Mathematical Year 10 Investigation

Introduction
The aim of this investigation is to maximize the volume of a 3-dimensional open-faced cuboid, with a 20cm-by-20cm net.
This aim will be achieved using graph analysis, deriving equations and examining cases in lower dimensions.

Image of the 20cm-by-20cm net

Mathematics conveys fundamental principles of the universe, while the problem at hand may not seem “fundamental” as
such, it does offer an insight into how shapes and objects can be optimized to maximize their volume, or perhaps even
minimize their volume under the correct purview. This can have many practical applications in real world, and if we use the
principles we derive from this investigation, might even give insight into higher spatial dimensions and how they can be
conveyed in a three-dimensional world.

Practical investigation:
Method 1 (Graphical Analysis):

Consider the net with sides labelled “a” and “b”

Image of the 20cm-by-20cm net, sides labelled “a” and “b”

From this image we can derive the formula that:
𝑏 + 2𝑎 = 20
From the net we can also construct a 3-dimensional object from the cuboid:
 Image of the 20cm-by-20cm net transformed into a cuboid, sides labelled “a” and “b”
The volume of the cuboid is as such:
𝑉 = 𝑎𝑏2
From the previous equation we can notice that we have come across a system of equations, from the following substitution,
we can derive the following formula:

𝑉 = 𝑎𝑏2
𝑏 + 2𝑎 = 20
𝑏 = 20 − 2𝑎
𝑉 = 𝑎(20 − 2𝑎)2
Since “a” is just the name of a variable, and so is “V”, we can substitute the two using the following:
𝑉=𝑦
𝑎=𝑥
Giving us:
𝑦 = 𝑥(20 − 2𝑥)2
Graphically, if we were to plot this it would give us the following function:

Image of the equation 𝑦 = 𝑥(20 − 2𝑥)2

To find the maximum volume or the largest value of y, it would seem to approach infinity, however this is because the graph
neglects the fact that the maximum side length of the net is 20cm, meaning the domain must be restricted, in order to find the
maximum value:
𝑦 = 𝑥(20 − 2𝑥)2 {𝑥 ∈ 𝑅 |0 < 𝑥 < 10}

Graphically:
 a
Image of the equation 𝑦 = 𝑥(20 − 2𝑥)2, with restricted domain {𝑥 ∈ 𝑅 |0 < 𝑥 < 10}

10 16000
The maximum point of this graph is ( 3 , ). ∴ the maximum volume of an open faced cuboid with a net of 20-cm-by-
27
16000
20cm is 𝑐𝑚3
27

Method 2 (Differentiation):
However notice that the point in which the maximum volume is found is also a turning point for the graph. This means there
is a relationship between the derivative of an equation and the maximum volume, if we keep our original equation of:
𝑦 = 𝑥(20 − 2𝑥)2
Now let us expand the equation to let us differentiate it more easily:
𝑦 = 𝑥(20 − 2𝑥)(20 − 2𝑥)
𝑦 = 𝑥(400 − 80𝑥 + 4𝑥 2)
𝑦 = 4𝑥 3 − 80𝑥 2 + 400𝑥
𝑑𝑦
= 12𝑥 2 − 160𝑥 + 400
𝑑𝑥
When the differential equation is equated to 0, that is when the maximum point is acquired:
12𝑥 2 − 160𝑥 + 400 = 0
3𝑥 2 − 40𝑥 + 100 = 0
2
3𝑥 − 30𝑥 − 10𝑥 + 100 = 0
3𝑥(𝑥 − 10) − 10(𝑥 − 10) = 0
(3𝑥 − 10)(𝑥 − 10) = 0
10
𝑥= , 𝑥 = 10
3
However one of these x values do not give us the maximum, rather the minimum, as there are two stationary points, to find
the correct stationary point, substitute the values back into the original equation, and the value which is lesser will be the
minimum

𝑦 = (10)(20 − 2(10))2
𝑦 = (10)(20 − 20)2
𝑦 = (10)(0)2
𝑦=0
This implies that this value is the minimum, and ∴:
10
𝑥=
3
Is the maximum

Further Investigation 1 (an m-cm-by-n-cm net):

By the derivative method we can make some more observations, take a m-cm-by-n-cm net.
 Image of the 20cm-by-20cm net, sides labelled “a” and “b”

Notice how the sides are no longer labelled just a and b, but rather a, b and c. This is due to the fact that m and n can have
variable values, and not always be equivalent. This implies that the net should have an extra variable side. From this new
net we can derive equations:
𝑛 = 2𝑎 + 𝑐
𝑚 = 2𝑎 + 𝑏
From the net we can also construct a 3-dimensional object from the cuboid:

