I have the following function, depicted on this image:

enter image description here

The strange thing is, that I only know the coordinate system from the "inside out", that means I know the lengths b, c, e and f, but I don't know a and d. Neither do I know the function. My goal is to calculate a and d. I could assume the function is quadratic, (even if it's not, it would be sufficient as an approximation, if I swapped the two axes).

I also know the length a+d. It's as if the two axes were a thread being stretched over the edge of a cube, and I can move it, and I know all the markings on it, but not the position where it contacts the edge.

The problem is, if I try to use my assumptions on the function for my calculations, I end up with

g(a) = d
g(a+b) = d + e
g(a+b+c) = d + e + f

As I don't know a and d, this results in a big mess in my calculations, and I can't get anywhere, because I don't know the origin of my coordinate system.

As I know the "outside" part of my coordinate system better than the "inside" of it, is there any transformation I can use to make my job easier? (or a completely different strategy to solve my original problem?)

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Would it help to put the origin at the point you currently call $(a,d)$? The lower left corner becomes $(-a,-d)$ but is decoupled from the other lengths. $\endgroup$ – Ross Millikan Nov 30 '12 at 22:12

If you know $b,c,e,f$ you have three points on a parabola so should be able to determine it. As in my comment, let the origin be at your $(a,d)$. Then your functional form is $x=py^2+qy$. There is no constant term as it goes through the origin. If we substitute in the known points we get $b=pe^2+qe, (b+c)=p(e+f)^2+q(e+f)$ This is two equations in two unkowns $(p$ and $q)$.

  • $\begingroup$ You are right, it does even become a simple interpolation problem even if I decide to use another form for my function (it is taken from real-life measurements, so it might not be one continuous function describing my "red line" from one end to the other). I arrived to this problem after a long time of simplifying a 3d problem, I don't know how could I miss such a simple solution! $\endgroup$ – vsz Nov 30 '12 at 22:22
  • $\begingroup$ by the way, shouldn't it be $b=pe^2+qe$ ? $\endgroup$ – vsz Nov 30 '12 at 22:44
  • $\begingroup$ vsc I think Ross is assuming you mean for f to be the distance from e, so he's added the values, to compute the distance between f and d. Just as he did for b + c (to compute the distance from a to c). $\endgroup$ – Namaste Nov 30 '12 at 23:02
  • $\begingroup$ @vsc: amWhy is correct. Based on the original posting, it appears each segment is separate-that c does not include a or b, for example. $\endgroup$ – Ross Millikan Nov 30 '12 at 23:09
  • $\begingroup$ If the origin was moved to $(a,d)$ then $g(b) = e$, not $d$ $\endgroup$ – vsz Nov 30 '12 at 23:33

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.