Optimizing Cost for Given Volume of a Cylinder

  • Thread starter Thread starter toasticles
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Multivariable
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around optimizing the cost for a cylinder given a specific volume. The participants are exploring the relationship between the cost function and the dimensions of the cylinder, specifically the radius and height.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to express the cost function in terms of radius and height, substituting volume into the equation. Questions arise regarding the differentiation process and the implications of treating height as a constant. There is also confusion about the application of constants in the cost equation.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing different approaches to rewriting the cost function and questioning the validity of each other's expressions. Some guidance has been offered regarding differentiation, but there remains uncertainty about the correctness of the formulations and the interpretation of the cost equation.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential ambiguities in the original mathematical expressions and the need for clarity in the use of parentheses. There is also mention of varying levels of familiarity with calculus among participants.

toasticles
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
if Cost(r)=0.01(2\pir2+v/\pir2(2\pir))+0.015(4\pir+v/\pir2)
v=hpir2
how does one show for the optimal radius/height for any volume i.e. where the cost will be the minimum for that volume?

all my attempts have ended with 0=0

help please? i'll give you cookehz ^^
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The first thing I would do is go ahead and replace "v" by \pi r^2 h:
cost(r, h)= 0.01(2\pi r^2+[v/(\pi r^2)](2\pi r)+0.015(4\pi r+v/(\pi r^2)
cost(r, h)= 0.01(2\pi r^2+[(\pi r^2h)/(\pi r^2)](2\pi r)+0.015(4\pi r+(\pi r^2 h)/(\pi r^2)
cost(r, h)= 0.01(2\pi r^2+ h(2\pi r)+ 0.015(4\pi r+ h))

Now differentiate with respect to both r and h:
Treating h as if it were a constant,
cost_r(r, h)= 0.01(4\pi r+ 2\pi h+ 0.015(4\pi))
cost_h(r, h)= 0.01(2\pi r+ 0.015)

To find the optimum height, set those both equal to 0 and solve the two equations for r and h. (Since there is no "h" in the second equation , it is particularly easy to solve it for r. Although it looks to me like there is a sign error- that will give a negative value for r.)
 
HallsofIvy said:
cost(r, h)= 0.01(2\pi r^2+ h(2\pi r)+ 0.015(4\pi r+ h))

i don't think this is right or if it is how did you get it so that the second part(0.15(4pir+h) is also multiplied by 0.01 as the 0.01 and 0.015 "segments" of the equation are separated completely by the addition sign? (i'm only first year calculus) so if it's a law or something please explain :D
 
toasticles said:
if Cost(r)=0.01(2\pir2+v/\pir2(2\pir)+0.015(4\pir+v/\pir2)
v=hpir2

i think its because your original brackets were a little ambiguous - why not use the method but with what you've got?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
2K