Numerical calculation about curve length

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around numerical methods for calculating the length of a curve, comparing different approaches and seeking better techniques. Participants explore both theoretical and practical aspects of numerical integration, with a focus on methods that could yield more accurate results than simple distance summation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a basic method for calculating curve length using the distance formula between two points and seeks a more refined numerical method similar to area calculation techniques.
  • Another participant suggests using circular arc segments for regions with slowly varying curvature as an alternative approach.
  • A different participant references the integral representation of curve length and proposes evaluating it using numerical formulas, specifically mentioning the integral forms for both Cartesian and parametric curves.
  • One participant expresses interest in knowing which numerical formula is considered the best for this purpose, emphasizing a preference for methods that outperform simple distance summation.
  • Another participant mentions that Simpson's rule is often the most efficient numerical method for such calculations.
  • A participant advocates for the trapezoidal rule, stating it is sufficient for most cases and less tedious than Simpson's rule.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing preferences for numerical methods, with no consensus on a single best approach. Some favor Simpson's rule for efficiency, while others prefer the trapezoidal rule for its simplicity. The discussion remains open regarding the most effective numerical technique for curve length calculation.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not resolved the effectiveness of various numerical methods, and there are assumptions regarding the conditions under which each method may perform better. The discussion does not clarify the specific contexts or types of curves being considered.

xyz3003
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I think I have returned all my math back to teachers without any refund.

y=f(x);
h=xb-xa, which is very small.

My Q is to calculate curve length rather than area numerically.
But let me use area as example to show you what i want.

to calculate area between xa to xb, we have 2 ways:
1) area=(f(xa)+f(xb))*h/2; (trapezoid?)
2) area=(f(xa)+4*f(xm)+f(xb))*h/6; here xm=(xa+xb)/2; (parabola?)
As my test, second one is much better than first.

for curve length:
1) len=square root( (f(xb)-f(xa))*(f(xb)-f(xa)) + h*h);
actually, it is distance from (xa, f(xa)) to (xb, f(xb)).

do you know second way to calculate curve length as in area sample above, simple, easy-to-use and better?

any links or explanations are highly appreciated.

thanks.


.
.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, in regions where the curvature is slowly varying, you might interpolate with circular arc segments instead.

Just a suggestion..
 
Start from an integral representing the length of the curve

[tex]\int_{x_1}^{x_2} \sqrt{1 + \left(\frac{dy}{dx}\right)^2}\,dx[/tex]

or [tex]\int_{t_1}^{t_2} \sqrt{\left(\frac{dx}{dt}\right)^2 + \left(\frac{dy}{dt}\right)^2\right)}\,dt[/tex] for a curve defined by parametric equations.

Evaluate the integrals with your favorite numerical formula.
 
AlephZero said:
Evaluate the integrals with your favorite numerical formula.

I just want to know the "favorite numerical formula", if which is better than summing line distances from one point to another.
 
xyz3003 said:
I just want to know the "favorite numerical formula", if which is better than summing line distances from one point to another.
As I said before, in most cases, Simpson's rule is most efficient.
 
I like the trapezoidal rule because it does a good enough job for most things and is much less tedious than simpons.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K