled surface
A ruled surface is a surface generated by a line that moves along a curve
. The various positions of these lines are referred to as the generators of the surface. Such a surface has the parametric representation [1, 2 , 20, 21]:
where ;
. In this setting, the curve
is known as the striction curve, and v is the arc-length of
(or
). If
is neither stationary nor null, and if
is non-null, then the Blaschke frame for
can be established as follows [20, 24]:
This provides a compact framework for analyzing the geometric properties of the ruled surface using the Blaschke frame. The Blaschke formula for the Blaschke frame is expressed as:
where represents the spherical curvature of
. With respect to the Blaschke frame and the signs
,
,
, the striction curve is defined as [20, 24]:
Here, J(v), and
are known as the curvature functions of
. This formulation provides a systematic approach to describing the geometry of ruled surfaces in terms of their Blaschke frame components and curvature functions.
3 Main results
In this section, we explore and define the evolute offsets of a skew fixed-axis -ruled surface in
, utilizing the symmetry of the evolute curves. We then provide the parameterization of the evolute offsets for both skew and non-skew fixed-axis
-ruled surfaces. Furthermore, we examine the properties of these ruled surfaces and discuss a classification scheme for their various forms.
Based on the notations introduced in Section 2, we focus on a skew -ruled surface characterized by
. From this, we derive the following results:
where
Then, the Blaschke formula is
where is the Darboux vector, and
The striction curve is defined by
Therefore, a skew -ruled surface can be described as:
J(v), and
are the structure functions of
; J(v) is the spherical curvature of
,
and
is the distribution parameter of
.
Definition 1. is a fixed-angle
if its ruling has a fixed-angle with a definite line.
Definition 2. is a fixed-distance
if its ruling has a fixed-distance with a definite line.
Definition 3. is a fixed-axis
if its ruling has a fixed-spatial distance with a definite line.
Furthermore, the curvature-axis of
is
Let be the radius of curvature among
and
. Then
Corollary 1. The curvature , the torsion
, and J(v) of
are
Corollary 2. If , then
is a Lorentzian small circle.
Proof. From Eq 18, we observe that , and
, which indicates that
is a Lorentzian small circle (assuming
) ∎.
Definition 4. Let be a skew
that satisfies Eq 15 in
. A
is an evolute offset of
if there exists a bijection between their striction points such that the central normal of
and the ruling of
are colinear.
Let be an evolute offset of
. Then,
where
Here f(v) is the distance function among the striction points of and
[16, 17]. If
,
and
are the Blaschke vectors of
, and since
at striction points, then,
and
In view of Eqs 17, (21), and (22) we reach
where
If be the arc-length of
, then
. Therefore,
where
Corollary 3. , that is,
is a Lorentzian small circle iff
, that is,
is a hyperbolic great circle.
3.1 Height functions
In matching with [26], a point will be
curvature-axis of
; for all v such that
, with
. Here
signalizes the p-th derivative of
with reference to v. For the 1st curvature-axis
of
, we locate
, and
. So,
is at least a
curvature-axis of
. We now locate a high function
, by
. We let
for any constant point
. Then, we display the following:
Proposition 1. Via the last presuppositions, we occupancy:
i- w is fixed up to the 1st order iff ,
, that is,
for and
.
ii- w is fixed up to the 2nd order iff is
curvature-axis of
, that is,
iii- w is fixed up to the 3rd iff is
curvature-axis of
, that is,
iv- w is fixed up to the 4th order iff is
curvature-axis of
, that is,
Proof. i-Firstly, we derive
Then,
for real numbers c1, and
, the consequence is apparent.
ii- The derivative of Eq 26 register that:
iii- The derivative of Eq 28 is
Hence, we attain
iv- By the same pretexts, we can also control
The proof is complete ∎.
Via the Proposition 1, we conclude:
(a) The osculating circle ()
of
is width by
which state that the must has link of at least 3rd order at
iff J′′≠0.
(b) The curve and the
has link at least 4-th order at
iff J′=0, and J′′≠0.
