Finding radius of circle inscribed in trapezium











up vote
3
down vote

favorite
7












A circle is inscribed in trapezoid $ABCD$. Let $K,L,M,N$ be the points of intersection of the circle with diagonals $AC$ and $BD$ respectively. $K$ is between $A$ and $L$ and $M$ is between $B$ and $N$. Given that $AK*LC = 16$ and $BM*ND = frac{9}{4}$, find the radius of the circle



I was able to deduce a few elementary things



$AB + CD = AD + BC$ and also tried using power of point and use the given products but didnt get anything useful










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Point E? Where is it?
    – Oldboy
    Oct 5 at 12:15










  • sorry it was a typo, its actually B
    – saisanjeev
    Oct 5 at 13:01










  • Are you sure that the trapezoid is not an isosceles?
    – Lanet
    Oct 9 at 15:59










  • @Lanet $AKtimes LC$ would be equal to $BMtimes ND$ if the trapezoid was isosceles.
    – Oldboy
    Oct 18 at 11:34

















up vote
3
down vote

favorite
7












A circle is inscribed in trapezoid $ABCD$. Let $K,L,M,N$ be the points of intersection of the circle with diagonals $AC$ and $BD$ respectively. $K$ is between $A$ and $L$ and $M$ is between $B$ and $N$. Given that $AK*LC = 16$ and $BM*ND = frac{9}{4}$, find the radius of the circle



I was able to deduce a few elementary things



$AB + CD = AD + BC$ and also tried using power of point and use the given products but didnt get anything useful










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Point E? Where is it?
    – Oldboy
    Oct 5 at 12:15










  • sorry it was a typo, its actually B
    – saisanjeev
    Oct 5 at 13:01










  • Are you sure that the trapezoid is not an isosceles?
    – Lanet
    Oct 9 at 15:59










  • @Lanet $AKtimes LC$ would be equal to $BMtimes ND$ if the trapezoid was isosceles.
    – Oldboy
    Oct 18 at 11:34















up vote
3
down vote

favorite
7









up vote
3
down vote

favorite
7






7





A circle is inscribed in trapezoid $ABCD$. Let $K,L,M,N$ be the points of intersection of the circle with diagonals $AC$ and $BD$ respectively. $K$ is between $A$ and $L$ and $M$ is between $B$ and $N$. Given that $AK*LC = 16$ and $BM*ND = frac{9}{4}$, find the radius of the circle



I was able to deduce a few elementary things



$AB + CD = AD + BC$ and also tried using power of point and use the given products but didnt get anything useful










share|cite|improve this question















A circle is inscribed in trapezoid $ABCD$. Let $K,L,M,N$ be the points of intersection of the circle with diagonals $AC$ and $BD$ respectively. $K$ is between $A$ and $L$ and $M$ is between $B$ and $N$. Given that $AK*LC = 16$ and $BM*ND = frac{9}{4}$, find the radius of the circle



I was able to deduce a few elementary things



$AB + CD = AD + BC$ and also tried using power of point and use the given products but didnt get anything useful







geometry






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Oct 5 at 13:01

























asked Oct 5 at 10:42









saisanjeev

841212




841212












  • Point E? Where is it?
    – Oldboy
    Oct 5 at 12:15










  • sorry it was a typo, its actually B
    – saisanjeev
    Oct 5 at 13:01










  • Are you sure that the trapezoid is not an isosceles?
    – Lanet
    Oct 9 at 15:59










  • @Lanet $AKtimes LC$ would be equal to $BMtimes ND$ if the trapezoid was isosceles.
    – Oldboy
    Oct 18 at 11:34




















  • Point E? Where is it?
    – Oldboy
    Oct 5 at 12:15










  • sorry it was a typo, its actually B
    – saisanjeev
    Oct 5 at 13:01










  • Are you sure that the trapezoid is not an isosceles?
    – Lanet
    Oct 9 at 15:59










  • @Lanet $AKtimes LC$ would be equal to $BMtimes ND$ if the trapezoid was isosceles.
    – Oldboy
    Oct 18 at 11:34


















