Flagpole Height Calculation | FE Trig Problem 14

  • Thread starter Thread starter ratman720
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Trig
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a trigonometry problem involving the calculation of the height of a flagpole based on angles of elevation from two different distances. The original poster describes the problem setup and their approach using tangent functions, while also noting discrepancies between their result and a provided answer from a reference book.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the use of tangent functions to derive the height of the flagpole and question the validity of their results compared to the Law of Sines. There is also a focus on the algebraic manipulation of equations to find the height.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing guidance on the correct interpretation of the problem and the equations involved. There is acknowledgment of the need to clarify the relationship between the variables used in the calculations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential confusion regarding the terminology of the "Law of Signs" versus the "Law of Sines," and there is a mention of the possibility of multiple solutions or interpretations based on the equations presented.

ratman720
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Im in the process of reviewing for my FE and found an online PDF of the older Lindeburg book while I wait for the new one. While running through the trig section review problems, I came to problem 14. Which is summarized as follows:

looking at the top of a flagpole you notice the angle of measurement is 37° 11', You move away 17m and the new angle to the top of the flag pole is 25°43'. How high is the flagpole.

The problem is on pg 70/71 of the .pdf which I have linked below.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/113765067/FE-Review-Manual-Lindeburg-2010 .

I chose to solve this using tangents. Ie x*tan(37°11')=(x+17)*tan(25°43'). its fairly simple rearrange the equation and solve. I come to a height of ~29.56 The answer in the book is found using the law of signs. and comes to 22.43. Of the available options both of our answers are closest to (B) at 22. Noting that the answer from the book is closer, I am curious if this is simply an issue with rounding, or whether there is a distinct reason why tangents can't be used for this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
The answer to the problem is the height of the flagpole 'h', which is not the same as the value of 'x'.

And no, the difference between 29.56 and 22.43 could not be the result of rounding, even if you had correctly solved for the height of the flagpole.

BTW, it's the 'Law of Sines' for this problem. There is a different 'Law of Signs' used for finding out how many real roots a polynomial might have.
 
Using tangents I get ~22m for the height of the polel

Check your algebra.
 
You had two equations to solve,

\tan{(37^o11')}=\frac{h}{x}

\tan{(25^o43')}=\frac{h}{x+17}

which have two unknowns, hence it's obviously possible to find the value (or in some cases, possibly multiple values or no values) of x and h that satisfies the above equations. You've found the value of x, and now you just need to plug that x value back into either of the equations to find h.

Or alternatively, skip calculating x altogether by rearranging each equation to make x the subject, and then equate them

x=\frac{h}{\tan{(37^o11')}}

x=\frac{h}{\tan{(25^o43')}}-17
 
Ya I completely forgot to convert my solution for x over to h. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
15K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
10K
Replies
11
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
10K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
10K
Replies
2
Views
1K