Solve Calculus Problem: Find Shortest Ladder Length

  • Thread starter Thread starter AD
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculus
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving a calculus problem involving finding the shortest ladder length needed to reach a building over a fence. The problem is framed with a 6ft high fence located 2ft from the building, and the ladder's length is expressed in terms of its height on the building and its distance from the fence. Participants suggest using the squared length of the ladder, L², to simplify differentiation, focusing on finding an extremum. The conversation emphasizes the importance of simplifying the expression before differentiation to make calculations easier, particularly using the quotient rule for the second term. Ultimately, the goal is to derive a manageable equation to find the minimum ladder length efficiently.
AD
Messages
70
Reaction score
0
Not my own homework problem, but somebody else's.

Parallel to a tall building runs a 6ft high fence. It is 2ft away from the building. What is the shortest ladder needed to reach the building from the other side of the fence?

I've drawn a diagram for this problem (see attached).

I've called the height above the ground at which the ladder touches the building 'h' and the distance of the base of the ladder from the fence 'x' and the length of the ladder 'L'.

Then

L2 = h2 + (x + 2)2

I think that by expressing L as a function in terms of one of the variables, x or h, and differentiating with respect to that variable, I can find then find the minimum length of the ladder.

By considering similar triangles

6/x = h/(2 + x)

So

x = 12/(h - 6)

And

h = 12/x + 6

But by substituting in either of these values, the differentiation dL/dx or dL/dh becomes horrible.

Is there an easier way to solve this problem? Am I overlooking something? I'd like to see if I could find an easier function to differentiate.
 

Attachments

  • ladder.gif
    ladder.gif
    2 KB · Views: 558
Physics news on Phys.org
This is the trick: Look for an extremum of L2. You know that L is positive, so an extremum of L2 is also an extremum of L.
I've tried
<br /> \frac{d}{dh}L^2 = 0<br />
It's lengthy but easy.

Edit: I think the rest of your work is OK.
 
Last edited:
Okay, so I can do dL2/dx or dL2/dh rather than and dL/dx or dL/dh and that will make the maths easier.

You've suggested dL2/dh.

Substituting x = 12/(h - 6) into the equation for L2 means that I would have to differentiate

h2 + [(12/(h - 6)) + 2]2

with respect to h. Right?
 
Correct.
Simplify before you derive. A lot of things will cancel.:wink:
 
So

L2 = h2 + [(12/(h - 6)) + 2]2

= h2 + 144/[(h - 6)2] + 48/(h - 6) + 4

What's cancelling?
 
Oh, c'mon. Combine the fractions before you square!
 
To get

L2 = h2 + 4h2/(h - 6)2

...?

Can I simplify it further?
 
I think this will do. Next, derive...
 
How? Using the quotient rule for the second term? Is that what you did?
 
  • #10
Yes.
 
Back
Top