Point E? Where is it?
– Oldboy
Oct 5 at 12:15




Point E? Where is it?
– Oldboy
Oct 5 at 12:15












sorry it was a typo, its actually B
– saisanjeev
Oct 5 at 13:01




sorry it was a typo, its actually B
– saisanjeev
Oct 5 at 13:01












Are you sure that the trapezoid is not an isosceles?
– Lanet
Oct 9 at 15:59




Are you sure that the trapezoid is not an isosceles?
– Lanet
Oct 9 at 15:59












@Lanet $AKtimes LC$ would be equal to $BMtimes ND$ if the trapezoid was isosceles.
– Oldboy
Oct 18 at 11:34






@Lanet $AKtimes LC$ would be equal to $BMtimes ND$ if the trapezoid was isosceles.
– Oldboy
Oct 18 at 11:34












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
2
down vote



accepted










When all else fails, get a bigger hammer



...which I did and found that the answer was $R=6$.



enter image description here



I won't explain why $AC$, $BD$ $PR$ and $QS$ concur at $F$. It's just a special case of
Brianchon's theorem. So let's start from there. Notice the angles $angle CAB=angle ACD=alpha$, $angle ABD=angle BDC=beta$ and segment $OF=x$. We'll use them all the time. For the sake of simplicity I will also introduce the following symbols: $AK=p_1$, $LC=p_2$, $BM=q_1$, $DN=q_2$. We know that $p_1p_2=16$ and $q_1q_2=9/4$.



First, let's try to find $p_1=AK$. The same approach will be used to find segments $p_2,q_1,q_2$



Take a look at quadrilateral $AQOK$:



$$AQ=FQcotalpha=AKcos alpha+OKsinvarphi$$



$$QO=AKsinalpha+OKcosvarphi$$



This leads to the following equations:



$$p_1cosalpha+Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha$$
$$p_1sinalpha+Rcosvarphi=R$$



or:



$$Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha$$
$$Rcosvarphi=R-p_1sinalpha$$



Square these two equations and add them. This will eliminate the angle $varphi$ that we don't care about. You will end up with a quadratic equation with respect to $p_1$:



$$R^2=((R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha)^2+(R-p_1sinalpha)^2$$



This equation has two solutions. The bigger one is actually equal to $AL$ and the smaller one is $AK=p_1$:



$$p_1=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R+x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{1}$$



There is no need to calculate $p_2$ in a similar way. Everything would look the same, except that we would use $R-x$ instead of $R+x$ along the way. So we can obtain an expression for $p_2$ just by replacing $x$ with $-x$:



$$p_2=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R-x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{2}$$



Now comes the hardest part: you have to multiply (1) and (2). It looks like we are going nowhere... After a lot of simplifications, we get:



$$p_1p_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2alpha left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 alpha) +2 R sin alpha sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{3}$$



At least we know it's 16 :)



The good thing is that we don't have to go through the same torture to find $q_1q_2$, the process is exactly the same except that we have $beta$ instead of $alpha$:



$$q_1q_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2beta left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 beta) +2 R sin beta sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 beta))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{4}$$



Like it's not difficult enough we have to introduce the fact that $x$, $alpha$ and $beta$ are not independent! There's a connection between them.



Take a look at triangle $triangle ABC$:



$$AB=AQ+QB=(R+x)(cotalpha+cotbeta)$$



$$BC=BR+RC=BQ+CS=(R+x)cotbeta+(R-x)cotalpha$$



$$AC={2R over sinalpha}$$



If you replace all that into a well-known equation:



$$BC^2=AB^2+AC^2-2 ABcdot ACcosalpha$$



...you will get a very simple relation (trust me):



$$x^2=R^2(1-tanalphatanbeta)tag{5}$$



Now replace (5) into (3) and (4) and we'll get something that we can easily deal with:



$$p_1p_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}}right)$$



$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}}right)$$



...or, if we introduce $z=frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}$:



$$p_1p_2=R^2(2+z-2sqrt{1+z})=R^2(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2=16tag{6}$$



$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac1z-2sqrt{1+frac1z}right)=R^2left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)^2=frac{9}{4}tag{7}$$



