Mixing
Lateral area of oblique cylinder and cone
$begingroup$
As following picture :
I can find the lateral Area of right cylinder and cone.
There spread forms are a rectangles and a circular sector.
That's very easy.
But in the oblique cases ?
Are there same Area with right ones?
I wonder that there nets are a plane.
How can I find the latral areas in the case of the oblique ones?
geometry solid-geometry
asked Sep 14 '15 at 4:57
c-301c-301
877
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As following picture :
I can find the lateral Area of right cylinder and cone.
There spread forms are a rectangles and a circular sector.
That's very easy.
But in the oblique cases ?
Are there same Area with right ones?
I wonder that there nets are a plane.
How can I find the latral areas in the case of the oblique ones?
geometry solid-geometry
asked Sep 14 '15 at 4:57
c-301c-301
877
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Would a method using calculus be acceptable?
$endgroup$
– Rory Daulton
Sep 14 '15 at 9:53
$begingroup$
For an oblique cone, the surface area can be found (quite unsurprisingly) through surface integrals. The outcome is an elliptic integral, nothing elementary (similarly, the perimeter of an ellipse is given by a non-elementary, closely related elliptic integral of the second kind).
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
May 6 '18 at 20:33
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As following picture :
I can find the lateral Area of right cylinder and cone.
There spread forms are a rectangles and a circular sector.
That's very easy.
But in the oblique cases ?
Are there same Area with right ones?
I wonder that there nets are a plane.
How can I find the latral areas in the case of the oblique ones?
geometry solid-geometry
asked Sep 14 '15 at 4:57
c-301c-301
877
$endgroup$
As following picture :
I can find the lateral Area of right cylinder and cone.
There spread forms are a rectangles and a circular sector.
That's very easy.
But in the oblique cases ?
Are there same Area with right ones?
I wonder that there nets are a plane.
How can I find the latral areas in the case of the oblique ones?
geometry solid-geometry
geometry solid-geometry
asked Sep 14 '15 at 4:57
c-301c-301
877
asked Sep 14 '15 at 4:57
c-301c-301
877
asked Sep 14 '15 at 4:57
c-301c-301
877
asked Sep 14 '15 at 4:57
c-301c-301
877
asked Sep 14 '15 at 4:57
c-301c-301
877
877
$begingroup$
Would a method using calculus be acceptable?
$endgroup$
– Rory Daulton
Sep 14 '15 at 9:53
$begingroup$
For an oblique cone, the surface area can be found (quite unsurprisingly) through surface integrals. The outcome is an elliptic integral, nothing elementary (similarly, the perimeter of an ellipse is given by a non-elementary, closely related elliptic integral of the second kind).
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
May 6 '18 at 20:33
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Would a method using calculus be acceptable?
$endgroup$
– Rory Daulton
Sep 14 '15 at 9:53
$begingroup$
For an oblique cone, the surface area can be found (quite unsurprisingly) through surface integrals. The outcome is an elliptic integral, nothing elementary (similarly, the perimeter of an ellipse is given by a non-elementary, closely related elliptic integral of the second kind).
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
May 6 '18 at 20:33
$begingroup$
Would a method using calculus be acceptable?
$endgroup$
– Rory Daulton
Sep 14 '15 at 9:53
$begingroup$
Would a method using calculus be acceptable?
$endgroup$
– Rory Daulton
Sep 14 '15 at 9:53
$begingroup$
For an oblique cone, the surface area can be found (quite unsurprisingly) through surface integrals. The outcome is an elliptic integral, nothing elementary (similarly, the perimeter of an ellipse is given by a non-elementary, closely related elliptic integral of the second kind).
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
May 6 '18 at 20:33
$begingroup$
For an oblique cone, the surface area can be found (quite unsurprisingly) through surface integrals. The outcome is an elliptic integral, nothing elementary (similarly, the perimeter of an ellipse is given by a non-elementary, closely related elliptic integral of the second kind).
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
May 6 '18 at 20:33
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I did not even use calculus at all; I don't even know calculus, nor do I know if calculus is usable to find the formula. I am in a geometry class right now, for I am a high school freshman.
