Optimizing Surface Area for Cornflakes Box Design

  • Thread starter Thread starter chemical
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Optimisation
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around optimizing the surface area of a Cornflakes box in relation to its volume, with specific dimensions provided for both the original and optimal designs. Participants are exploring the implications of surface area on cost and consumer appeal.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning why a box with a larger surface area would be preferred despite higher costs. Various factors such as consumer handling, stability, advertising space, and aesthetic appeal are suggested as potential reasons for the design choice.

Discussion Status

There is an active exploration of ideas regarding the relationship between surface area, cost, and consumer preferences. Some participants are debating the relevance of the golden ratio in this context, while others are clarifying misconceptions about its definition and application.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating assumptions about design choices and consumer behavior without reaching a consensus on the optimal design rationale. The mention of the golden ratio introduces additional complexity to the discussion.

chemical
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I have been given a problem of taking an object (I used a Cornflakes Box) and finding the optimal surface area compared to its volume (volume and ratio between sides constant)

I got:

Cornflakes Box :
Length = 25cm
Height = 36 cm
Width = 9 cm

Optimal Surface area box:
Length = 17.3 cm
Height = 43.28 cm
Width = 10.82

Overall a 90cm^2 difference in surface area.

Now I have to explain why Cornflakes would make a box with a greater surface area, thus costing more. Please help :confused:


The teacher also said something about the Golden Ratio, but i can't see any relation to this in the dimensions
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Some ideas. (I don't know the real answer.)

Is the Corn Flakes box
  • just right for the average [child's] hand to hold?
  • more stable against tipping over?
  • better for packing/tiling?
    (Interesting: http://www.scamecanica.com/qpm/examples/ )
  • better for occupying more advertising space on your grocer's shelf?
 
I'm going to go with door #2 robphy.
 
Ill give you the golden ratio: 1:1:1 (a CUbe)

what don't you get about which one would cost more. The box with the larger surface ares costs more. Its that simple.
 
But who wants to pour cereal out of a cube-- plus its built into the mind of the consumer that that is the shape. It has all to deal with appeal to the consumer.
 
Nenad said:
Ill give you the golden ratio: 1:1:1 (a CUbe)

what don't you get about which one would cost more. The box with the larger surface ares costs more. Its that simple.


No, that is not the golden ratio. And if you had read the original post, the question was WHY would the cereal makers use a box that cost more. You appear to be saying that cereal makers use a box with more area BECAUSE it costs more. Do you really think they enjoy paying more money?
 
HallsofIvy said:
No, that is not the golden ratio. And if you had read the original post, the question was WHY would the cereal makers use a box that cost more. You appear to be saying that cereal makers use a box with more area BECAUSE it costs more. Do you really think they enjoy paying more money?
the golgen ratio IS 1:1:1. The only reason the companies don't make it this is because of appeal, advertisement and other factors.
 
Nenad said:
the golgen ratio IS 1:1:1. The only reason the companies don't make it this is because of appeal, advertisement and other factors.
1:1:1 is the optimal ratio, not the golden ratio. Thanks for the comments guys :)
 
Nenad said:
the golgen ratio IS 1:1:1. The only reason the companies don't make it this is because of appeal, advertisement and other factors.

It may be the "golgen" ratio but it certainly isn't the "golden ratio".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K