Now divide (6) by (7) and you get:



$$left(frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}right)^2=frac{p_1p_2}{q_1q_2}=frac{16}{frac94}=frac{64}{9}$$



$$frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}=frac{8}{3}$$



$$3(sqrt{1+z}-1)=8left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)tag{8}$$



You should be able to show that equation (8) has only one solution:



$$z=frac{16}9$$



Replace that into (6) and you get:



$$R^2=frac{p_1p_2}{(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2}=36implies R=6$$






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
    – Oldboy
    Nov 22 at 16:22











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2943226%2ffinding-radius-of-circle-inscribed-in-trapezium%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
2
down vote



accepted










When all else fails, get a bigger hammer



...which I did and found that the answer was $R=6$.



enter image description here



I won't explain why $AC$, $BD$ $PR$ and $QS$ concur at $F$. It's just a special case of
Brianchon's theorem. So let's start from there. Notice the angles $angle CAB=angle ACD=alpha$, $angle ABD=angle BDC=beta$ and segment $OF=x$. We'll use them all the time. For the sake of simplicity I will also introduce the following symbols: $AK=p_1$, $LC=p_2$, $BM=q_1$, $DN=q_2$. We know that $p_1p_2=16$ and $q_1q_2=9/4$.



First, let's try to find $p_1=AK$. The same approach will be used to find segments $p_2,q_1,q_2$



Take a look at quadrilateral $AQOK$:



$$AQ=FQcotalpha=AKcos alpha+OKsinvarphi$$



$$QO=AKsinalpha+OKcosvarphi$$



This leads to the following equations:



$$p_1cosalpha+Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha$$
$$p_1sinalpha+Rcosvarphi=R$$



or:



$$Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha$$
$$Rcosvarphi=R-p_1sinalpha$$



Square these two equations and add them. This will eliminate the angle $varphi$ that we don't care about. You will end up with a quadratic equation with respect to $p_1$:



$$R^2=((R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha)^2+(R-p_1sinalpha)^2$$



This equation has two solutions. The bigger one is actually equal to $AL$ and the smaller one is $AK=p_1$:



$$p_1=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R+x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{1}$$



There is no need to calculate $p_2$ in a similar way. Everything would look the same, except that we would use $R-x$ instead of $R+x$ along the way. So we can obtain an expression for $p_2$ just by replacing $x$ with $-x$:



$$p_2=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R-x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{2}$$



Now comes the hardest part: you have to multiply (1) and (2). It looks like we are going nowhere... After a lot of simplifications, we get:



$$p_1p_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2alpha left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 alpha) +2 R sin alpha sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{3}$$



At least we know it's 16 :)



The good thing is that we don't have to go through the same torture to find $q_1q_2$, the process is exactly the same except that we have $beta$ instead of $alpha$:



$$q_1q_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2beta left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 beta) +2 R sin beta sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 beta))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{4}$$



Like it's not difficult enough we have to introduce the fact that $x$, $alpha$ and $beta$ are not independent! There's a connection between them.



Take a look at triangle $triangle ABC$:



$$AB=AQ+QB=(R+x)(cotalpha+cotbeta)$$



$$BC=BR+RC=BQ+CS=(R+x)cotbeta+(R-x)cotalpha$$



$$AC={2R over sinalpha}$$



If you replace all that into a well-known equation:



$$BC^2=AB^2+AC^2-2 ABcdot ACcosalpha$$



...you will get a very simple relation (trust me):



$$x^2=R^2(1-tanalphatanbeta)tag{5}$$



Now replace (5) into (3) and (4) and we'll get something that we can easily deal with:



$$p_1p_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}}right)$$



$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}}right)$$



...or, if we introduce $z=frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}$:



$$p_1p_2=R^2(2+z-2sqrt{1+z})=R^2(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2=16tag{6}$$



$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac1z-2sqrt{1+frac1z}right)=R^2left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)^2=frac{9}{4}tag{7}$$



Now divide (6) by (7) and you get:



$$left(frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}right)^2=frac{p_1p_2}{q_1q_2}=frac{16}{frac94}=frac{64}{9}$$



$$frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}=frac{8}{3}$$



$$3(sqrt{1+z}-1)=8left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)tag{8}$$



