Finding Values for a Frustum Net to Calculating x, y, t, and H

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thetom
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Conical Net
AI Thread Summary
To calculate the values for a frustum net, the user provided dimensions R = 40, r = 35, and h = 83. The necessary formulas for calculating x, y, t, and H were discussed, including the Pythagorean theorem for H and formulas for x and y based on H. After some confusion with the calculations, the user determined H to be approximately 83.15, x as 582.05, y as 665.2, and t as 21.78 degrees. The importance of using consistent measurement units and understanding the square root function for H was emphasized. The user expressed gratitude for the clarification and assistance received.
Thetom
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
I need to make a net for a frustum. The following web page explains how to do it... http://www.analyzemath.com/Geometry/conical_frustum.html

I have tried but am unable to do this complicated, advanced (o.k basic) math.

In the following figure I have the values R,r and h.
conical_frustum_1.gif


R = 40
r = 35
h = 83

I need the values for x,y,t and H in the following figure so I can construct my net.
conical_frustum_2.gif


x = ?
y = ?
t = ?
H = ?

Can anyone please help me find x,y,t,H ?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Thetom said:
I need to make a net for a frustum. The following web page explains how to do it... http://www.analyzemath.com/Geometry/conical_frustum.html

I have tried but am unable to do this complicated, advanced (o.k basic) math.

In the following figure I have the values R,r and h.
conical_frustum_1.gif


R = 40
r = 35
h = 83

I need the values for x,y,t and H in the following figure so I can construct my net.
conical_frustum_2.gif


x = ?
y = ?
t = ?
H = ?

Can anyone please help me find x,y,t,H ?

Your internet must not be working properly. If you read on the linked article further, it gives explicit formulas to calculate x, y, and t.

H can be calculated knowing the Pythagorean Theorem:

H2 = h2 + (R-r)2

From the article:

x = r H / (R - r)
y = r H / (R - r) + H

Any of the formulas 2 Pi r = x t or 2 Pi R = y t may be used to find the central angle t (in radians):

t = 2 Pi r / x

= 2 Pi r / [ r H / (R - r) ]

= 2 Pi (R - r) / H

Since the angle t is in radians, to convert t to degrees

t in degrees = t in radians * 180 / Pi

Remember, measure twice, cut once.
 
SteamKing said:
Your internet must not be working properly.

No I'm just terrible at this stuff. I did read the solutions given on that page and went through their working example but I still don't understand it.

Here is what I do to solve the Pythagorean Theorem:

H² = h² + (R-r)²

H² = 83x83 + 5x5

H² = 6889 + 25

H² = 6914

H = 1 (6914 / 6914)

I divided the last number by itself as H² is H times by itself. :/
Clearly that's not right but i don't properly understand how to solve the equation or where I'm going wrong.
I think once I have got H i can do the next bit as it seems a bit easier.

I am all for learning how to do this but find it difficult. I appreciate the much needed help.
Remember, measure twice, cut once.

And in my case calculate ten times before asking on PF.
 
O.k I went ahead and cheated and used an online calculator to solve the Pythagorean problem.
So..

H= 83.15046602394962

I then did this..

x = r H / (R - r)
x = 35 x 83.15 / (40-35)
x = 2910.25 / 5
x = 582.05

y = r H / (R - r) + H
y = 35 x 83.15 / (40 - 35) + 83.15
y = 2910.25 / 5 + 83.15
y = 665.2

t = 2 Pi r / x
t = 2 x 3.141 x 35 / 582.05
t = 219.87 / 582.05
t = 0.38

t in degrees = 0.38 x 180 / Pi
t in degrees = 21.78So my final values are

H = 83.15
x = 582.05
y = 665.2
t = 21.78°

Is that correct?
 
Thetom said:
O.k I went ahead and cheated and used an online calculator to solve the Pythagorean problem.
So..

H= 83.15046602394962

I then did this..

x = r H / (R - r)
x = 35 x 83.15 / (40-35)
x = 2910.25 / 5
x = 582.05

y = r H / (R - r) + H
y = 35 x 83.15 / (40 - 35) + 83.15
y = 2910.25 / 5 + 83.15
y = 665.2

t = 2 Pi r / x
t = 2 x 3.141 x 35 / 582.05
t = 219.87 / 582.05
t = 0.38

t in degrees = 0.38 x 180 / Pi
t in degrees = 21.78So my final values are

H = 83.15
x = 582.05
y = 665.2
t = 21.78°

Is that correct?

Your numbers look pretty good. Remember, for H, x, and, y to use consistent measurement units like inches or centimeters when laying out your net.

When you have something like

H2 = 6914

the square root is what tells you how to find H, that is, what number when multiplied by itself, gives you 6914 in this case.

Your calculator has a key that looks like a little check mark √ which is what you press after entering 6914.
 
SteamKing said:
When you have something like

H2 = 6914

the square root is what tells you how to find H, that is, what number when multiplied by itself, gives you 6914 in this case.

Your calculator has a key that looks like a little check mark √ which is what you press after entering 6914.

Ah yes that makes sense^
Thanks very much for the help. The page I linked to confused me saying 'sqrt ' before the equations. I get it now. Much appreciated.
 
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...
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...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top