Unequal Ladders in Alleyway

Well done. I new it could be done by some one who has your brain power. Mine is running out of power.

Hi FeEE,

Now try it with a 50ft ladder in place of the 32ft one using the same method and see if it works.

Mike

Hi IronDoubleEE,

Could you please explain for normal people as I am the principle of your computations? I would highly appreciate to understand since I do not.

Thanking you in advance

Me too like Mikey asking IronDoubleEE now to try it with a 50ft ladder in place of the 32ft one using the same method and see if it works.

And what will the solution if we use 50ft ladder in place of 27ft?

The original, Unequal Ladders 32' and 27' in the 24' Alleyway, calculating for (X) distance between the Ladders to Alleyway Clearance below, as follows:

An extension of Ladder 32' to 50' equals 18' therefore, subtract 18' from 32' for 14.' Next, subtract 24' Alleyway measurement from 27' Ladder for 3.' Finally, subtract 3' from the 14' result to find (X) = 11' (plus a few inches clearance). Calculation will play you in the "Ballpark!"

Any comments? Anyone? Thank you!

Ron G.

I have a comment, how do you define precision in engineering? same as Watt or as per today?

Engineering precision, aahhh! The words engine and ingenious are of the same root, ingenerare "to create." Precision, is for the scientist to know, and the engineer to do.

Watt today; simply my candle view of "Alleyway's" dark obstructions.

I enjoyed your comments, thank you.

Ron G.

I am an engineer and thus I am accustomed to 2 approaches the first is "ingeniosity", inventivity and creativity. But ,I am sure you will agree, the best and most beautiful idea is not good (or pearhaps not satisfactory) if it does not work properly under the loading conditions it is subjected to. So that the second aspect of my work is to make it work and at the LOWEST possible cost. Here comes computing and precision. The problem was defined as obtaining a "value" and not an "estimated value". Your solution is for the second definition and mine for the first. If the problem would have been "give the best estimated value of h with an imprecision of X%" then I would have choosen YOUR approach since it is very straight and economical although unprecise if it is not specified that such an error is acceptable.

The solution proposed should, on my opinion, reflect the way the question is put.

Hi NICK NAME,

Well put! In my original post of 04/29, I was not so much concerned with precision as I was for the different methods of solving the problem. Incidentally, if you look on that forum, (posts #53 & 54) you'll see that I never implied this to be a calculus problem. Anyway, thanks so much for your input.

John

The advantage of calculus is that if the equations are written the right way teh solution is valid for ALL dimensions. Other wayd are realted to a special configuration and thus request every time a new effort. As I wrote engineering is a problem of efficiency: the lowest effort to the maximal result.

At least this is my way to think and nobody else is obliged to accept it.

Hi nick name,

I agree - once you have an algebraic solution for any length of ladders, all you need to do is plug the ladder lengths in and you get x. I don't think IronDoubleEE's method will work for any other ladder lengths although he did stumble onto a nearly correct solution.

Mike

I made a sketch to show where is the problem with IronDoubleEE's method but I do not know how to bring it in the comment window. In fact the suggested solution has a problem since it is insensitive ti the length of the lower ladder. The sketch shows it very clear.

If you know or anybody knows how to bring the sketch (which format) it will be clear to everybody and I shall say a big "thank you for your help!"

From my point of view, IronDoubleEE's method is just nothing except a joke. His method neither considered a Good Engineering nor Bad Engineering.

Thanks to Masu who gave me the procedure I can send this sketch which demonstrate the way IronDoubleEE's method works.

Unfortunately I found no relation between the segment B"D' and the segments EF or E'F'.

If I am wrong I would appreciate an indication where I am.

This solution leads to an other problem:

given AB=24' and BD=32' at which length of AC the segment EF is equal to B"D'?

Can anybody give an answer? For this and only for this ladder dimension is the suggested approach correct.