You should be able to show that equation (8) has only one solution:



$$z=frac{16}9$$



Replace that into (6) and you get:



$$R^2=frac{p_1p_2}{(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2}=36implies R=6$$






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
    – Oldboy
    Nov 22 at 16:22















up vote
2
down vote



accepted










When all else fails, get a bigger hammer



...which I did and found that the answer was $R=6$.



enter image description here



I won't explain why $AC$, $BD$ $PR$ and $QS$ concur at $F$. It's just a special case of
Brianchon's theorem. So let's start from there. Notice the angles $angle CAB=angle ACD=alpha$, $angle ABD=angle BDC=beta$ and segment $OF=x$. We'll use them all the time. For the sake of simplicity I will also introduce the following symbols: $AK=p_1$, $LC=p_2$, $BM=q_1$, $DN=q_2$. We know that $p_1p_2=16$ and $q_1q_2=9/4$.



First, let's try to find $p_1=AK$. The same approach will be used to find segments $p_2,q_1,q_2$



Take a look at quadrilateral $AQOK$:



$$AQ=FQcotalpha=AKcos alpha+OKsinvarphi$$



$$QO=AKsinalpha+OKcosvarphi$$



This leads to the following equations:



$$p_1cosalpha+Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha$$
$$p_1sinalpha+Rcosvarphi=R$$



or:



$$Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha$$
$$Rcosvarphi=R-p_1sinalpha$$



Square these two equations and add them. This will eliminate the angle $varphi$ that we don't care about. You will end up with a quadratic equation with respect to $p_1$:



$$R^2=((R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha)^2+(R-p_1sinalpha)^2$$



This equation has two solutions. The bigger one is actually equal to $AL$ and the smaller one is $AK=p_1$:



$$p_1=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R+x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{1}$$



There is no need to calculate $p_2$ in a similar way. Everything would look the same, except that we would use $R-x$ instead of $R+x$ along the way. So we can obtain an expression for $p_2$ just by replacing $x$ with $-x$:



$$p_2=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R-x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{2}$$



Now comes the hardest part: you have to multiply (1) and (2). It looks like we are going nowhere... After a lot of simplifications, we get:



$$p_1p_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2alpha left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 alpha) +2 R sin alpha sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{3}$$



At least we know it's 16 :)



The good thing is that we don't have to go through the same torture to find $q_1q_2$, the process is exactly the same except that we have $beta$ instead of $alpha$:



$$q_1q_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2beta left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 beta) +2 R sin beta sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 beta))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{4}$$



Like it's not difficult enough we have to introduce the fact that $x$, $alpha$ and $beta$ are not independent! There's a connection between them.



Take a look at triangle $triangle ABC$:



$$AB=AQ+QB=(R+x)(cotalpha+cotbeta)$$



$$BC=BR+RC=BQ+CS=(R+x)cotbeta+(R-x)cotalpha$$



$$AC={2R over sinalpha}$$



If you replace all that into a well-known equation:



$$BC^2=AB^2+AC^2-2 ABcdot ACcosalpha$$



...you will get a very simple relation (trust me):



$$x^2=R^2(1-tanalphatanbeta)tag{5}$$



Now replace (5) into (3) and (4) and we'll get something that we can easily deal with:



$$p_1p_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}}right)$$



$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}}right)$$



...or, if we introduce $z=frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}$:



$$p_1p_2=R^2(2+z-2sqrt{1+z})=R^2(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2=16tag{6}$$



$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac1z-2sqrt{1+frac1z}right)=R^2left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)^2=frac{9}{4}tag{7}$$



Now divide (6) by (7) and you get:



$$left(frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}right)^2=frac{p_1p_2}{q_1q_2}=frac{16}{frac94}=frac{64}{9}$$



$$frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}=frac{8}{3}$$



$$3(sqrt{1+z}-1)=8left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)tag{8}$$



You should be able to show that equation (8) has only one solution:



$$z=frac{16}9$$



Replace that into (6) and you get:



$$R^2=frac{p_1p_2}{(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2}=36implies R=6$$






