Quadratic Functions in The Real World

Graph of functions such as parabolas have many important applications in the world around us. They are frequently
used in areas such as engineering, finance, physics, nature, and sports. In this paper, we will be investigating the real
life applications of quadratic functions with two examples, the Sydney Harbour bridge and a water fountain. This
investigation will be done using various mathematical tools such as the free online graphing software “Desmos” and the
coding software “Flowgrithm”. Aside from these, we will also be using the standard methods of solving quadratic
equations such as the standard form of 𝑎𝑥 2 + 𝑏𝑥 + 𝑐, the completed square form and the intercept form that we have
learned in our syllabus. Firstly, let us start with the Sydney Harbour bridge. We will also evaluate the effectiveness each
form through detailed comparisons.

The Sydney Harbour bridge is a beautiful structure with ravishing quadratic functions to be uncovered.

Method 1: Using the completed square form equation ( 𝑎(𝑥 − ℎ)2 + 𝑘 )

503m = 620 pixels, makes Photo scale of 1 pixel = 0.81m

y

118
108
80
71.5 71.5 503
0
251.5 x
323
394.5

The approach of our first method was to use a photo we had taken of the bridge (which is a different photo because the
resolution of the image was too low to conduct proper scaling and adjusting in the software), and by obtaining the
dimensions of the bridge on the photo in pixel units, (using Adobe Fireworks), scale the photo and obtain some (x,y)
values to work with. Additionally, we have reconfirmed the values derived from the bridge by cross-checking with the
real-life measurements of the bridge. Therefore, the point of reference, or the scaling factor, was acquired by knowing
that the real-life span distance under the bridge arch was 503 meters. Subsequently, we calculated the photo scale of
one pixel and compared this value to the number of pixels in the lines plotted on this image. (This was partially due to
the fact that there was conflicting information on the height of the bridge arch, which ranged from 118 meters to 120
meters.) This method of determining the dimensions of the photo by referencing the ratio of pixels is referred to as pixel
scaling.

Thus, we were able to obtain the fundamental values of our quadratic equation:

The vertex / turning point is located at (h,k) = (251.5, 118), where h and k are the co-ordinates of the vertex;

While the three other (x,y) points on the arch are: (323,108) and (394.5,80) and (503,0).
The “Dilation Factor” of “a” value dictates the stretching and compression of a graph. A positive a value indicates a U-
shaped graph, while a negative a value indicates an inverted U-shaped graph. Henceforth, we can effectively acquire
the characteristics of the dilation factor as a negative one in the quadratic.

To obtain the a value the quadratic, we make a the subject of the formula upon inserting the origin (0,0).

𝑦−𝑘 0−118
𝑦 = 𝑎(𝑥 − ℎ)2 + 𝑘 → 𝑦 − 𝑘 = 𝑎(𝑥 − ℎ)2 → a = (𝑥−ℎ)2
→ a= (0−251.5)2
→ a = 0.00186554628

Furthermore, we can also insert the values of x = 503 and y = 0.

𝑦 = 𝑎(𝑥 − ℎ)2 + 𝑘 → 𝑦 − 𝑘 = 𝑎(𝑥 − ℎ)2 → 0 − 118 = 𝑎(503 − 251.5)2 → −118 = 63252.25𝑎 →

𝑎 = 0.00186554628

Hence, the equation of the graph obtained is 𝑦 = −0.00186554628(𝑥 − 251.5)2 + 118.

Furthermore, we substituted the values of x = 323 and x = 394.5 into this equation and in both cases, the equation of
the quadratic proved to be correct as the y values that came out where extremely close to the coordinates obtained.

𝑦 = −0.00186554628(323 − 251.5)2 + 118 = 108.462861 ≈ 108 (3𝑠. 𝑓. )

𝑦 = −0.00186554628(394.5 − 251.5)2 + 118 = 79.85144412 ≈ 80.0(3𝑠. 𝑓. )

As a final visual check, we graphed our quadratic equation using Desmos, and superimposed our bridge onto the graph.
We were pleased to confirm that the quadratic was a perfect fit and that other plotted x values did indeed match the real
life y values in the parabola.

