Finding m_c: Tangent to Catenary Curve

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jimbobian
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Catenary Tangent
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
2 replies · 2K views
jimbobian
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
Hi all, this question stems from a homework question but is not the homework question itself, more a discussion on something I found, hence why I have put it here.

The question involved using variational calculus to minimise the surface area of a soap bubble to find the shape it would take. The restrictions were that [itex]r=a[/itex] for [itex]z=\pm b[/itex] and I found the radius of the bubble as a function of height z to be:

[tex]r(z) = c\cosh(z/c)[/tex]

which is a catenary as expected. The constant c is constrained by the boundary conditions s.t:

[tex]a/c = \cosh(b/c)[/tex]

which the question points out only has solutions for the ratio [itex]b/a<m_c[/itex] where [itex]m_c[/itex] is some critical value. The question does not ask us to find [itex]m_c[/itex] but I wished to do so.

I plotted a selection of functions of the form [itex]a/c = \cosh(b/c)[/itex] for various [itex]c[/itex] and observed that the tangents appeared to form a straight line through the origin (which I have also added in red to help see it). This is consistent with what the question points out, but I can't seem to show why this is the case analytically (ie. that each catenary touches the same line through the origin). This line, incidentally, has a gradient of 1.5089 which I found using NR.

Could anyone point out why the catenaries form in this way, because I can't show (analytically) that they do.

Cheers,
James
 

Attachments

  • pf.jpg
    pf.jpg
    23.3 KB · Views: 520
Physics news on Phys.org
Thanks for pointing that out, at least now I know what it is called and that it seems to be a general result (for some envelope). But is it possible to show that, in this case, the envelope is a straight line with gradient [itex]m_c[/itex] as above.

I find the following two restrictions:

[tex]a=c\cosh(b/c)[/tex]
[tex]c/b = \tanh(b/c)[/tex]

But no way of showing that this leads to the same gradient for each choice of c.