 A picture has a height that is 4/3 its width.

It is to be enlarged to have an area of 192 square

inches. What will be the dimensions of the enlargement?

The height is defined in terms of the width, so I'll pick a variable for "width", and then create an
expression for the height.

Let "w" stand for the width of the picture. The height h is 4/3 the width, so h = (4/3)w. Then the area
is A = hw = [(4/3)w][w] = (4/3)w2 = 192. I need to solve this "area" equation for the value of the width,
and then back-solve to find the value of the height.

(4/3)w2 = 192
w2 = 144
w = ± 12

Since I can't have a negative width, I can ignore the "w = –12" solution. Then the width must be 12and
the height is h = (4/3)(12) = 16.

The enlargement will be 12 inches by 16 inches.

 The product of two consecutive negative integers is 1122. What are the numbers?

Advertisement

Remember that consecutive integers are one unit apart, so my numbers are n and n + 1. Multiplying to
get the product, I get:

n(n + 1) = 1122
n2 + n = 1122
n2 + n – 1122 = 0
(n + 34)(n – 33) = 0 Copyright © Elizabeth Stapel 2004-2011 All Rights Reserved

The solutions are n = –34 and n = 33. I need a negative value, so I'll ignore "n = 33" and
take n = –34. Then the other number is n + 1 = (–34) + 1 = –33.

The two numbers are –33 and –34.

Note that the second value could have been gotten by changing the sign on the extraneous solution.
Warning: Many students get in the very bad habit of arbitrarily changing signs to get the answers they
need, but this does not always work, and will very likely get them in trouble later on. Take the extra half
a second to find the right answer the right way.

 A garden measuring 12 meters by 16 meters is to have a pedestrian pathway installed all

around it, increasing the total area to 285 square meters. What will be the width of the
pathway?
 The first thing I need to do is draw a picture. Since I don't
know how wide the path will be, I'll label the width as "x".

Looking at my picture, I see that the total width will be

x + 12 + x = 12 + 2x, and the total length will be
x + 16 + x = 16 + 2x.

Then the new area is given by:

(12 + 2x)(16 + 2x) = 285

192 + 56x + 4x2 = 285
4x2 + 56x – 93 = 0

This quadratic is messy enough that I won't bother with trying to use factoring to solve; I'll just go
straight to the Quadratic Formula:

Obviously the negative value won't work in this context, so I'll ignore it. Checking the original exercise to
verify what I'm being asked to find, I notice that I need to have units on my answer:

The width of the pathway will be 1.5 meters.

 You have to make a square-bottomed, unlidded box with a height of three inches and a
volume of approximately 42 cubic inches. You will be taking a piece of cardboard, cutting
three-inch squares from each corner, scoring between the corners, and folding up the edges.
What should be the dimensions of the cardboard, to the nearest quarter inch?
 When dealing with geometric sorts of word problems, it
is usually helpful to draw a picture. Since I'll be cutting
equal-sized squares out of all of the corners, and since
the box will have a square bottom, I know I'll be starting
with a square piece of cardboard.

I don't know how big the cardboard will be yet, so I'll

label the sides as having length "w".

Since I know I'll be cutting out three-by-three squares to

get sides that are three inches high, I can mark that on
my drawing.

The dashed lines show where I'll be scoring the

cardboard and folding up the sides.

Since I'll be losing three inches on either end of the

cardboard when I fold up the sides, the final width of the
bottom will be the original "w" inches, less three on the
one side and another three on the other side. That is,
the width of the bottom will be w – 3 – 3 = w – 6.

Then the volume of the box, from the drawing, is:

(w – 6)(w – 6)(3) = 42
(w – 6)(w – 6) = 14
(w – 6)2 = 14

This is the quadratic I need to solve. I can take the square root of either side, and then add the to the
right-hand side:

...or I can multiply out the square and apply the Quadratic Formula:
Either way, I get two solutions which, when expressed in practical decimal terms, tell me that the width
of the original cardboard is either about 2.26 inches or else about 9.74 inches.

How do I know which solution value for the width is right? By checking each value in the original word
problem. If the cardboard is only 2.26 inches wide, then how on earth would I be able to fold up three-
inch-deep sides? But if the cardboard is 9.74 inches, then I can fold up three inches of cardboard on
either side, and still be left with 3.74 inches in the middle. Checking:

(3.74)(3.74)(3) = 41.9628

This isn't exactly 42, but, taking round-off error into account, it's close enough that I can trust that I have
the correct value:

The cardboard should measure 9.75 inches on a side.