Furthermore, we went on with the same method to obtain the upper arch of the Sydney harbour bridge.
𝑦 = 𝑎(𝑥 − ℎ)2 + 𝑘 → 𝑦 − 𝑘 = 𝑎(𝑥 − ℎ)2 → 0 − 73 = 𝑎(503 − 251.5)2 → −73 = 63252.25𝑎 →

𝑎 = 0.00115410914

Hence, the equation of the graph of the upper arch obtained is 𝑦 = −0.00115410914(𝑥 − 251.5)2 + 73

We proceeded to use Desmos again to gauge the accuracy of our results and we were pleased to see that it was very
close to the real-life upper arch, although it was less accurate as compared to the lower arch above. We believe that
this was due to the camera angle which resulted in the unbalance in perspective for the more prominent upper arch.

However, we wanted to improve the accuracy of the equation as although the substitution of numerous x values did
indeed result in extremely close values relative to the actual y values, we still felt that the margin of error in the deviation
from the actual values were a tad bit too large and hence we wanted to reduce it. Hence, we used a more mathematical
approach for our second approach.

Method 2: Standard form of quadratic equation: ( 𝑎𝑥 2 + 𝑏𝑥 + 𝑐)

Firstly, we can derive that c = 0, as firstly, the y intercept as plotted on the images above is 0. Secondly, when the value
of x is 0, it is shown that the coordinates are 0,0, which proves that c = 0.

Hence, we can negate the effect of c on the equation, and express the equation as 𝑦 = (𝑎𝑥 2 + 𝑏𝑥)

For this equation, we will get two simultaneous equations by inputting 2 coordinates, which are (503,0) and (251.5, 118)

1st equation: 0 = 𝑎𝑥 2 + 𝑏𝑥 = 𝑎(503)2 + 𝑏(503) = 253009𝑎 + 503𝑏 → 0 = 253009𝑎 + 503𝑏

2nd equation: 118 = 𝑎𝑥 2 + 𝑏𝑥 = 𝑎(251.5)2 + 𝑏(251.5) = 63252.25𝑎 + 251.5𝑏 → 118 = 63252.25𝑎 + 251.5𝑏

We will now multiply the second equation by 2 and subtract it from the first equation to obtain a.

118 = 63252.25𝑎 + 251.5𝑏 → 126504.5𝑎 + 503𝑏 − 236 = 0

(253009𝑎 + 503𝑏) − (126504.5𝑎 + 503𝑏 − 236) = 126504.5𝑎 + 236 = 0 → 126504.5𝑎 = −236

𝑎 = −0.00186554628

We can now input the value of a back into the first equation to obtain the value of b
 472
0 = 253009𝑎 + 503𝑏 → 0 = −472 + 503𝑏 → 472 = 503𝑏 → 𝑏 =
503

472
Therefore, the equation of the graph we get is 𝑦 = −0.00186554628𝑥 2 + 503 𝑥

As earlier on, we will now input the values of x = 323 and x = 394.5

472
𝑦 = −0.00186554628(323)2 + (323) = 108.4628615 ≈ 108 (3 𝑠. 𝑓. )
503

472
𝑦 = −0.00186554628(394.5)2 + (394.5) = 79.85144478 ≈ 80.0 (3𝑠. 𝑓. )
503

After numerous more substitutions with the inputting of different x values in accordance with the line plotted in the
image, the precision of both functions did not deviate much from each other, and the precision we measured was pretty
much identical. Hence, we concluded that both functions were viable and extremely similar.

After our investigation of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, we will now investigate the parabola of the humble water fountain.

The water fountain is an everyday item that we use to dispense the fluid of life and sustenance.

Using pixel scaling as before, we sketched the reference points of the graph to obtain x and y values. This time, we
referenced the water dispenser as focal point for dilation, as in real life they were 3.0cm.

Method 1: Factorised Quadratic – Intercept form ( 𝑎(𝑥 − 𝑏)(𝑥 − 𝑐) ) with Flowgorithm

In the factorised quadratic form, b and c are the x intercepts. Hence, we can directly deduce the equation of the graph
1
from the graph plotted above, and thus we see that the two x intercepts are 0 and 14 6.

