#$&* course MTH272 If your solution to a stated problem does not match the given solution, you should self-critique per instructions at http://vhcc2.vhcc.edu/dsmith/geninfo/labrynth_created_fall_05/levl1_22/levl2_81/file3_259.htm.
.............................................
Given Solution: `a Dividing [1, 5] into four intervals each will have length ( 5 - 1 ) / 4 = 1. The four intervals are therefore [1, 2], [2, 3], [3, 4], [4,5]. The function values at the endpoints f(1) = 0, f(2) = .5, f(3) = .471, f(4) = .433 and f(5) = .4. The average altitudes of the trapezoids are therefore (0 + .5) / 2 = 0.25, (.5 + .471)/2 = 0.486, (.471 + .433) / 2 = 0.452 and (.433 + .4) / 2 = 0.417. Trapeoid areas are equal to ave height * width; since the width of each is 1 the areas will match the average heights 0.25, 0.486, 0.452, 0.417. The sum of these areas is the trapezoidal approximation 1.604. ** DER &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Self-critique (if necessary):NA ------------------------------------------------ Self-critique Rating: ********************************************* ********************************************* Question: `q5.6.32 (was 5.6.24 est pond area by trap and midpt (20 ft intervals, widths 50, 54, 82, 82, 73, 75, 80 ft). How can you tell from the shape of the point whether the trapezoidal or midpoint estimate will be greater? YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY Your solution: (20 ft intervals, widths 50, 54, 82, 82, 73, 75, 80 ft) Trapezoidal (50+54+54, 82+82+82+82+73+73+75+75+80)=862 taking each of the points and laying them out as they would on each side of the interval. 862*20= 17240 multiplying the interval by the width 17240/2=8620 dividing by 2 gives the area in square feet Midpoint If these are all midpoint widths at interval of 20 {(20*50)(20*54)+(20*82)+(20*82)+(20*73)+(20*75)+(20*80)}=9920 Analysis It would appear that the midpoint has greater area than the Trapezoidal, but if you draw out the graph of the points the Trapezoidal is more accurate of estimation of area. I would say the Trapezoidal has more area from looking at the graph. confidence rating #$&*:3 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
.............................................
Given Solution: `a Since widths at 20-ft intervals are 50, 54, 82, 82, 73, 75, 80 ft the pond area can be approximated by a series of trapezoids with these altitudes. The average altitudes are therefore respectively (0 + 50 / 2) = 25 (50 + 54) / 2 = 52 (54 + 82) / 2 = 68 (82 + 82) / 2 = 82 etc., with corresponding areas 25 * 20 = 500 52 * 20 = 1040 etc., all areas in ft^2. The total area, according to the trapezoidal approximation, will therefore be 20 ft (25+52+68+82+77.5+74+77.5+40) ft = 9920 square feet. The midpoint widths would be calculated based on widths at positions 10, 30, 50, 70, ..., 150 ft. Due to the convex shape of the pond these estimates and will lie between the estimates made at 0, 20, 40, ..., 160 feet. The convex shape of the pond also ensures that the midpoint of each rectangle will 'hump above' the trapezoidal approximation, so the midpoint estimate will exceed the trapezoidal estimate. ** &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Self-critique (if necessary): So we need to assume a starting point of 0 on each side of the given points. I am noy sure why, but I can program that into my brain for recovery for the same kind of problem. My ending assumption is correct with the midpoint point verses the trapezoidal type measurements is that it gives a much tighter measurement there for more accurate. So getting the same numbers using the 2 rules the trapezoidal is bring us closer to the actual area. ------------------------------------------------ Self-critique Rating:3
#$&* course MTH272 If your solution to a stated problem does not match the given solution, you should self-critique per instructions at http://vhcc2.vhcc.edu/dsmith/geninfo/labrynth_created_fall_05/levl1_22/levl2_81/file3_259.htm.
.............................................
Given Solution: `a Dividing [1, 5] into four intervals each will have length ( 5 - 1 ) / 4 = 1. The four intervals are therefore [1, 2], [2, 3], [3, 4], [4,5]. The function values at the endpoints f(1) = 0, f(2) = .5, f(3) = .471, f(4) = .433 and f(5) = .4. The average altitudes of the trapezoids are therefore (0 + .5) / 2 = 0.25, (.5 + .471)/2 = 0.486, (.471 + .433) / 2 = 0.452 and (.433 + .4) / 2 = 0.417. Trapeoid areas are equal to ave height * width; since the width of each is 1 the areas will match the average heights 0.25, 0.486, 0.452, 0.417. The sum of these areas is the trapezoidal approximation 1.604. ** DER &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Self-critique (if necessary):NA ------------------------------------------------ Self-critique Rating: