Straight Line and its construction
From Math Images
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|ImageSize=280px | |ImageSize=280px | ||
|Image=S35-1.jpg | |Image=S35-1.jpg | ||
| - | |ImageIntro=Independently invented by a French army officer, Charles-Nicolas Peaucellier and a Lithuanian (disputable) mathematician Lipmann Lipkin, this is the device that draws a straight line without using a straight edge. It was the first planar linkage that drew straight line without a reference guideway and it had important applications in engineering and mathematics. | + | |ImageIntro=Independently invented by a French army officer, Charles-Nicolas Peaucellier and a Lithuanian (disputable) mathematician Lipmann Lipkin, this is the device that draws a straight line without using a straight edge. It was the first planar {{EasyBalloon|Link=linkage|Balloon=It is defined as a series of rigid links connected with joints to form a closed chain, or a series of closed chains. Each link has two or more joints, and the joints have various degrees of freedom to allow motion between the links}} that drew straight line without a reference guideway and it had important applications in engineering and mathematics. |
|ImageDescElem=What is a straight line? How do you define straightness? How do you construct something straight without assuming you have a straight edge? These are questions that seem silly to ask because they are so intuitive. We come to accept that straightness is simply straightness and its definition, like that of point and line, is simply assumed. However, compare this to the way we draw a circle. When using a compass to draw a circle, we are not starting with a figure that we accept as circular; instead, we are using a fundamental property of circles that the points on a circle are at a fixed distance from the center. This page explores the properties of a straight line and hence its construction. | |ImageDescElem=What is a straight line? How do you define straightness? How do you construct something straight without assuming you have a straight edge? These are questions that seem silly to ask because they are so intuitive. We come to accept that straightness is simply straightness and its definition, like that of point and line, is simply assumed. However, compare this to the way we draw a circle. When using a compass to draw a circle, we are not starting with a figure that we accept as circular; instead, we are using a fundamental property of circles that the points on a circle are at a fixed distance from the center. This page explores the properties of a straight line and hence its construction. | ||
|ImageDesc=== What is a straight line? == | |ImageDesc=== What is a straight line? == | ||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
[[Image:Img324.gif|center|border|350px]] | [[Image:Img324.gif|center|border|350px]] | ||
| - | The picture above shows a patent drawing of an early steam engine. It is of the simplest form with a boiler (on the left), a cylinder with piston, a beam (on top) and a pump (on the right side) at the other end. The pump was usually used to extract water from the mines. When the piston is at its lowest position, steam is let into the cylinder from valve K and it pushes the piston upwards. Afterward, when the piston is at its highest position, cold water is let in from valve E, cooling the steam in the cylinder and causing the pressure in the the cylinder to drop below the atmospheric pressure. The difference in pressure caused the piston to move downwards. After the piston returns to the lowest position, the whole process is repeated. This kind of steam engine is called "atmospheric" because it utilized atmospheric pressure to cause the downward action of the piston (steam only balances out the atmospheric pressure and allow the piston to return to the highest point). Since in the downward motion, the piston pulls on the beam and in the upward motion, the beam pulls on the piston, the connection between the end of the piston rod and the beam is always in tension(under stretching) and that is why a chain is used as the connection. | + | The picture above shows a patent drawing of an early steam engine. It is of the simplest form with a boiler (on the left), a cylinder with piston, a beam (on top) and a pump (on the right side) at the other end. The pump was usually used to extract water from the mines. When the piston is at its lowest position, steam is let into the cylinder from valve K and it pushes the piston upwards. Afterward, when the piston is at its highest position, cold water is let in from valve E, cooling the steam in the cylinder and causing the pressure in the the cylinder to drop below the atmospheric pressure. The difference in pressure caused the piston to move downwards. After the piston returns to the lowest position, the whole process is repeated. This kind of steam engine is called "atmospheric" because it utilized atmospheric pressure to cause the downward action of the piston (steam only balances out the atmospheric pressure and allow the piston to return to the highest point). Since in the downward motion, the piston pulls on the beam and in the upward motion, the beam pulls on the piston, the connection between the end of the piston rod and the beam is always in tension (under stretching) and that is why a chain is used as the connection. |
| - | Anyway, the piston moves in the vertical direction and the piston rod takes only axial loading, i.e. forces applied in the direction along the rod. However, from the above picture, it is clear that the end of the piston does not move in a straight line due to the fact that the end of the beam describes | + | Anyway, the piston moves in the vertical direction and the piston rod takes only axial loading, i.e. forces applied in the direction along the rod. However, from the above picture, it is clear that the end of the piston does not move in a straight line due to the fact that the end of the beam describes an arch of a circle. As a result, horizontal forces are created and subjected onto the piston rod. Consequently, the process of wear and tear is very much quickened and the efficiency of the engine greatly compromised. Now considering that the up-and-down cycle repeats itself hundreds of times every minute and the engine is expected to run 24/7 to make profits for the investors, such defect in the engine must not be tolerated and thus poses a great need for improvements. |
[[Image:Img325.gif|center|border|500px]] | [[Image:Img325.gif|center|border|500px]] | ||
| - | Improvements were made. Firstly, "double-action" engines were made, part of which is shown in the picture on | + | Improvements were made. Firstly, "double-action" engines were made, part of which is shown in the picture on top. Atmospheric pressure acts in both upward and downward strokes of the engine and two chains were used (one connected to the top of the arched end of the beam and one to the bottom), both of which will take turns to be in tension throughout one cycle. One might ask why chain was used all the time. The answer was simple: to fit the curved end of the beam. However, this does not fundamentally solved the problem and unfortunately created more. The additional chain increased the height of the engine and made the manufacturing very difficult (it was hard to make straight steel bars and rods back then) and costly. |
[[Image:Img326.gif|border|center|200px]] | [[Image:Img326.gif|border|center|200px]] | ||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
==='''James Watt's breakthrough'''=== | ==='''James Watt's breakthrough'''=== | ||
| - | James Watt found a mechanism that converted the linear motion of pistons in the cylinder to the semi circular motion of the beam (or the circular motion of the flywheel) and vice versa. In 1784, he invented a three member linkage that solved the linear motion to circular problem practically as illustrated by the animation below. In its simplest form, there are two radius arms that have the same lengths and a connecting arm with midpoint P. Point P moves in a straight line. However, this linkage only produced approximate straight line (a stretched figure 8 actually) as shown on the right, much to the chagrin of the mathematicians who were after absolute straight lines. There is a more general form of the Watt's linkage that the two radius arms having different lengths like shown in the figure in the middle. To make sure that Point P still move in the stretched figure 8, it has to be positioned such that it adheres to the ratio<math>\frac{AB}{CD} = \frac{CP}{CB}</math>. | + | James Watt found a mechanism that converted the linear motion of pistons in the cylinder to the semi circular motion of the beam (or the circular motion of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flywheel flywheel]) and vice versa. In 1784, he invented a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linkage_(mechanical) three member linkage] that solved the linear motion to circular problem practically as illustrated by the animation below. In its simplest form, there are two radius arms that have the same lengths and a connecting arm with midpoint P. Point P moves in a straight line. However, this linkage only produced approximate straight line (a stretched figure 8 actually) as shown on the right, much to the chagrin of the mathematicians who were after absolute straight lines. There is a more general form of the Watt's linkage that the two radius arms having different lengths like shown in the figure in the middle. To make sure that Point P still move in the stretched figure 8, it has to be positioned such that it adheres to the ratio<math>\frac{AB}{CD} = \frac{CP}{CB}</math>. |