In this track, by taking into examination the curvature-axes of , we can accomplish a sequence of curvature-axes
,
,...,
. The proprietorships and the joint links among these curvature-axes are much amusing topics. For demand, it is uncomplicated to see that if
, and J′=0,
is locating at
is fixed regarding to
. In these circumstances, the curvature axis is fixed up to 2nd order, and
is a constant angle
.
Theorem 1. is a fixed-angle
, that is,
iff
Since ., from the Eqs 12, and (18), we reach to:
. It is valuable to transfer the parameter v via
, and let’s take
. Then,
where a1, a2, a3 are constants fulfilling a2 = 0, and . It follows that
for constants a2, a3 fulfilling , and
. Let’s make
Therefore, we attain
Since , we realize that
. By setting the upper sign, we receive
Then,
Let
where and
are differentiable functions of
. Differentiating the last equation via v and appointing the Blaschke formulae, we possess
From Eqs 14, and (33), one finds that:
which signify we can manifest that
4 Evolute offsets of a fixed-axis
SL-ruled surface
In this section, we conclude and inspect the evolute offsets of a constant-axis skew and non-skew -ruled surfaces. We then develop a theory analogous to the theory of evolute curves for these surfaces. To achieve this, we present the following theorem.
Theorem 2. Let be a skew
-ruled surface as defined in Eq 15. Then
is a fixed-axis
-ruled surface iff (i) J = const., and (ii)
.
Proof. The necessity of the conditions follows directly from Theorem 1. For the sufficiency, we proceed as follows: Without loss of generality, a constant Lorentzian frame can be used with the
). The striction curve can be determined by
or in view of Eqs 31, we attain
where is the distance along the
axis (Figure 1). The stations of both points
and
determined on that of
; the minimal distance
is based on
.
From Eqs 30-(32) and Eq 36 we acquire
If , then Eq 27 leads to
The proof is done ∎.
Since and
are all constants, this exhibits that
is a cylindrical helix with the
-axis. Furthermore, for
, from Eqs 18, and (38), we accomplish
In view of Eqs 34, and (39), we fulfill
Hence, from Eqs 15, (30), (39), and (40), we attain
where
Via Eqs 19, and (41) the surface is
4.1 Classification of
M and
M
In the following, we set . For specific values of
, and
, we consider the following:
(1) Let ,
,
, and
. The fixed-axis
, and its evolute offset appear in Fig 2.
(2) Let ,
,
, and
. The fixed-axis
, and its evolute offset appear in Fig 3.
(3) Since , then
is an
non-skew or tangential developable (
). For
,
,
, and
, the fixed-axis
, and its evolute offset
are located in Fig 4.
(4) Since , then
is a
binormal (
). For
,
,
, and
, the fixed-axis
, and its evolute offset
are located in Fig 5.
(5) If is a
cone, then
. From Eq 36, we conclude
Then,
which show that , and
. Further, employing
into the Eq 39 we deduce
. Consequently, we acquire
and
The fixed-axis , and its evolute offset
are arranged in Fig 6; where
and
.
5 Conclusion
In this study, we examined the evolute offsets of fixed-axis skew -ruled surface in
, by leveraging the symmetry of evolute curves. Through our analysis, we formulated the parameterization of evolute offsets for both skew and non-skew ruled surfaces while also characterizing their geometric properties. We established key structural relationships between the curvature-axis functions and the associated height functions, leading to a deeper understanding of the curvature behavior of skew
-ruled surface. In particular, we derived conditions under which a skew
-ruled surface becomes a fixed-axis
-ruled surface and formulated a theorem analogous to the classical theory of evolute curves, providing a framework for further studies on these ruled surfaces.
Our results highlight that a surface is a fixed-axis
-ruled surface if and only if the spherical curvature function J remains constant and the function
is also constant. These findings contribute to the broader study of ruled surfaces in Lorentzian geometry and offer a foundation for potential applications in kinematics and differential geometry. Future research may explore generalizations of these results in higher-dimensional spaces or in relation to other classes of ruled surfaces.
These results are expected to be useful in the field of . In future work, we plan to further investigate the classification of singularities as outlined in [27, 28].
References
- 1.
Gugenheimer HW. Differential geometry. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1956, pp. 162–9.
- 2.
