I Determine ## \beta ## as a function of ##\theta## linkage

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the angle β as a function of θ for a specific linkage using trigonometric principles. The Law of Sines and Law of Cosines are applied to relate angles and sides of triangles formed within the linkage. A complex equation for sin(φ) is derived, which can be solved using the quadratic formula. An alternative approach is suggested, involving the use of a diagonal in the quadrilateral to simplify calculations through additional applications of the cosine and sine rules. Ultimately, a more elegant expression for β is achieved, demonstrating the importance of perspective in solving trigonometric problems.
erobz
Gold Member
Messages
4,445
Reaction score
1,839
I 've been trying find ##\beta## as a function of ##\theta## for this linkage. It's quite the trigonometric mess.

1676847859269.png

Start with the Law of Sines:

$$ \frac{\sin \beta}{x} = \frac{\sin \varphi}{R} \implies \boxed{ x = R \frac{\sin \beta}{\sin \varphi} \tag{1} }$$

Relating angles:

$$ \theta + \alpha + \varphi = \frac{\pi}{2} \implies \boxed{ \alpha = \frac{\pi}{2} -( \theta+\varphi) \tag{2} } $$

Applying Law of Cosines ( for each triangle):

$$ \boxed{ R^2 = w^2 + x^2 - 2 w x \cos \varphi \tag{3}}$$

$$ \boxed{ l^2 = r^2 + x^2 - 2 r x \cos \alpha \tag{4}}$$

Sub ##(1) \to (3)## to find ##\sin \varphi## in terms of ##\sin \beta##:

$$ \left( \left( R^2-w^2\right)^2+ 4 w^2 R^2 \sin^2 \beta \right) \sin^4 \varphi - \left( 2R^2\left(R^2-w^2\right) + 4 w^2 R^2 \right) \sin^2 \beta \sin^2 \varphi + R^4 \sin^4 \beta = 0 \tag{5} $$

Eq ##(5)## can be solved for ##\sin \varphi## using the quadratic formula with the substitution ## u = \sin^2 \varphi ##:

## a = \left( \left( R^2-w^2\right)^2+ 4 w^2 R^2 \sin^2 \beta \right) ##

## b = - \left( 2R^2\left(R^2-w^2\right) + 4 w^2 R^2 \right) \sin^2 \beta ##

##c = R^4 \sin^4 \beta##

It follows that:

$$ \boxed{ \sin \varphi = \sqrt{ \frac{-b \pm \sqrt{b^2 - 4ac} }{2a} } \tag{6} } $$

Now, if we return to ##(4)## substituting ##(1)## and the identity ##\cos \alpha = \sin ( \theta+ \varphi)##:

$$ l^2 = r^2 + \frac{R^2 \sin^2 \beta}{ \sin^2 \varphi}- 2 r \frac{R \sin \beta}{ \sin \varphi } \sin ( \theta + \varphi) $$

Then applying the sum-difference identity for ##\sin( \theta + \varphi )##:

$$\boxed{ l^2 = r^2 + \frac{R^2 \sin^2 \beta}{ \sin^2 \varphi}- 2 r \frac{R \sin \beta}{ \sin \varphi } \left( \sin \theta \cos \varphi + \cos \theta \sin \varphi \right) \tag{7} }$$

From this point I can use a similar trick as in ##5## to get a solution for either ##\sin \theta , \cos \theta ## in terms of ##\sin \beta ## and all the constants.

It's seeming to be a real mess. Is it really this complex of a function - Have I messed up?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I think you may find it easier to solve if you draw the other diagonal of the quadrilateral instead of the one labelled x. That diagonal goes from the top of the yellow line r to the vertex of the angle ##\beta##. Call its length y.
Then, since you know the angle between r and w is ##\pi/2 - \theta## you can use the cosine rule for triangle r-y-w to get the length y in terms of ##r,w,\cos(\pi/2-\theta)##, ie ##r,w,\sin\theta##.
Next, use the sine rule for the same triangle to get the angle ##\gamma## in the bottom-right corner of that triangle. That forms part of the angle ##\beta##.
The other part of ##\beta## is the bottom-right angle of the triangle l-R-y. You now know all three sides of that triangle, so you can apply the cosine law to that bottom right angle to get an expression for it in terms of ##l,R,y##.

I don't know for sure that it's any less messy than what you had but since it really only has three steps: cosine rule, sine rule, cosine rule, I think it's likely to.
 
andrewkirk said:
I think you may find it easier to solve if you draw the other diagonal of the quadrilateral instead of the one labelled x. That diagonal goes from the top of the yellow line r to the vertex of the angle ##\beta##. Call its length y.
Then, since you know the angle between r and w is ##\pi/2 - \theta## you can use the cosine rule for triangle r-y-w to get the length y in terms of ##r,w,\cos(\pi/2-\theta)##, ie ##r,w,\sin\theta##.
Next, use the sine rule for the same triangle to get the angle ##\gamma## in the bottom-right corner of that triangle. That forms part of the angle ##\beta##.
The other part of ##\beta## is the bottom-right angle of the triangle l-R-y. You now know all three sides of that triangle, so you can apply the cosine law to that bottom right angle to get an expression for it in terms of ##l,R,y##.

I don't know for sure that it's any less messy than what you had but since it really only has three steps: cosine rule, sine rule, cosine rule, I think it's likely to.
Yeah, it does appear to be the elegant route:

$$ \beta = \arcsin\left( \frac{ r \cos \theta }{ \sqrt{ r^2+w^2-2rw \sin \theta} } \right) + \arccos\left( \frac{ r^2 +w^2+R^2-l^2-2rw \sin \theta }{ \sqrt{ r^2+w^2-2rw \sin \theta} } \right) $$

Simple change of perspective, dramatic effects...SMH. Thanks for the tip!
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top