I Determine ## \beta ## as a function of ##\theta## linkage

erobz
Gold Member
Messages
4,442
Reaction score
1,839
I 've been trying find ##\beta## as a function of ##\theta## for this linkage. It's quite the trigonometric mess.

1676847859269.png

Start with the Law of Sines:

$$ \frac{\sin \beta}{x} = \frac{\sin \varphi}{R} \implies \boxed{ x = R \frac{\sin \beta}{\sin \varphi} \tag{1} }$$

Relating angles:

$$ \theta + \alpha + \varphi = \frac{\pi}{2} \implies \boxed{ \alpha = \frac{\pi}{2} -( \theta+\varphi) \tag{2} } $$

Applying Law of Cosines ( for each triangle):

$$ \boxed{ R^2 = w^2 + x^2 - 2 w x \cos \varphi \tag{3}}$$

$$ \boxed{ l^2 = r^2 + x^2 - 2 r x \cos \alpha \tag{4}}$$

Sub ##(1) \to (3)## to find ##\sin \varphi## in terms of ##\sin \beta##:

$$ \left( \left( R^2-w^2\right)^2+ 4 w^2 R^2 \sin^2 \beta \right) \sin^4 \varphi - \left( 2R^2\left(R^2-w^2\right) + 4 w^2 R^2 \right) \sin^2 \beta \sin^2 \varphi + R^4 \sin^4 \beta = 0 \tag{5} $$

Eq ##(5)## can be solved for ##\sin \varphi## using the quadratic formula with the substitution ## u = \sin^2 \varphi ##:

## a = \left( \left( R^2-w^2\right)^2+ 4 w^2 R^2 \sin^2 \beta \right) ##

## b = - \left( 2R^2\left(R^2-w^2\right) + 4 w^2 R^2 \right) \sin^2 \beta ##

##c = R^4 \sin^4 \beta##

It follows that:

$$ \boxed{ \sin \varphi = \sqrt{ \frac{-b \pm \sqrt{b^2 - 4ac} }{2a} } \tag{6} } $$

Now, if we return to ##(4)## substituting ##(1)## and the identity ##\cos \alpha = \sin ( \theta+ \varphi)##:

$$ l^2 = r^2 + \frac{R^2 \sin^2 \beta}{ \sin^2 \varphi}- 2 r \frac{R \sin \beta}{ \sin \varphi } \sin ( \theta + \varphi) $$

Then applying the sum-difference identity for ##\sin( \theta + \varphi )##:

$$\boxed{ l^2 = r^2 + \frac{R^2 \sin^2 \beta}{ \sin^2 \varphi}- 2 r \frac{R \sin \beta}{ \sin \varphi } \left( \sin \theta \cos \varphi + \cos \theta \sin \varphi \right) \tag{7} }$$

From this point I can use a similar trick as in ##5## to get a solution for either ##\sin \theta , \cos \theta ## in terms of ##\sin \beta ## and all the constants.

It's seeming to be a real mess. Is it really this complex of a function - Have I messed up?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I think you may find it easier to solve if you draw the other diagonal of the quadrilateral instead of the one labelled x. That diagonal goes from the top of the yellow line r to the vertex of the angle ##\beta##. Call its length y.
Then, since you know the angle between r and w is ##\pi/2 - \theta## you can use the cosine rule for triangle r-y-w to get the length y in terms of ##r,w,\cos(\pi/2-\theta)##, ie ##r,w,\sin\theta##.
Next, use the sine rule for the same triangle to get the angle ##\gamma## in the bottom-right corner of that triangle. That forms part of the angle ##\beta##.
The other part of ##\beta## is the bottom-right angle of the triangle l-R-y. You now know all three sides of that triangle, so you can apply the cosine law to that bottom right angle to get an expression for it in terms of ##l,R,y##.

I don't know for sure that it's any less messy than what you had but since it really only has three steps: cosine rule, sine rule, cosine rule, I think it's likely to.
 
andrewkirk said:
I think you may find it easier to solve if you draw the other diagonal of the quadrilateral instead of the one labelled x. That diagonal goes from the top of the yellow line r to the vertex of the angle ##\beta##. Call its length y.
Then, since you know the angle between r and w is ##\pi/2 - \theta## you can use the cosine rule for triangle r-y-w to get the length y in terms of ##r,w,\cos(\pi/2-\theta)##, ie ##r,w,\sin\theta##.
Next, use the sine rule for the same triangle to get the angle ##\gamma## in the bottom-right corner of that triangle. That forms part of the angle ##\beta##.
The other part of ##\beta## is the bottom-right angle of the triangle l-R-y. You now know all three sides of that triangle, so you can apply the cosine law to that bottom right angle to get an expression for it in terms of ##l,R,y##.

I don't know for sure that it's any less messy than what you had but since it really only has three steps: cosine rule, sine rule, cosine rule, I think it's likely to.
Yeah, it does appear to be the elegant route:

$$ \beta = \arcsin\left( \frac{ r \cos \theta }{ \sqrt{ r^2+w^2-2rw \sin \theta} } \right) + \arccos\left( \frac{ r^2 +w^2+R^2-l^2-2rw \sin \theta }{ \sqrt{ r^2+w^2-2rw \sin \theta} } \right) $$

Simple change of perspective, dramatic effects...SMH. Thanks for the tip!
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Back
Top