[[Image:Watts linkage.gif|right|border]] | [[Image:Watts linkage.gif|right|border]] | ||
| Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
==='''The Motion of Point P'''=== | ==='''The Motion of Point P'''=== | ||
| - | We intend to described the path of P so that we could show it does not move in a straight line. | + | We intend to described the path of <math>P</math> so that we could show it does not move in a straight line (which is obvious) and more importantly to pinpoint the position of <math>P</math> using certain parameter we know such as the angle of rotation or one coordinate of point <math>P</math>. This is awfully important in engineering as engineers would like to know that there are no two parts of the machine will collide with each other throughout the motion. |
===='''Algebraic Description'''==== | ===='''Algebraic Description'''==== | ||
| + | We see that <math>P</math> moves in a stretched figure 8 and will tend to think that there should be a nice close form of the relationship between the coordinates of <math>P</math> like that of the circle. But after this section, you will see that there is a closed form, at least theoretically, but it is not "nice" at all. | ||
[[Image:JW point P.png|center|600px]] | [[Image:JW point P.png|center|600px]] | ||
We know coordinates <math>A</math> and <math>D</math>. Hence let the coordinates of <math>A</math> be <math>(0,0)</math>, coordinates of <math>B</math> be <math>(c,d)</math>. We also know the length of the bar. Let <math>AB=CD=r, BC=m</math>. | We know coordinates <math>A</math> and <math>D</math>. Hence let the coordinates of <math>A</math> be <math>(0,0)</math>, coordinates of <math>B</math> be <math>(c,d)</math>. We also know the length of the bar. Let <math>AB=CD=r, BC=m</math>. | ||
| - | Suppose that at one instance we know the coordinates of <math>B</math> as <math>(a,b)</math>, then <math>P</math> will be on the circle centered at <math>B</math> with a radius of <math>m</math>. Since <math>P</math> is on the circle centered at <math>D</math> with radius <math>r</math>. Then the coordinates of C have to satisfy the two equations below. | + | Suppose that at one instance we know the coordinates of <math>B</math> as <math>(a,b)</math>, then <math>P</math> will be on the circle centered at <math>B</math> with a radius of <math>m</math>. Since <math>P</math> is on the circle centered at <math>D</math> with radius <math>r</math>. Then the coordinates of <math>C</math> have to satisfy the two equations below. |
<math>\begin{cases} | <math>\begin{cases} | ||
| Line 73: | Line 74: | ||
Now, expanding the first two equations we have, | Now, expanding the first two equations we have, | ||
| + | |||
<math>\begin{cases} | <math>\begin{cases} | ||
| - | x^2+y^2-2ax-2by+a^2+b^2=m^2 \cdots \cdots | + | x^2+y^2-2ax-2by+a^2+b^2=m^2 \cdots \cdots \\{{EquationRef2|Eq. 1}} |
| - | x^2+y^2-2cx-2dy+c^2+d^2=r^2 \cdots \cdots | + | x^2+y^2-2cx-2dy+c^2+d^2=r^2 \cdots \cdots \\{{EquationRef2|Eq. 2}} |
\end{cases}</math> | \end{cases}</math> | ||
Subtract the second equation from the first we have, | Subtract the second equation from the first we have, | ||
| - | <math>(-2a+2c)x-(2b-2d)y+(a^2+b^2)-(c^2+d^2)=m^2-r^2\cdots \cdots | + | <math>(-2a+2c)x-(2b-2d)y+(a^2+b^2)-(c^2+d^2)=m^2-r^2\cdots \cdots </math>{{EquationRef2|Eq. 3}} |
Substituting <math>a^2+b^2=r^2</math> and rearranging we have, | Substituting <math>a^2+b^2=r^2</math> and rearranging we have, | ||
| Line 92: | Line 94: | ||
Hence <math>y=\frac {-2a+2c}{2b-2d}x-\frac {m^2-2r^2+c^2+d^2}{2b-2d} \cdots \cdots Eqt 4</math> | Hence <math>y=\frac {-2a+2c}{2b-2d}x-\frac {m^2-2r^2+c^2+d^2}{2b-2d} \cdots \cdots Eqt 4</math> | ||
| - | Now, we could manipulate Eqt 3 to get an expression for <math>b</math>, i.e. <math>b=f(a,c,d,m,r,x,y)</math>. Next, we substitute <math>b=f(a,c,d,m,r,x,y)</math> back into Eqt 1 and will be able to obtain an expression for <math>a</math>, i.e. <math>a=g(x,y,d,c,m,r)</math>. Since <math>b=\pm \sqrt {r^2-a^2}</math>, we have expressions of <math>a</math> and <math>b</math> in terms of <math>x,y,d,c,m</math> and <math>r</math>. | + | Now, we could manipulate <math>Eqt 3</math> to get an expression for <math>b</math>, i.e. <math>b=f(a,c,d,m,r,x,y)</math>. Next, we substitute <math>b=f(a,c,d,m,r,x,y)</math> back into <math>Eqt 1</math> and will be able to obtain an expression for <math>a</math>, i.e. <math>a=g(x,y,d,c,m,r)</math>. Since <math>b=\pm \sqrt {r^2-a^2}</math>, we have expressions of <math>a</math> and <math>b</math> in terms of <math>x,y,d,c,m</math> and <math>r</math>. |