Image of the 20cm-by-20cm net transformed into a cuboid, sides labelled “a” and “b”
The volume of the cuboid is as such:
𝑉 = 𝑎𝑏𝑐
From the previous equation we can notice that we have come across a system of equations, from the following substitution,
we can derive the following formula:

𝑉 = 𝑎𝑏𝑐
𝑛 = 2𝑎 + 𝑐
𝑐 = 𝑛 − 2𝑎
𝑚 = 2𝑎 + 𝑏
𝑏 = 𝑚 − 2𝑎
𝑉 = 𝑎(𝑚 − 2𝑎)(𝑛 − 2𝑎)
Since “a” is just the name of a variable, and so is “V”, we can substitute the two using the following:
𝑉=𝑦
𝑎=𝑥
Giving us:
𝑦 = 𝑥(𝑚 − 2𝑥)(𝑛 − 2𝑥)
Now let us expand the equation to let us differentiate it more easily:
𝑦 = 𝑥(𝑚 − 2𝑥)(𝑛 − 2𝑥)
𝑦 = 𝑥(𝑚𝑛 − 2𝑚𝑥 − 2𝑛𝑥 + 4𝑥 2 )
𝑦 = 4𝑥 3 − 2(𝑚 + 𝑛)𝑥 2 + 𝑚𝑛𝑥
𝑑𝑦
= 12𝑥 2 − 4(𝑚 + 𝑛)𝑥 + 𝑚𝑛
𝑑𝑥
When the differential equation is equated to 0, that is when the maximum point is acquired:
12𝑥 2 − 4(𝑚 + 𝑛)𝑥 + 𝑚𝑛 = 0
Now using the quadratic formula we can evaluate x:
𝑎 = 12, 𝑏 = −4(𝑚 + 𝑛), 𝑐 = 𝑚𝑛
−𝑏 ± √𝑏2 − 4𝑎𝑐
𝑥=
2𝑎
4(𝑚 + 𝑛) ± √(−4(𝑚 + 𝑛))2 − 4(12)(𝑚𝑛)
𝑥=
2(12)
4(𝑚 + 𝑛) ± √(16(𝑚 + 𝑛)2 − 48(𝑚𝑛)
𝑥=
24

4(𝑚 + 𝑛) ± 4√((𝑚 + 𝑛)2 − 3(𝑚𝑛)

𝑥=
24
(𝑚 + 𝑛) ± √𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛
𝑥=
6
(𝑚 + 𝑛) ± √𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛
𝑥=
6

Now this formula generates the maximum and minimum turning points, however, we only need the maximum point. If we
take the second derivative of the original equation we can find the maximum and minimum:
𝑑2𝑦
= 24𝑥 − 8(𝑚 + 𝑛)
𝑑𝑥 2
Now substitute the value of x we obtained from the first derivative:
𝑑2𝑦 (𝑚 + 𝑛) ± √𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛
2 = 24 − 8(𝑚 + 𝑛)
𝑑𝑥 6
2
𝑑 𝑦
= 4(𝑚 + 𝑛) ± 4√𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛 − 8(𝑚 + 𝑛)
𝑑𝑥 2
𝑑2𝑦
= −4(𝑚 + 𝑛) ± 4√𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛
𝑑𝑥 2
If the second derivatives value is negative it implies that the point is a maximum, whereas if it is positive it implies that the
point is a minimum. ∴ since the discriminant is always positive (√(16(𝑚 + 𝑛)2 − 48(𝑚𝑛), the lesser value of the second
derivative will always be when the quadratic formula’s (±) is (–) ∴ we can evaluate the x value as:
(𝑚 + 𝑛) − √𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛
𝑥=
6
Meaning this is the general formula for one of the sides of an open faced cuboid with net dimensions m-cm-by-n-cm. To
check if this formula is correct we can substitute the values of m = 20 and n = 20:
(20 + 20) ± √202 + 202 − 20(20)
𝑥=
6
40 − √800 − (400)
𝑥=
6
40 − √400
𝑥=
6
40 − 20
𝑥=
6
20
𝑥=
6
10
𝑥=
3
This validates our generalised formula. However this formula can be simplified even further when m = n:

𝑚=𝑛
(𝑚 + 𝑛) − √𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛
𝑥=
6
 (2𝑚) − √𝑚2 + 𝑚2 − 𝑚2
𝑥=
6
(2𝑚) − √𝑚2
𝑥=
6
(2𝑚) − 𝑚
𝑥=
6
𝑚
𝑥=
6