Bottema O, Roth B. Theoretical kinematics. New York: North-Holland Press; 1979.
- 3.
Karger A, Novak J. Space kinematics and Lie groups. New York: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers; 1985.
- 4. Papaioannou SG, Kiritsis D. An application of Bertrand curves and surfaces to CAD/CAM. Comput-Aided Design. 1985;17(8):348–52.
- 5. Schaaf JA, Ravani B. Geometric continuity of ruled surfaces. Comput Aided Geom Des. 1998;15(3):289–310.
- 6. Peternell M, Pottmann H, Ravani B. On the computational geometry of ruled surfaces. Comput-Aided Des. 1999;31(1):17–32.
- 7.
Pottman H, Wallner J. Computational line geometry. Heidelberg: Springer; 2001.
- 8. Ravani B, Ku TS. Bertrand offsets of ruled and developable surfaces. Comput-Aided Des. 1991;23(2):145–52.
- 9. Küçük A, Gürsoy O. On the invariants of Bertrand trajectory surface offsets. Appl Math Comput. 2004;151(3):763–73.
- 10. Kasap E, Kuruoğlu N. Integral invariants of the pairs of the Bertrand ruled surface. Bull Pure Appl Sci Sect E Math. 2002;21;37–44.
- 11. Kasap E, Kuruoğlu N. The Bertrand offsets of ruled surfaces. Acta Math Vietnam. 2006;31:39–48.
- 12. Kasap E, Yüce S, Kuruoğlu N. The involute-evolute offsets of ruled surfaces. Iranian J Sci Tech Trans. 2009;33:195–201.
- 13. Orbay K, Kasap E, Aydemir İ. Mannheim offsets of ruled surfaces. Math Probl Eng. 2009;2009(1).
- 14. Önder M, Uğurlu HH. Frenet frames and invariants of timelike ruled surfaces. Ain Shams Eng J. 2013;4(3):507–13.
- 15. Senturk GY, Yuce S. Properties of integral invariants of the involute-evolute offsets of ruled surfaces. Int J Pure Appl Math. 2015;102(4).
- 16. Yoon DW. On the evolute offsets of ruled surfaces in Euclidean 3-space. Inter J Pure App Maths. 2016;108(4):985–97.
- 17. Yoon DW. On the evolute offsets of ruled surfaces in Minkowski 3-space. Turk J Math. 2016;40:594–604.
- 18. Aldossary MT, Abdel-Baky RA. On the Blaschke approach of Bertrand offsets of spacelike ruled surfaces. AIMS Math. 2022;7(10):17843–58.
- 19. Alluhaibi N, Abdel-Baky RA, Naghi M. On the Bertrand offsets of timelike ruled surfaces in Minkowski 3-space. Symmetry. 2022;14(4):673.
- 20. Nazra SH, Abdel-Baky RA. Bertrand offsets of ruled surfaces with Blaschke frame in Euclidean 3-space. Axioms. 2023;12(7):649.
- 21. Li Y, Eren K, Ersoy S. On simultaneous characterizations of partner-ruled surfaces in Minkowski 3-space. AIMS Math. 2023;8(9):22256–73.
- 22. Baltić V, Eren K, Savić A, Ersoy S. Constant angle ruled surfaces with a pointwise 1-type Gauss map. Mathematics. 2024;12(12):1861.
- 23. Savić A, Eren K, Ersoy S, Baltić V. Alternative view of inextensible flows of curves and ruled surfaces via alternative frame. Mathematics. 2024;12(13):2015.
- 24. López R. Differential geometry of curves and surfaces in Lorentz-Minkowski space. Int Electron J Geom. 2014;7:44–107.
- 25.
O’Neil B. Semi-Riemannian geometry, with applications to relativity. New York: Academic Press; 1983.
- 26.
Bruce JW, Giblin PJ. Curves and singularities. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1992.
- 27. Almoneef AA, Abdel-Baky RA. Singularity properties of Spacelike circular surfaces. Symmetry. 2023;15(4):842.
- 28. Nazra SH, Abdel-Baky RA. Singularities of non-lightlike developable surfaces in Minkowski 3-space. Mediterr J Math. 2022;20(1).