In this last exercise above, you should notice that each solution method gave the same final answer for
the cardboard's width. But the Quadratic Formula took longer and provided me with more opportunities
to make mistakes. Warning: Don't get stuck in the rut of always using the Quadratic Formula!

 An object is launched at 19.6 meters per second (m/s) from a 58.8-meter tall platform. The
equation for the object's height s at time t seconds after launch is s(t) = –4.9t2 + 19.6t + 58.8,
wheres is in meters. When does the object strike the ground?

What is the height (above ground level) when the object smacks into the ground? Well, zero, obviously.
So I'm looking for the time when the height is s = 0. I'll set s equal to zero, and solve:

0 = –4.9t2 + 19.6t + 58.8

0 = t2 – 4t – 12
0 = (t – 6)(t + 2)

Then t = 6 or t = –2. The second solution is from two seconds before launch, which doesn't make sense
in this context. (It makes sense on the graph, because the line crosses the x-axis at –2, but negative time
won't work in this word problem.) So "t = –2" is an extraneous solution, and I'll ignore it.

The object strikes the ground six seconds after launch.

Note the construction of the height equation in the problem above. The initial launch height
was 58.8 meters, and the constant term was "58.8". The initial velocity (launch speed) was 19.6 m/s, and
the coefficient on the linear term was "19.6". This is always true for these up/down projectile motion
problems. (If you have an exercise with sideways motion, the equation will have a different form, but
they'll always giveyou that equation.) The initial velocity is the coefficient for the middle term, and the
initial height is the constant term. And the coefficient on the leading term comes from the force of
gravity. This coefficient is negative, since gravity pulls downward, and the value will either be "4.9" (if
your units are "meters") or "16" (if your units are "feet"). In general, the format is:

s(t) = –gt2 + v0t + h0

...where "g" here is the "4.9" or the "16" derived from the value of the force of gravity (technically, it's
half of the force of gravity, but you probably don't need to know that right now), "v0" ("vee-naught", or
"vee-sub-zero") is the initial velocity, and "h0" ("aitch-naught", or "aitch-sub-zero") is the initial height.

Memorize this equation (or at least its meaning), because you may need to know this on the test.

 An object in launched directly upward at 64 feet per second (ft/s) from a platform 80 feet
high. What will be the object's maximum height? When will it attain this height?

Hmm... They didn't give me the equation this time. But that's okay, because I can create the equation
from the information that they did give me. The initial height is 80 feet above ground and the initial
speed is 64 ft/s. Since my units are "feet", then the number for gravity will be 16, and my equation is:

s(t) = –16t2 + 64t + 80

They want me to find the maximum height. For a negative quadratic like this, the maximum will be at
the vertex of the upside-down parabola. So they really want me to find the vertex. From graphing, I
know how to find the vertex; in this case, the vertex is at (2, 144):

h = –b/2a = –(64)/2(–16) = –64/–32 = 2

k = s(2) = –16(2)2 + 64(2) + 80 = –16(4) + 128 + 80 = 208 – 64 = 144

But what does this vertex tell me? According to my equation, I'm plugging in time values and extracting
height values, so the input "2" must be the time and the output "144" must be the height. Copyright ©
Elizabeth Stapel 2004-2011 All Rights Reserved

It takes two seconds to reach the maximum height of 144 feet.

 An object is launched from ground level directly upward at 39.2 m/s. For how long is the
object at or above a height of 34.3 meters?

My units this time are "meters", so the gravity number will be "4.9". Since the object started at ground
level, the initial height was 0. Then my equation is:

s(t) = –4.9t2 + 39.2t

Advertisement

Since this is a negative quadratic, the graph is an upside-down parabola. I can find the two times when
the object is exactly 34.3 meters high, and I know that the object will be above 34.3 meters the whole
time in between. Why "two time", and how do I know that the time period is between those two times?
Because the first time will be when the object passes a height of 34.3 meters on its way up to its
maximum height, and the second time when be when it passes 34.3 meters as it is falling back down to
the ground. So I have to solve the following:

–4.9t2 + 39.2t = 34.3

t2 – 8t + 7 = 0
(t – 7)(t – 1) = 0

Then the object is at 34.3 meters at one second after launch (going up) and againt at seven seconds
after launch (coming back down). Subtracting to find the difference, I find that:

The object is at or above 34.3 meters for six seconds.

Don't be surprised if many of your exercises work out as "neatly" as the above examples have. Many
textbooks still engineer their exercises carefully, so that you can solve by factoring (that is, by quickly
doing the algebra). However, heavy dependence on calculators is leading more texts to create
"interesting" (that is, needlessly complicated) exercises, so some (or all) of your exercises may involve
much more messy computations than have been displayed here. If so, study these "neat" examples
carefully, until you are quite sure you follow the reasoning.

