B How to cut a plate onto a tube at an angle?

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter Drpia
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Angle Plate Tube
Drpia
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Formula for a plate to sit on end on a tube at an angle
I'm trying to draw a file for a plate that will sit on a piece of 6inch tubing at an angle. I can't quite get the radius right. I've tried
R=(.5mM)÷square root of (m squared + M sqaured) m=minor diameter M=major diameter
And I've tried R=(H÷2)+(W squared ÷ 8H)
H= height of arc W=width of arc
The second one gets close but its still not quite right. Is there another formula for this?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I'm sure there are other ways. I'm not quite sure where you are running into trouble.

Do you know the angle of the plate to the tubing?
What result is it that you are looking for? The properties of the ellipse, drawn on your plate?

Obviously the minor axis will be six inches. You should be able to work out the major axis AB pretty easily using soh-cah-toa:
1730137795084.png


For example, if angle α is 30 degrees, that should make for a major axis of 6.928":
1730137272867.png

1730137320503.png
 
Last edited:
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