∴ the volume of a m-cm-by-m-cm shape would have formula:

𝑚 2𝑚 2𝑚
𝑉 = ( )( )
6 3 3

2𝑚3
𝑉=
27
Further Investigation 2 (Using python and vectors to investigate negative areas and other cases):

These formulas can be algorithmically displayed with this code, if translated into an Integrated Development Environment
(IDE), you can input values for the dimensions of the net:

m = float(input("input the length of the net "))

n = float(input("input the width of the net "))
if m == n:
print((m/6)*(2*m/3)**2)
else:
a =(4*(n+m)-((-4*(n+m))**2-48*(m*n))**0.5)/24
""" notice that when using the quadratic formula in this instance, there is no plus/minus sign, rather only a
minus sign, this is due to the nature of a 3 dimensional shape having a cubic equation when trying to figure out
the maximum value, ∴ when trying to find a maximum turning point only the smaller cases needs to be
considered, this can be proven using a second derivative"""
b= m-2*a
c =n-2*a
""" This helps us find the value of the other variables, which are distinct when m ≠ n, however it is important to
note that when the case m = n is true, the following formula can be applied (m/6)*(2m/3)^2"""
print(a*(b)*(c))

Let’s use this program to solve some cases:

Case 1 m = 20, n = 30 or a (20-cm-by-30-cm net):

Case 2 m = 30, n = 30 or a (30-cm-by-30-cm net):

This case is especially interesting as m = n, to validate this case, let’s use formula:
2𝑚3
𝑉=
27
 2(30)3
𝑉=
27
2(27,000)
𝑉=
27
54000
𝑉=
27
𝑉 = 2000
Case 2 m = 20, n = -20 or a (-20-cm-by-20-cm net):
Interestingly, if 𝑚 < 0 or 𝑛 < 0, for 𝑚 ≠ 𝑛, the output is positive, rather than negative,

This could be explained if we think of the points of our net and their relative positions as vector quantities for example take a
net 𝐴𝐵𝐶𝐷

Image of the ABCD net, corners labelled ABCD respectively

If we view the relative positions as vectors, The volume can still remain positive as vectors themselves can’t inherently be
negative: For example consider a vector 𝐴𝐵⃗⃗⃗⃗⃗ then consider its opposite vector 𝐵𝐴
⃗⃗⃗⃗⃗ :

⃗⃗⃗⃗⃗
𝐴𝐵

⃗⃗⃗⃗⃗
𝐵𝐴

⃗⃗⃗⃗⃗ | =|𝐵𝐴
Notice that |𝐴𝐵 ⃗⃗⃗⃗⃗ |, this means that the magnitude is the same, hence the distance between the two points are the same,
this means that inherently that the distance between points A and B must always be positive, but not necessarily the Vector
themselves, meaning If we take a (-m)-cm-by-n-cm net, it would look like this, compared to a regular (m)-cm-by-n-cm net,:
Image of the (-m)-cm-by-n-cm net or a DCBA net Image of the (m)-cm-by-n-cm net or ABCD net

However this only works theoretically when you take the negative values as a vector quantity

Further Investigation 3 (Taking a limit to see what happens to the side length as one of the sides of the net approach
infinity):

If you take the formula derived prior:

(𝑚 + 𝑛) − √𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛
𝑥=
6

And let:
𝑚 = 20
To achieve the original net and the start of the investigation, what would 𝑥 approach as n approached infinity?

(20 + 𝑛) − √202 + 𝑛 2 − 20𝑛

𝑥=
6
To take the limit of this equation:
(20 + 𝑛) − √𝑛 2 − 20𝑛 + 400
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6
Now if we were to substitute n for infinity, we would have:
(20 + ∞) − √∞2 − 20(∞) + 400
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6
Which would give us an indeterminate form, ∴ we must manipulate the equation to allow us to evaluate the limit properly:
(20 + 𝑛) − √𝑛 2 − 20𝑛 + 400
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6
((20 + 𝑛) − √𝑛 2 − 20𝑛 + 400)((20 + 𝑛) + √𝑛 2 − 20𝑛 + 400)
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6((20 + 𝑛) + √𝑛 2 − 20𝑛 + 400)
((20 + 𝑛)2 − (𝑛 2 − 20𝑛 + 400)
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6((20 + 𝑛) + √𝑛 2 − 20𝑛 + 400)