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
    – Oldboy
    Nov 22 at 16:22













up vote
2
down vote



accepted







up vote
2
down vote



accepted






When all else fails, get a bigger hammer



...which I did and found that the answer was $R=6$.



enter image description here



I won't explain why $AC$, $BD$ $PR$ and $QS$ concur at $F$. It's just a special case of
Brianchon's theorem. So let's start from there. Notice the angles $angle CAB=angle ACD=alpha$, $angle ABD=angle BDC=beta$ and segment $OF=x$. We'll use them all the time. For the sake of simplicity I will also introduce the following symbols: $AK=p_1$, $LC=p_2$, $BM=q_1$, $DN=q_2$. We know that $p_1p_2=16$ and $q_1q_2=9/4$.



First, let's try to find $p_1=AK$. The same approach will be used to find segments $p_2,q_1,q_2$



Take a look at quadrilateral $AQOK$:



$$AQ=FQcotalpha=AKcos alpha+OKsinvarphi$$



$$QO=AKsinalpha+OKcosvarphi$$



This leads to the following equations:



$$p_1cosalpha+Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha$$
$$p_1sinalpha+Rcosvarphi=R$$



or:



$$Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha$$
$$Rcosvarphi=R-p_1sinalpha$$



Square these two equations and add them. This will eliminate the angle $varphi$ that we don't care about. You will end up with a quadratic equation with respect to $p_1$:



$$R^2=((R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha)^2+(R-p_1sinalpha)^2$$



This equation has two solutions. The bigger one is actually equal to $AL$ and the smaller one is $AK=p_1$:



$$p_1=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R+x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{1}$$



There is no need to calculate $p_2$ in a similar way. Everything would look the same, except that we would use $R-x$ instead of $R+x$ along the way. So we can obtain an expression for $p_2$ just by replacing $x$ with $-x$:



$$p_2=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R-x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{2}$$



Now comes the hardest part: you have to multiply (1) and (2). It looks like we are going nowhere... After a lot of simplifications, we get:



$$p_1p_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2alpha left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 alpha) +2 R sin alpha sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{3}$$



At least we know it's 16 :)



The good thing is that we don't have to go through the same torture to find $q_1q_2$, the process is exactly the same except that we have $beta$ instead of $alpha$:



$$q_1q_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2beta left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 beta) +2 R sin beta sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 beta))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{4}$$



Like it's not difficult enough we have to introduce the fact that $x$, $alpha$ and $beta$ are not independent! There's a connection between them.



Take a look at triangle $triangle ABC$:



$$AB=AQ+QB=(R+x)(cotalpha+cotbeta)$$



$$BC=BR+RC=BQ+CS=(R+x)cotbeta+(R-x)cotalpha$$



$$AC={2R over sinalpha}$$



If you replace all that into a well-known equation:



$$BC^2=AB^2+AC^2-2 ABcdot ACcosalpha$$



...you will get a very simple relation (trust me):



$$x^2=R^2(1-tanalphatanbeta)tag{5}$$



Now replace (5) into (3) and (4) and we'll get something that we can easily deal with:



$$p_1p_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}}right)$$



$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}}right)$$



...or, if we introduce $z=frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}$:



$$p_1p_2=R^2(2+z-2sqrt{1+z})=R^2(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2=16tag{6}$$



$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac1z-2sqrt{1+frac1z}right)=R^2left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)^2=frac{9}{4}tag{7}$$



Now divide (6) by (7) and you get:



$$left(frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}right)^2=frac{p_1p_2}{q_1q_2}=frac{16}{frac94}=frac{64}{9}$$



$$frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}=frac{8}{3}$$



$$3(sqrt{1+z}-1)=8left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)tag{8}$$



You should be able to show that equation (8) has only one solution:



$$z=frac{16}9$$



Replace that into (6) and you get:



$$R^2=frac{p_1p_2}{(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2}=36implies R=6$$






share|cite|improve this answer












When all else fails, get a bigger hammer



...which I did and found that the answer was $R=6$.



enter image description here



I won't explain why $AC$, $BD$ $PR$ and $QS$ concur at $F$. It's just a special case of
Brianchon's theorem. So let's start from there. Notice the angles $angle CAB=angle ACD=alpha$, $angle ABD=angle BDC=beta$ and segment $OF=x$. We'll use them all the time. For the sake of simplicity I will also introduce the following symbols: $AK=p_1$, $LC=p_2$, $BM=q_1$, $DN=q_2$. We know that $p_1p_2=16$ and $q_1q_2=9/4$.