1 1 1
𝑎(𝑥 − 𝑏)(𝑥 − 𝑐) → 𝑎(𝑥 − 0) (𝑥 − 14 ) → 𝑎𝑥 (𝑥 − 14 6) → 𝑎𝑥2 − 14 𝑎𝑥 (the equation of the graph)
6 6

1 1
To find the value of a, we will substitute in the values of x and y by referencing the turning point (7 , 9 ).
12 3

1
1 1 𝑦 9 1344
2
𝑎𝑥 − 14 6 𝑎𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝑎(𝑥 −
2
14 6 𝑥) =𝑦→𝑎 = 1 →𝑎 = 12 1 1
3
→𝑎 = − 7225
(𝑥 2 −14 𝑥) (7 −14 (7 ))
6 12 6 12

1344 1344 1
Now that we have concluded that a = − 7225, the equation can be expressed as − 7225 (𝑥 − 0) (𝑥 − 14 6)
Now, using the other coordinates that we have plotted on the image, we will test the accuracy of our function using the
coding software Flowgorithm.

After connecting a string of codes through defining variables and programming the equation sequence, we were able to
create a string of code that gave us the y value after inputting the x value for efficiency.

In the line of code below, the user is to input the a, b, c values which are the constants in the
equation, and they have the choice to input any x value they want.

1344
We can deduce from the above quadratic equation that the value of a is − , b is 0 and c is
7225
1
14 .
6

By inputting the y value, the code will process the y value through the automatic calculation of
the factorised quadratic form. Furthermore, it can find the y intercept and line of symmetry
𝑏+𝑐
through the equations of 𝑎𝑏𝑐 and 2
respectively.

From here, we inputted the four other x values in the graph and checked them with the actual
values.

𝟏
When x is 3.25, the y value is 6.599861592. Actual value is 𝟔 𝟐 .

1 𝟐
When x is 5 , the y value is 8.649965398. Actual value is 𝟖 .
6 𝟑

7 𝟏
When x is 9 12, the y value is 8.17073576. Actual value is 𝟖 𝟔.

5
When x is 11 6, the y value is 5.136239908. Actual value is 𝟓.

This time, we were disappointed to see that the values that we had plotted did not come out
as accurate as we expected, with a 0.1 margin of error, especially for our last x value, which was a 0.13 off the actual
value as plotted in the graph.

We suspect that this was due to the fact that a stream of water is not a perfect quadratic due to gravity and its projectile
motion, hence there are some inaccuracies in sketching the graph and plotting the values.

Furthermore, we used Desmos to graph out the equation and superimpose the image onto the parabola. Nonetheless,
we were still pleased that the equation fit the parabola pretty well despite it not being perfect.
Method 2) Using functions and simultaneous equations to obtain the quadratic via standard quadratic form

This time, we decided to use functions to deduce the values of a, b, and c by substituting the values of x.

𝑓(𝑥) = 𝑎𝑥 2 + 𝑏𝑥 + 𝑐 → 𝑓(𝟎) = 𝑎(𝟎)2 + 𝑏(𝟎) + 𝑐 → 𝑓(𝟎) = 𝑐 → c = 0 ---------------- Equation 1

9 1
𝑓(𝑥) = 𝑎𝑥 2 + 𝑏𝑥 + 𝑐 → 𝑓(𝟑. 𝟐𝟓) = 𝑎(𝟑. 𝟐𝟓)2 + 𝑏(𝟑. 𝟐𝟓) + 𝑐 → 𝑓(𝟑. 𝟐𝟓) = 10 16 𝑎 + 3 4 𝑏 + 𝑐

1 9 1
→ 6 2 = 10 16 𝑎 + 3 4 𝑏 → 104 = 169𝑎 + 52𝑏 --------------------- Equation 2

𝟓 𝟓 𝟓 𝟓 1 5
𝑓(𝑥) = 𝑎𝑥 2 + 𝑏𝑥 + 𝑐 → 𝑓 (𝟏𝟏 𝟔) = 𝑎(𝟏𝟏 𝟔)2 + 𝑏(𝟏𝟏 𝟔) + 𝑐 → 𝑓 (𝟏𝟏 𝟔) = 140 36 𝑎 + 11 6 𝑏 + 𝑐

1 1
→ 5 = 140 36 𝑎 + 11 4 𝑏 + 𝑐 → 540 = 15123𝑎 + 1278𝑏 → 1278𝑏 = 540 − 15123𝑎

180− 5041𝑎
→𝑏= 426
= ------- Equation 3

Hence, we can substitute equation 3 into equation 2 to solve for a:

180− 5041𝑎 69 1
104 = 169𝑎 + 52𝑏 → 104 = 169𝑎 + 52( 426
) → 104 = 169𝑎 + 21 71 − 615 3 𝑎

1 2 1344
→ 446 3 𝑎 = − 82 71 → 𝑎 = − 7313

Now, we can find b and solve the quadratic.

