What Dimensions Minimize Material in a Paper Cup Designed for 8oz?

tjc9
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


company manufactures paper cups that are designed to hold 8 fluid ounces
each. The cups are in the shape of a frustum of a right circular cone (so the top and
bottom of the cup are circles, not necessarily of the same size, and the side profile is
that of a trapezoid). What are the dimensions for a paper cup that minimizes the
amount of material used?

Homework Equations


The volume of the cup would be pi/3(R^2+Rr+r^2)h
The surface area would be pi(r)^2+pi(R+r)sqrt((r-R)^2+h^2​

The Attempt at a Solution


Know that I'd need to hold volume constant at V=8 fl. oz. or 14.4375 in.^3. Know I need to minimize the surface area of the cup. I solved for h in the volume equation then substituted that into the area equation. I don't know where to go from there because if you take the partial derivatives it becomes way too complicated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I believe you should use the lagrange multiplier method, minimizing the function of the area using the constant volume function as a constraint. Are you familiar with such thing?
 
I know sort of how to but not with that function. Also, what constraint would the volume function create
 
Last edited:
tjc9 said:
I know sort of how to but not with that function.

The problem can range from almost-impossible to nasty but do-able, depending on how you represent it. Your representation is just about impossible with your choice of variables, although it can be solved easily enough using a numerical optimization package.

I found it much better to represent the frustrum as an actual difference between two cones of radii ##R## and ##r## and of heights ##H## and ##h.## We have ##R = H t## and ##r = h t##, where ##t## is the tangent of the half-angle at the apex of the cone. It is best to leave it as just ##t##, rather than as ##\tan( \theta/2).##

When I did all of that the Lagrange multiplier method became just barely practical.
 
Last edited:
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
33
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
14K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Back
Top