 After the semester is over, you discover that the math department has changed textbooks
(again) so the bookstore won't buy back your nearly-new book. You and your friend
Herman decide to get creative. You go to the roof of a twelve-story building and look over the
edge to the reflecting pool 160 feet below. You drop your book over the edge at the same
instant that Herman chucks his book straight down at 48 feet per second. By how many
seconds does his book beat yours into the water?

Our initial launch heights will be the same: we're both launching from 160 feet above ground. And the
gravity number, since we're working in feet, will be 16. My initial velocity is zero, since I just dropped my
book, but my buddy Herman's velocity is a negative 48, the negative coming from the fact that he
chucked his book down rather than up. So our "height" equations are:

mine: s(t) = –16t2 + 160

his: s(t) = –16t2 – 48t + 160

In each case, I need to find the time for the books to reach a height of zero ("zero" being "ground level"),
so:

mine: 0 = –16t2 + 160, t2 – 10 = 0, so t = ± sqrt(10)

his: 0 = –16t2 – 48t + 160, t2 + 3t – 10 = 0, (t + 5)(t – 2) = 0, so t = –5 or t = 2

I will ignore the negative time values. His book hits the water after two seconds, and mine hits
after sqrt(10) seconds, or after about 3.16 seconds. That is:

Herman's book hits the water about 1.16 seconds sooner than mine does.

Every once in a while, they'll get clever and put a "projectile" problem into a different environment. The
equation will remain the same in structure, but you may have to account for a different value for gravity.
  The International Space Agency has finally landed a robotic explorer on an extra-solar planet.
Some probes are extended from the lander's body to conduct various tests. To demonstrate
the crushing weight of gravity on this planet, the lander's camera is aimed at a probe's
ground-level ejection port, and the port launches a baseball directly upwards at 147 feet per
second (ft/s), about the top speed of a professional pitcher. The force due to gravity on this
planet is 98 ft/s2. Assuming no winds and that the probe can scurry out of the way in time,
how long will it take for the ball to smack back into the surface?

To set up my equation for this exercise, I need to keep in mind that the value of the coefficient "g" from
the "projectile motion" equation above is one-half of the value of the force due to gravity. In physics,
there is the "universal gravitational constant" G; then every object exerts its own gravitational force,
which is related to its own mass and the universal constant G. In the "projectile motion" formula, the "g"
is half of the value of the gravitational force for that particular body. For instance, the gravitational force
on Earth is a downward 32 ft/s2, but we used "16" in the equation.

So "g" for my equation this time will by 98 ÷ 2 = 49. Then:

s = –49t2 + 147t
0 = –49t2 + 147t
0 = t2 – 3t = t(t – 3)

Then t = 0 or t = 3. The first solution represents when the ball was launched, so the second solution is
the one I want.

It takes three seconds for the ball to hit the ground.

Note: On Earth, it would take a little over nine seconds for the ball to fall back to the ground.

When you get to calculus, you will see some of these max/min exercises again. At that point, they'll
want you to differentiate to find the maximums and minimums; at this point, you'll find the vertex, since
the vertex will be the maximum or minimum of the related graphed parabola. But they're the same
exercise and you'll get the same answers then as you will now.

 You have a 500-foot roll of fencing and a large field. You want to construct a rectangular
playground area. What are the dimensions of the largest such yard? What is the largest area?

The fencing-length information gives me perimeter. If the length of the enclosed area is L and the width
is w, then the perimeter is 2L + 2w = 500, so L = 250 – w. By solving the perimeter equation for one of
the variables, I can substitute into the area formula and get an equation with only one variable:

A = Lw = (250 – w)w = 250w – w2 = –w2 + 250w

To find the maximum, I have to find the vertex (h, k).

h = –b/2a = –(250)/2(–1) = –250/–2 = 125

In my area equation, I plug in "width" values and get out "area" values. So the h-value in the vertex is
the maximizing width, and the k-value will be the maximal area:
k = A(125) = –(125)2 + 250(125) = –15 625 + 31 250 = 15 625

The problem didn't ask me "what is the value of the variable w?", but "what are the dimensions?" I
have w = 125. Then the length is L = 250 – w = 250 – 125 = 125.

The largest area will have dimensions of 125' by 125',

for a total area of 15 625 square feet.

Note that the largest rectangular area was a square. This is always true: for a given perimeter, the
largest rectangular area will be that of a square. However, teachers are starting to notice that students
have figured this out, so they're giving more complicated area-perimeter problems.