But still, I might have two different solutions for different kinds of oblique cones.
I originally tried to share the actual document, since the formulas contain characters that can't be used for this inspection, but according to James, the document was not accessible. Unfortunately, I do not know how exactly to share the document to everyone, so I just took a screenshot of the document and all it has to offer.
[Link of Screenshot][1] [1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/91gIu.png
I also tried to explain everything to answer James's other questions
An oblique cylinder is easier since it has an entirely congruent slant height, which is congruent to the axis. So an accurate lateral area formula would be 2πra, where r is the radius and a is the axis. And what I mean by "axis" is the distance between the center of the base and the vertex.
However, an oblique cone only has one pair of congruent slant heights that connect to points that are the base's diameter apart. That slant height can actually be interpreted as the mean of the maximum and minimum slant heights, in which is the average slant height of the entire cone. This is so because the increase/decrease in the slant height from the two paired slant heights mentioned previously (which this is why they are important) are exactly the same since the base is a circle and not a parabola.
To support this, those points create a diameter that is perpendicular to the diameter connecting the points of the maximum and minimum slant heights.
The lateral area found only using the Pythagorean Theorem twice in a row, only being given the radius, the altitude, and the axis, besides the fact that an angle measurement of the axis can replace either the axis or the altitude, because trigonometry, and after using the trigonometry is when the formulas are usable. It's also what is multiplied by πr to find the lateral area, just like a right cone, for the surface area, that is simply one of the formulas + the base: πr^2.
Let me know if there is anything wrong with having access to the screenshot, either if the image is not public, or the stupid fact that I do not have enough reputation.
answered May 4 '18 at 17:22
Ian BarnettIan Barnett
112
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Please write a self-contained answer, or at least make the linked document public. Anyway the surface area of an oblique cone is not an elementary object.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
May 6 '18 at 20:35
$begingroup$
As the one who posted this, I meant Jack instead of James, by the way.
$endgroup$
– Ian Barnett
Jun 14 '18 at 15:46
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1434572%2flateral-area-of-oblique-cylinder-and-cone%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I did not even use calculus at all; I don't even know calculus, nor do I know if calculus is usable to find the formula. I am in a geometry class right now, for I am a high school freshman.
But still, I might have two different solutions for different kinds of oblique cones.
I originally tried to share the actual document, since the formulas contain characters that can't be used for this inspection, but according to James, the document was not accessible. Unfortunately, I do not know how exactly to share the document to everyone, so I just took a screenshot of the document and all it has to offer.
[Link of Screenshot][1] [1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/91gIu.png
I also tried to explain everything to answer James's other questions
An oblique cylinder is easier since it has an entirely congruent slant height, which is congruent to the axis. So an accurate lateral area formula would be 2πra, where r is the radius and a is the axis. And what I mean by "axis" is the distance between the center of the base and the vertex.
However, an oblique cone only has one pair of congruent slant heights that connect to points that are the base's diameter apart. That slant height can actually be interpreted as the mean of the maximum and minimum slant heights, in which is the average slant height of the entire cone. This is so because the increase/decrease in the slant height from the two paired slant heights mentioned previously (which this is why they are important) are exactly the same since the base is a circle and not a parabola.
To support this, those points create a diameter that is perpendicular to the diameter connecting the points of the maximum and minimum slant heights.
The lateral area found only using the Pythagorean Theorem twice in a row, only being given the radius, the altitude, and the axis, besides the fact that an angle measurement of the axis can replace either the axis or the altitude, because trigonometry, and after using the trigonometry is when the formulas are usable. It's also what is multiplied by πr to find the lateral area, just like a right cone, for the surface area, that is simply one of the formulas + the base: πr^2.
Let me know if there is anything wrong with having access to the screenshot, either if the image is not public, or the stupid fact that I do not have enough reputation.
answered May 4 '18 at 17:22
Ian BarnettIan Barnett
112
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Please write a self-contained answer, or at least make the linked document public. Anyway the surface area of an oblique cone is not an elementary object.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
May 6 '18 at 20:35
$begingroup$
As the one who posted this, I meant Jack instead of James, by the way.
$endgroup$
– Ian Barnett
Jun 14 '18 at 15:46
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I did not even use calculus at all; I don't even know calculus, nor do I know if calculus is usable to find the formula. I am in a geometry class right now, for I am a high school freshman.
But still, I might have two different solutions for different kinds of oblique cones.
I originally tried to share the actual document, since the formulas contain characters that can't be used for this inspection, but according to James, the document was not accessible. Unfortunately, I do not know how exactly to share the document to everyone, so I just took a screenshot of the document and all it has to offer.
[Link of Screenshot][1] [1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/91gIu.png
I also tried to explain everything to answer James's other questions
An oblique cylinder is easier since it has an entirely congruent slant height, which is congruent to the axis. So an accurate lateral area formula would be 2πra, where r is the radius and a is the axis. And what I mean by "axis" is the distance between the center of the base and the vertex.
However, an oblique cone only has one pair of congruent slant heights that connect to points that are the base's diameter apart. That slant height can actually be interpreted as the mean of the maximum and minimum slant heights, in which is the average slant height of the entire cone. This is so because the increase/decrease in the slant height from the two paired slant heights mentioned previously (which this is why they are important) are exactly the same since the base is a circle and not a parabola.
To support this, those points create a diameter that is perpendicular to the diameter connecting the points of the maximum and minimum slant heights.
The lateral area found only using the Pythagorean Theorem twice in a row, only being given the radius, the altitude, and the axis, besides the fact that an angle measurement of the axis can replace either the axis or the altitude, because trigonometry, and after using the trigonometry is when the formulas are usable. It's also what is multiplied by πr to find the lateral area, just like a right cone, for the surface area, that is simply one of the formulas + the base: πr^2.
Let me know if there is anything wrong with having access to the screenshot, either if the image is not public, or the stupid fact that I do not have enough reputation.
answered May 4 '18 at 17:22
Ian BarnettIan Barnett
112
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Please write a self-contained answer, or at least make the linked document public. Anyway the surface area of an oblique cone is not an elementary object.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
May 6 '18 at 20:35
$begingroup$
As the one who posted this, I meant Jack instead of James, by the way.
$endgroup$
– Ian Barnett
Jun 14 '18 at 15:46
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I did not even use calculus at all; I don't even know calculus, nor do I know if calculus is usable to find the formula. I am in a geometry class right now, for I am a high school freshman.
But still, I might have two different solutions for different kinds of oblique cones.
I originally tried to share the actual document, since the formulas contain characters that can't be used for this inspection, but according to James, the document was not accessible. Unfortunately, I do not know how exactly to share the document to everyone, so I just took a screenshot of the document and all it has to offer.
[Link of Screenshot][1] [1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/91gIu.png
I also tried to explain everything to answer James's other questions
An oblique cylinder is easier since it has an entirely congruent slant height, which is congruent to the axis. So an accurate lateral area formula would be 2πra, where r is the radius and a is the axis. And what I mean by "axis" is the distance between the center of the base and the vertex.
However, an oblique cone only has one pair of congruent slant heights that connect to points that are the base's diameter apart. That slant height can actually be interpreted as the mean of the maximum and minimum slant heights, in which is the average slant height of the entire cone. This is so because the increase/decrease in the slant height from the two paired slant heights mentioned previously (which this is why they are important) are exactly the same since the base is a circle and not a parabola.
To support this, those points create a diameter that is perpendicular to the diameter connecting the points of the maximum and minimum slant heights.
The lateral area found only using the Pythagorean Theorem twice in a row, only being given the radius, the altitude, and the axis, besides the fact that an angle measurement of the axis can replace either the axis or the altitude, because trigonometry, and after using the trigonometry is when the formulas are usable. It's also what is multiplied by πr to find the lateral area, just like a right cone, for the surface area, that is simply one of the formulas + the base: πr^2.
