What is the formula for the perimeter of an ellipse?

  • Thread starter Thread starter joecoss
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ellipse Perimeter
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on finding an algebraic formula for the perimeter of an ellipse that avoids elliptic integrals. It highlights that while the perimeter can be approximated using the formula 2π√((a²+b²)/2), where a and b are the semi-major and semi-minor axes, the accuracy for high eccentricities (0.9-1.0) is uncertain. The arclength formula is mentioned, but it ultimately leads back to elliptic integrals, which the original poster wishes to avoid. There is no exact solution for the perimeter, necessitating numerical integration or approximation methods. The conversation concludes with references to additional resources for better approximations.
joecoss
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Could anyone direct me to an analytically correct algebraic formula for the Perimeter of an Ellipse based on either the eccentricity or the Semi-Major and Semiminor Axes other than the Elliptic Integral ? If so, how accurate will it be for relatively high eccentricities such as 0.9-1.0 ? Thanks.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Given those properties of a given ellipse, you should be able to define a function, f(x) which describes the top half of the ellipse. The perimeter of the ellipse would be twice the length of f(x) on the interval on which it exists. The length of f(x) on that interval, let's call it [-a,a], is:

L = \int _{-a} ^a \sqrt{1 + [f'(x)]^2}dx
 
To see why this works, think of f'(x) as dy/dx. Now, put the "dx" under the square root, and you'll get:

L = \int _{-a} ^a \sqrt{{dx}^2 + {dy}^2}

Now, if you consider an infinitessimal piece of the function, you can treat it as a straight line segment. If you think of this segment as the hypoteneuse of a triangle with sides dx and dy, then clearly, the length of this hypoteneuse is the integrand. Sum the lengths of these tiny segments over the desired interval, and you get the length of the function on that interval.
 
I have a handbook that lists the perimeter of an ellipse as approximately:

2\pi\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}(a^2+b^2)}

a and b are the semi-major and semi-minor axes, respectively. No idea on the accuracy.
 
OK I am with you on the Arclength Formula, do you know the function if given a (S-maj), b (S-minor), or c (Focus to center) ? Thanks a lot.
 
Won't the arclength formula lead to the elliptic integral? You already said you don't want that.

Edit: There is no exact solution for the perimeter of an ellipse. You either have to numerically integrate this:

4a\int_0^{\pi/2}\sqrt{1-e^2\sin^2 t}\,dt}

(where e is the eccentricity)

Or use an approximation like the one I gave in my earlier post.

Edit Edit: This page seems to have some better approximations listed at the bottom:

http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/formulas/faq.ellipse.circumference.html
 
Last edited:
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...
Back
Top