(𝑛 2 + 40𝑛 + 400) − (𝑛 2 − 20𝑛 + 400)

𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6((20 + 𝑛) + √𝑛 2 − 20𝑛 + 400)
60𝑛
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6((20 + 𝑛) + √𝑛 2 − 20𝑛 + 400)
60
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6 2
𝑛 ((20 + 𝑛) + √𝑛 − 20𝑛 + 400)
60
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞
20 20 400
6 (( 𝑛 + 1) + √1 − 𝑛 + 2 )
𝑛
 10
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞
20 20 400
(( 𝑛 + 1) + √1 − 𝑛 + 2 )
𝑛
10
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞
20 20 400
(( ∞ + 1) + √1 − ∞ + 2 )
∞
10
𝑥=
((0 + 1) + √1 − 0 + 0)
10
𝑥=
(1 + √1)
10
𝑥=
(1 + 1)
10
𝑥=
(2)
𝑥=5

∴, according to this limit as n approaches infinity the value of 𝑥 approaches 5, furthermore this could be validated
graphically however the degree of accuracy could be lesser, as the method is by eye:

Image of the graphs 𝑥(20 − 2𝑥)(10𝑚 − 2𝑥) = 𝑦, where m increases by a factor of 10 in each graph

From these graphs it is clear that the value of the said approaches 5

To discover the general formula of an m-cm-by-n-cm net where n approaches infinity, we can take the limit once again:

(𝑚 + 𝑛) − √𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6
However, once again similar to the previous time when we substitute n for infinity the form is indeterminate:
(𝑚 + ∞) − √𝑚2 + ∞2 − 𝑚(∞)
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6
So let’s manipulate the equation:
((𝑚 + 𝑛) − √𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛)((𝑚 + 𝑛) + √𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛)
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6((𝑚 + 𝑛) + √𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛)
((𝑚 + 𝑛)2 − (𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛))
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6((𝑚 + 𝑛) + √𝑚 2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛)

(𝑚2 + 2𝑚𝑛 + 𝑛 2 − (𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛))

𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6((𝑚 + 𝑛) + √𝑚2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛)
(3𝑚𝑛)
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6((𝑚 + 𝑛) + √𝑚 2 + 𝑛 2 − 𝑚𝑛)
 (3𝑚)
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 6 2 2
𝑛 ((𝑚 + 𝑛) + √𝑚 + 𝑛 − 𝑚𝑛)
(3𝑚)
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 𝑚 𝑚2 𝑚
6(( 𝑛 + 1) + √ 2 + 1 − 𝑛 )
𝑛
(3𝑚)
𝑥 = lim
𝑛→∞ 𝑚 𝑚2 𝑚
6((∞ + 1) + √ 2 + 1 − ∞)
∞
(3𝑚)
𝑥=
6((0 + 1) + √0 + 1 − 0)
(3𝑚)
𝑥=
6((1) + √1)
(3𝑚)
𝑥=
6((1) + 1)
(3𝑚)
𝑥=
6(2)
(3𝑚)
𝑥=
12
𝑚
𝑥=
4

𝑚
∴, as n approaches infinity the side length 𝑥 approaches 4

Method 3 (cases in lesser dimensions):

Take a dot A, it exists in the 0th dimension, meaning it has no dimensions, it simply just is with no parameters

Now extend the dot A into the 1st dimension, into a line AB:

This is different to the dot as it now has the ability to be measured, we can calculate the magnitude (length) of line AB, or let
it be a value in this case, let us assign the value 𝑎.

Now let us extend the line into the 2nd dimension, into a shape ABCD:
The shape now has 2 measurements, we can calculate the height and width of the object, let the length of AB remain as 𝑎,
whereas let’s assign the width as 𝑏.

Let us once again extend the shape into the third dimension, to produce an object with three measurables properties, length,
width and height.

Let’s keep the first two properties as 𝑎 and 𝑏, but let the height be 𝑐
Notice that the cuboid ABCDEFGH is almost what we had in our original investigation a cuboid. However the dimensions
are askew. Since we have already found a relationship between dimensions, let’s extend our knowledge by examining lower
cases, to figure out our initial investigation. Where a value from the first dimension (length of the net) corresponds to a value
in the third dimension (volume of the cuboid)

The line AB has length a:

Now if a was given as 2cm, then naturally the maximum length of the line would be 2cm. 3cm, would yield 3cm. A pattern
is starting to form, denoting a linear relationship

𝑎=𝑙

The shape AB has length a, and width b:

Now if the perimeter of the shape was given as 20cm, then clearly:
2𝑎 + 2𝑏 = 2𝑙 + 2𝑤
𝑎+𝑏 = 𝑙+𝑤
𝑎 + 𝑏 = 20
Furthermore, the area is:
𝑎𝑏 = 𝐴
Using a substitution:
𝐴 = 𝑎(20 − 𝑎)
This case is especially interesting to me. As a child when I was 10 or 12, I was presented a similar problem however,
pertaining to a farmer and his fence. What was the maximum area of his enclosure, while minimising the amount of fencing
he needed to buy? I knew little about differentiation and graphical analysis, so I guessed and checked. I noticed that the area
of the enclosure would always be maximised when 𝑎 = 𝑏. Therefore when presented with this initial investigation, I was
quite surprised when the maximum volume of the cuboid formed by a net was not when all the side lengths were equal. It
was only later I realised that what I had thought of was in a interesting way provided by differentiation:

𝐴 = 𝑎(20 − 𝑎)
𝑑𝐴
= −2𝑎 + 20
𝑑𝑎
0 = −2𝑎 + 20
2𝑎 = 20
𝑎 = 10
And Substituting a = 10:

𝑏 = 10

Meaning for any two dimensional shape a=b to maximise A

Further Investigation 4 (Seeing what happens in higher dimensions):

If we were to apply the same rules to the 3rd dimensional object the methodology would be quite similar to methods 1 and 2,
∴ this approach will not delve into the mathematics, however what is truly intriguing is what happens if we apply this theory
to a higher spatial dimension, particularly the fourth (as it is most manageable)

We have seen that the general formulas have been as following (for each dimension, letters have been substituted with x and
y for practical usage):

0th dimension:
𝑦=0

1st dimension:
𝑦=𝑥

2nd dimension:
𝑦 = 𝑥(𝑚 − 𝑥),

3rd dimension:
𝑦 = 𝑥(𝑚 − 2𝑥)(𝑛 − 2𝑥)

While the pattern is hard to discern, and to properly distinguish a more full proof you would need cases of higher
dimensions, there is a general pattern to the formulas So let’s make some observations

Observation 1:

In the 0th dimension the formula is y = 0, the equation is to the 0th degree

Observation 2:

In the 1st dimension the formula is y = 𝑥, the equation is to the 1st degree

Observation 3:

In the 2nd dimension the formula is 𝑦 = 𝑥(𝑚 − 𝑥),, the equation is to the 2nd degree

Based on these patters it seems that the nth dimension has an equation to the nth degree, moreover when comparing
the 2nd dimension to the 3rd:

Observation 4:
𝑦 = 𝑥(𝑚 − 𝑥)
𝑦 = 𝑥(𝑚 − 2𝑥)(𝑛 − 2𝑥)

We see that there is a clear relation, the 2nd dimension and the third, by every dimension there is an extra:

(𝐶 − 𝑙𝑥)
Where C is some constant and 𝑙 is some number, however l in the 3rd dimension seems to be 2, and in the 2nd seems to be 𝑙, ∴
the relationship between 𝑙 and the number of dimensions can be predicted as nth dimension -1= 𝑙

∴ an estimation for the hypervolume of a 4 dimensional shape, based on the information given prior would be as such:

𝑦=𝑥(𝑚−3𝑥)(𝑛−3𝑥)(𝑝−3𝑥)
Where m, n and p are constants

Reflection:

Throughout the investigation numerous mathematical techniques were used. From derivatives to limits and more. However
as mathematicians we must critique these methodologies, to see if they are really optimal for this particular problem.

In our first approach, we attempted to solve the problem graphically. While this approach did yield the correct result, the
reason it was correct was due to technology. If we were to sketch the graph on paper it would be much harder to distinguish
the correct maximum, meaning while the result was still correct it lacked pure mathematical finesse, and relied on external
sources to obtain a result.

Our second approach, differentiation obtained the result and compared to the graphical approach, utilised better
understanding of maths to find the answer. No external sources was used, and each line of maths linked to the next,
furthermore, differentiation allowed us to express our understanding of mathematical concepts, making it in my opinion the
best approach to solve the 20-cm-by-20-cm net problem.

The third method, creating a case analysis of smaller dimensions, while once again yielded a correct result, had to borrow
concepts from the other methods, meaning it relied heavily on other techniques, and by itself was not very powerful.
However it was critical to use this case by case method to solve our 4th dimensional hypercube, meaning while it was not
optimal to solve our initial problem, it held some merit went we expanded the investigation further.