Let me know if there is anything wrong with having access to the screenshot, either if the image is not public, or the stupid fact that I do not have enough reputation.
answered May 4 '18 at 17:22
Ian BarnettIan Barnett
112
$endgroup$
I did not even use calculus at all; I don't even know calculus, nor do I know if calculus is usable to find the formula. I am in a geometry class right now, for I am a high school freshman.
But still, I might have two different solutions for different kinds of oblique cones.
I originally tried to share the actual document, since the formulas contain characters that can't be used for this inspection, but according to James, the document was not accessible. Unfortunately, I do not know how exactly to share the document to everyone, so I just took a screenshot of the document and all it has to offer.
[Link of Screenshot][1] [1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/91gIu.png
I also tried to explain everything to answer James's other questions
An oblique cylinder is easier since it has an entirely congruent slant height, which is congruent to the axis. So an accurate lateral area formula would be 2πra, where r is the radius and a is the axis. And what I mean by "axis" is the distance between the center of the base and the vertex.
However, an oblique cone only has one pair of congruent slant heights that connect to points that are the base's diameter apart. That slant height can actually be interpreted as the mean of the maximum and minimum slant heights, in which is the average slant height of the entire cone. This is so because the increase/decrease in the slant height from the two paired slant heights mentioned previously (which this is why they are important) are exactly the same since the base is a circle and not a parabola.
To support this, those points create a diameter that is perpendicular to the diameter connecting the points of the maximum and minimum slant heights.
The lateral area found only using the Pythagorean Theorem twice in a row, only being given the radius, the altitude, and the axis, besides the fact that an angle measurement of the axis can replace either the axis or the altitude, because trigonometry, and after using the trigonometry is when the formulas are usable. It's also what is multiplied by πr to find the lateral area, just like a right cone, for the surface area, that is simply one of the formulas + the base: πr^2.
Let me know if there is anything wrong with having access to the screenshot, either if the image is not public, or the stupid fact that I do not have enough reputation.
answered May 4 '18 at 17:22
Ian BarnettIan Barnett
112
edited May 11 '18 at 22:08
answered May 4 '18 at 17:22
Ian BarnettIan Barnett
112
answered May 4 '18 at 17:22
Ian BarnettIan Barnett
112
answered May 4 '18 at 17:22
Ian BarnettIan Barnett
112
112
$begingroup$
Please write a self-contained answer, or at least make the linked document public. Anyway the surface area of an oblique cone is not an elementary object.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
May 6 '18 at 20:35
$begingroup$
As the one who posted this, I meant Jack instead of James, by the way.
$endgroup$
– Ian Barnett
Jun 14 '18 at 15:46
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Please write a self-contained answer, or at least make the linked document public. Anyway the surface area of an oblique cone is not an elementary object.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
May 6 '18 at 20:35
$begingroup$
As the one who posted this, I meant Jack instead of James, by the way.
$endgroup$
– Ian Barnett
Jun 14 '18 at 15:46
$begingroup$
Please write a self-contained answer, or at least make the linked document public. Anyway the surface area of an oblique cone is not an elementary object.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
May 6 '18 at 20:35
$begingroup$
Please write a self-contained answer, or at least make the linked document public. Anyway the surface area of an oblique cone is not an elementary object.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
May 6 '18 at 20:35
$begingroup$
As the one who posted this, I meant Jack instead of James, by the way.
$endgroup$
– Ian Barnett
Jun 14 '18 at 15:46
$begingroup$
As the one who posted this, I meant Jack instead of James, by the way.
$endgroup$
– Ian Barnett
Jun 14 '18 at 15:46
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1434572%2flateral-area-of-oblique-cylinder-and-cone%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Would a method using calculus be acceptable?
$endgroup$
– Rory Daulton
Sep 14 '15 at 9:53
$begingroup$
For an oblique cone, the surface area can be found (quite unsurprisingly) through surface integrals. The outcome is an elliptic integral, nothing elementary (similarly, the perimeter of an ellipse is given by a non-elementary, closely related elliptic integral of the second kind).
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
May 6 '18 at 20:33