Say point <math>P</math> has coordinates <math>(x',y')</math>, then <math>x'=\frac {a+x}{2}</math> and <math>y'=\frac {b+y}{2}</math> which will yield | Say point <math>P</math> has coordinates <math>(x',y')</math>, then <math>x'=\frac {a+x}{2}</math> and <math>y'=\frac {b+y}{2}</math> which will yield | ||
| Line 101: | Line 103: | ||
\end{cases}</math> | \end{cases}</math> | ||
| - | In the last step we substitute <math>a=g(x,y,d,c,m,r)</math>,<math>b=\pm \sqrt {r^2-a^2}</math>, Eqt 5 and Eqt 6 back into Eqt 4 and we will finally have a relationship between <math>x'</math> and <math>y'</math>. Of course, it will be a messy one but we could definitely use Mathematica to do the maths. | + | In the last step we substitute <math>a=g(x,y,d,c,m,r)</math>,<math>b=\pm \sqrt {r^2-a^2}</math>, <math>Eqt 5</math> and <math>Eqt 6</math> back into <math>Eqt 4</math> and we will finally have a relationship between <math>x'</math> and <math>y'</math>. Of course, it will be a messy one but we could definitely use Mathematica to do the maths. |
===='''Parametric Description'''==== | ===='''Parametric Description'''==== | ||
| + | Alright, since the algebraic equations are not agreeable at all, we have to resort to the parametric description. To think about, it would not be too bad if we could describe the motion of <math>P</math> using the angle of ration. As a matter of fact, it is easier to obtain the angle of rotation than knowing one of <math>P</math>'s coordinates. | ||
[[Image:JWpara.png|center|600px]] | [[Image:JWpara.png|center|600px]] | ||
Revision as of 11:01, 7 July 2010
| How to draw a straight line without a straight edge |
|---|


is a straight line. In addition, we are most familiar with another definition is the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. However, it is important to realize that the definitions of being "shortest" and "straight" are different from that on a flat plane. For example, the shortest distance between two points on a sphere is the the "great circle", a section of a sphere that contains a diameter of the sphere, and great circle is straight on the spherical surface.
.

so that we could show it does not move in a straight line (which is obvious) and more importantly to pinpoint the position of
and
. Hence let the coordinates of
, coordinates of
be
. We also know the length of the bar. Let
.
, then
. Since
. Then the coordinates of
have to satisfy the two equations below.
.
to get an expression for
, i.e.
. Next, we substitute
and will be able to obtain an expression for
, i.e.
. Since
, we have expressions of
and
, then
and
which will yield
and
back into
and we will finally have a relationship between
and
. Of course, it will be a messy one but we could definitely use Mathematica to do the maths.
in conformation of most parametrizations of point.
. Then using cosine formula, we have
and
as
,
and
being the coordinates of point
is parametrized in term of
and
is the original three member linkage with
and point
. A is the pivot of the beam fixed on the engine frame while D is also fixed. However, Watt modified it by adding a parallelogram
to it and connecting point
to the piston rod. We now know that point

and
. Furthermore, all the bars are free to rotate at every joint and point
is a fixed pivot. Due to the symmetrical construction of the linkage, it goes without proof that points
and
and they meet at point
.
is a rhombus
and
. Since the length
and
are of constant length, then the product
is of constant value however you change the shape of this construction.
is the the extra link pivoted to the fixed point
with
. Construct line
that cuts the circle at point
. In addition, construct line
such that
.
,
constant, i.e. the length of
(or the x-coordinate of
,
and
. Point
and
is of constant value. I left it to you to prove the rest. Mr. Prim's blowing engine used for ventilating the House of Commons, 1877. The crosshead of the reciprocating air pump is guided by a Peaucellier linkage shown at the center. The slate-lined air cylinders had rubber-flap inlet and exhaust valves and a piston whose periphery was formed by two rows of brush bristles. Prim's machine was driven by a steam engine.

and
constant. When point
, intersecting
at point
are collinear
,
.
where
and
with radius having the relation
. We roll
. Voila!
and point
will trace out an ellipse. Why? Consider the coordinates of
and
. Point
. Now, whenever we see
and
together, we want to square them. Hence,
and
. Well, they are not so pretty yet. So we make them pretty by dividing
by
and
by
, obtaining
and
. Voila again!
and this is exactly the algebraic formula for an ellipse.

