MHB Calculate volume of non parallel wedge

AI Thread Summary
To calculate the volume of a non-parallel wedge, first determine the areas of the triangular bases. The left triangle has an area of 0.4 m², while the right triangle has an area of 1.0 m², resulting in an average area of 0.7 m². The volume is then calculated by multiplying this average area by the wedge's length of 6 m, yielding a total volume of 4.2 m³. It is important to note that the top surface of the wedge is not flat, which may affect further calculations or applications. Understanding these calculations is essential for accurate volume determination in non-standard shapes.
jasonmcbride
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi, just wondering how I would calculate the volume of this wedge? see photo attached

IMG_6851.jpg
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
We have a triangle on the left side with area $\frac 12\cdot 4\,\text{m}\cdot 200\,\text{mm} = 0.4\,\text{m}^2$.
And we have a triangle on the right side with area $\frac 12\cdot 4\,\text{m}\cdot 500\,\text{mm} = 1.0\,\text{m}^2$.
The average triangular area is $\frac{0.4+1.0}{2} = 0.7\,\text{m}^2$.
Multiply by the length to find the volume $V=6\,\text{m}\cdot 0.7\,\text{m}^2=4.2\,\text{m}^3$.

Btw, the top surface is not flat.
 
Last edited:
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top