1344
180− 5041𝑎 180+ 5041( )
𝑏= 426
→𝑏= 426
7313
= 2.597292493

7 91 1344
𝑓(𝑥) = 𝑎𝑥 2 + 𝑏𝑥 + 𝑐 → − 𝑥2 + 2 𝑥 + 0 → 2.597292493𝑥 − 𝑥2
36 144 7313

Utilising Flowgorithm like before but with a new code for the standard quadratic
form, 𝑎𝑥 2 + 𝑏𝑥 + 𝑐, we substituted the new values to test the accuracy of the new
formula.

In the line of code below, the user is to input the a, b, c values which are the
constants in the equation, and they have the choice to input any x value they want.

1344
We can infer from the above quadratic equation that the value of a is − b is
7313

2.597292493 and c is 0.

By inputting the y value, the code will process the y value through the automatic
calculation of the factorised quadratic form.

From here, we inputted the three other x values in the graph and checked them with
the actual values.

1 𝟐
When x is 5 6, the y value is 8.5134. Actual value is 𝟖 𝟑.

1 𝟏
When x is 712, the y value is 9.1765. The Actual value is 𝟗 𝟑.

7 𝟏
When x is 9 , the y value is 8.0121. Actual value is 𝟖 .
12 𝟔
This time, we were heartened to see that the values that we had plotted were relatively precise and that the graphs
were nearly identical when superimposed onto the image and only had a margin of difference of 0.15.

Additionally, we concluded that method 1 is more accurate as compared to method 2. This is due to the fact that graph
one took into consideration the x intercepts and the vertex, whereas method 2 only took two random points on the graph
and one x intercept for the equation, hence resulting in the same graph with the exception of a higher vertex due to a
function.

Method 2’s graph

Superimposed image of both functions

 X 1st equation 2nd equation: As a finishing touch, we utilized Microsoft excel to plot a table of
1344 1 1344 2 the each of the two equations’ y values to gauge the margin of
values −
7225
(𝑥 − 0) (𝑥 − 14 )
6 2.597292493𝑥 − 𝑥
7313
error and uncertainty of the two functions.
1 2.4493 2.4135
2 4.5265 4.4595 From the graph and the table, we have effectively concluded that

3 6.2317 6.1378 both equations were indeed accurate however their values were
different due to a very slight difference in the a value which
4 7.5648 7.4486
affected the curves and width of the graph, hence causing the
5 8.5260 8.3919
shapes of the parabola to differ very slightly with only a margin of
6 9.1150 8.9676
error of around 0.15, hence proving both methods to be accurate.
7 9.3320 9.1757
8 9.1770 9.0162
9 8.4700 8.4893
10 7.7509 7.5947

We have now investigated these two examples and modelled their respective graphs. While doing our modelling and
research, we have learned many things. For instance, we discovered that although math can be applied to model real
world physics and architecture, there are certain limitations. Firstly, we discovered that a water fountain’s curve may not
be a perfect parabola and thus cannot be modelled accurately. This was due to the constant projectile motion of the
water. Secondly, we discovered that our methods of pixel scaling had limitations. It worked well for the first image of the
bridge, but not for the water fountain. This could have been due to the angle the photo was taken, hence affecting the
perspective. This in turn affected the accuracy of the pixel scaling. The low resolution of the image may also have
affected our pixel scaling of the fountain due to the dimension of one pixel being much less accurate. In conclusion, we
found that math can be applied in surprising ways to calculate values that are sometimes too difficult to measure in real
life, in this case the applying of calculations of parabolic graphs. Additionally we came to the verdict that the completed
square form and the intercept form were much more efficient on the condition that the parabola’s origin is 0,0, whereas
we also realised that using simultaneous equation using the standard quadratic form was much more redundant and
difficult on the other hand due to the values not being integers and instead being very large fractions and irrational
numbers. We also realised the efficiency and usefulness of technology as a mathematical tool, relying heavily on the
various software that we mentioned earlier such as Desmos to check our results. We furthermore believe that we could
improve the efficiency of our report next time through using more professional software’s for pixel scaling and trajectory
motion measuring in order to obtain a perfect quadratic. Overall, we were relatively satisfied with our final equations as
they were not only accurate but also very precise even when different methods were used.