First, let's try to find $p_1=AK$. The same approach will be used to find segments $p_2,q_1,q_2$



Take a look at quadrilateral $AQOK$:



$$AQ=FQcotalpha=AKcos alpha+OKsinvarphi$$



$$QO=AKsinalpha+OKcosvarphi$$



This leads to the following equations:



$$p_1cosalpha+Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha$$
$$p_1sinalpha+Rcosvarphi=R$$



or:



$$Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha$$
$$Rcosvarphi=R-p_1sinalpha$$



Square these two equations and add them. This will eliminate the angle $varphi$ that we don't care about. You will end up with a quadratic equation with respect to $p_1$:



$$R^2=((R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha)^2+(R-p_1sinalpha)^2$$



This equation has two solutions. The bigger one is actually equal to $AL$ and the smaller one is $AK=p_1$:



$$p_1=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R+x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{1}$$



There is no need to calculate $p_2$ in a similar way. Everything would look the same, except that we would use $R-x$ instead of $R+x$ along the way. So we can obtain an expression for $p_2$ just by replacing $x$ with $-x$:



$$p_2=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R-x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{2}$$



Now comes the hardest part: you have to multiply (1) and (2). It looks like we are going nowhere... After a lot of simplifications, we get:



$$p_1p_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2alpha left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 alpha) +2 R sin alpha sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{3}$$



At least we know it's 16 :)



The good thing is that we don't have to go through the same torture to find $q_1q_2$, the process is exactly the same except that we have $beta$ instead of $alpha$:



$$q_1q_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2beta left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 beta) +2 R sin beta sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 beta))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{4}$$



Like it's not difficult enough we have to introduce the fact that $x$, $alpha$ and $beta$ are not independent! There's a connection between them.



Take a look at triangle $triangle ABC$:



$$AB=AQ+QB=(R+x)(cotalpha+cotbeta)$$



$$BC=BR+RC=BQ+CS=(R+x)cotbeta+(R-x)cotalpha$$



$$AC={2R over sinalpha}$$



If you replace all that into a well-known equation:



$$BC^2=AB^2+AC^2-2 ABcdot ACcosalpha$$



...you will get a very simple relation (trust me):



$$x^2=R^2(1-tanalphatanbeta)tag{5}$$



Now replace (5) into (3) and (4) and we'll get something that we can easily deal with:



$$p_1p_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}}right)$$



$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}}right)$$



...or, if we introduce $z=frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}$:



$$p_1p_2=R^2(2+z-2sqrt{1+z})=R^2(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2=16tag{6}$$



$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac1z-2sqrt{1+frac1z}right)=R^2left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)^2=frac{9}{4}tag{7}$$



Now divide (6) by (7) and you get:



$$left(frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}right)^2=frac{p_1p_2}{q_1q_2}=frac{16}{frac94}=frac{64}{9}$$



$$frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}=frac{8}{3}$$



$$3(sqrt{1+z}-1)=8left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)tag{8}$$



You should be able to show that equation (8) has only one solution:



$$z=frac{16}9$$



Replace that into (6) and you get:



$$R^2=frac{p_1p_2}{(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2}=36implies R=6$$







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Nov 22 at 15:55









Oldboy

6,2781629




6,2781629












  • Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
    – Oldboy
    Nov 22 at 16:22


















  • Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
    – Oldboy
    Nov 22 at 16:22
















Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
– Oldboy
Nov 22 at 16:22




Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
– Oldboy
Nov 22 at 16:22


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2943226%2ffinding-radius-of-circle-inscribed-in-trapezium%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Quarter-circle Tiles

build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

Mont Emei