 You have a 1200-foot roll of fencing and a large field. You want to make two paddocks by
splitting a rectangular enclosure in half. What are the dimensions of the largest such
enclosure?

I'm dealing with something that looks like this:

It doesn't really matter which side I label as the

"length" and which I label as the "width", as
long as I label clearly and work consistently.

With the labelling I've chosen, the fencing gives me a "perimeter" of 2L + 3w = 1200. Solving for one of
the variables, I get:

2L + 3w = 1200
L + 1.5w = 600
L = –1.5w + 600

Then the area is: Copyright © Elizabeth Stapel 2004-2011 All Rights Reserved

A = Lw = (–1.5w + 600)w = –1.5w2 + 600w

To maximize this area, I have to find the vertex. Since all I need are the dimensions (not the area), all I
need from the vertex (h, k) is the value of h, since this will give me the maximal width.

h = –b/2a = –(600)/2(–1.5) = –600/–3 = 200

Then the length will be L = –1.5(200) + 600 = –300 + 600 = 300.

The paddock should be 300' by 200', with the divider

running parallel to the 200-foot-long side.

Notice that, with the divider running down the middle of the paddock, you don't get a square as being
the maximal shape. If they throw in cost considerations (like putting prettier but more expensive fencing
on the side of the paddock facing the street), you'll get odd-sized results, too. Warning: Don't just
assume that the maximal rectangular shape will always be a square.
In many quadratic max/min problems, you'll be given the formula you need to use. Don't try to figure
out where they got it from. Just find the vertex. Then interpret the variables to figure out which number
from the vertex you need, where, and with what units.

 Your factory produces lemon-scented widgets. You know that each unit is cheaper, the more
you produce. But you also know that costs will eventually go up if you make too many
widgets, due to the costs of storage of the overstock. The guy in accounting says that your cost
for producing x thousands of units a day can be approximated by the formula C = 0.04x2 –
8.504x + 25302. Find the daily production level that will minimize your costs.

As you might guess, it will be a lot easier to use the vertex formula to find the minimizing value for this
quadratic than it would be to complete the square. So I'll use the vertex formula:

h = –b/2a = –(–8.504)/2(0.04) = 8.504/0.08 = 106.3

Since the inputs to the formula they gave me are the production levels ("thousands of units"), I've found
the number I need. The other number for the vertex would be the actual costs for making this amount
of widgets, and the problem doesn't ask for that. I do need to remember, though, that x is in thousands
of units, so my best level of production is not 106.3 units, but (106.3)(1 000) = 106 300 units.

I will minimize my costs if I produce 106 300 units a day.

Sometimes you'll get hit with a problem that seems much more complicated, especially when you have
to invent the formula yourself.

 You run a canoe-rental business on a small river in Ohio. You currently charge $12 per canoe
and average 36 rentals a day. An industry journal says that, for every fifty-cent increase in
rental price, the average business can expect to lose two rentals a day. Use this information to
attempt to maximize your income. What should you charge?

Let's say I have no idea how to set this problem up. Instead of going straight to an equation, I'll need to
put in some real numbers, see what I do when I know what the values are, and then follow the pattern
to get my formula. Here is my reasoning, neatly laid out in a table:

number
price hikes price per rental total income / revenue
of rentals

none $12.00 36 $12.00×36 = $432.00

1 price hike $12.00 + 1(0.50) 36 – 1(2) $12.50×34 = $425.00

2 price hikes $12.00 + 2(0.50) 36 – 2(2) $13.00×32 = $416.00

3 price hikes $12.00 + 3(0.50) 36 – 3(2) $13.50×30 = $405.00

x price hikes $12.00 + x(0.50) 36 – x(2) (12 + 0.5x)(36 – 2x)

Then my formula for my revenues R after x fifty-cent price hikes is:

R(x) = (12 + 0.5x)(36 – 2x) = 432 – 6x – x2 = –x2 – 6x + 432

The maximum income will occur at the vertex of this quadratic's parabola, and the vertex is at
(–3, 441):

h = –b/2a = –(–6)/2(–1) = 6/(–2) = –3

k = R(h) = –(–3)2 – 6(–3) + 432 = –9 + 18 + 432 = 450 – 9 = 441

That is, my income will be maximized (assuming the journal article is correct) if I lower my current price
of $12 by three times of fifty cents, or by $1.50.

I should charge $10.50 per canoe.

Whenever you're not sure of your formula, try doing what I did above: write out what you would do if
you knew what the numbers were, and see if you can turn that into a formula. But make sure you write
things out completely, like I did, so you can see the pattern. Warning: Don't simplify too much in your
head, or you could miss what your formula is supposed to be.