c
 Ê

In this section we are going to look at computing the arc length of a function. Because it¶s
easy enough to derive the formulas that we¶ll use in this section we will derive one of them
and leave the other to you to derive.

We want to determine the length of the continuous function

on the interval . Initially we¶ll need to estimate the length of the curve.
We¶ll do this by dividing the interval up into Y equal subintervals each of width
and we¶ll denote the point on the curve at each point by
. We can then approximate the
curve by a series of straight lines connecting the points. Here is a sketch of this situation
for .

Now denote the length of each of these line segments by and the
length of the curve will then be approximately,

and we can get the exact length by taking Y larger and larger. In other words, the exact length
will be,

Now, let¶s get a better grasp on the length of each of these line segments. First, on each

segment let¶s define

. We can then compute
directly the length of the line segments as follows.
By the V

 
 we know that on the interval there
is a point so that,

Therefore, the length can now be written as,

The exact length of the curve is then,

However, using the {      {      

, this is nothing more than,

A slightly more convenient notation (in my opinion anyway) is the following.

In a similar fashion we can also derive a formula for

on . This formula is,

Again, the second form is probably a little more convenient.

Note the difference in the derivative under the square root! Don¶t get too confused. With
one we differentiate with respect to  and with the other we differentiate with respect to .
One way to keep the two straight is to notice that the differential in the ³denominator´ of the
derivative will match up with the differential in the integral. This is one of the reasons why
the second form is a little more convenient.

Before we work any examples we need to make a small change in notation. Instead of having
two formulas for the arc length of a function we are going to reduce it, in part, to a single
formula.

From this point on we are going to use the following formula for the length of the curve.


 



where,

Note that no limits were put on the integral as the limits will depend upon the { that we¶re
using. Using the first { will require  limits of integration and using the second { will
require limits of integration.

Thinking of the arc length formula as a single integral with different ways to define { will be
convenient when we run across arc lengths in future sections. Also, this { notation will be a
nice notation for the next section as well.

Now that we¶ve derived the arc length formula let¶s work some examples.

×
Determine the length of

between .
 

In this case we¶ll need to use the first { since the function is in the form
. So, let¶s get the derivative out of the way.
Let¶s also get the root out of the way since there is often simplification that can be done and
there¶s no reason to do that inside the integral.

Note that we could drop the absolute value bars here since secant is positive in the range
given.

The arc length is then,

×
Determine the length of

between .
 

There is a very common mistake that students make in problems of this type. Many students

see that the function is in the form and they immediately

decide that it will be too difficult to work with it in that form so they solve for to get the
function into the form . While that can be done here it will
lead to a messier integral for us to deal with.

Sometimes it¶s just easier to work with functions in the form .

In fact, if you can work with functions in the form then you

can work with functions in the form . There really isn¶t a

difference between the two so don¶t get excited about functions in the form
.

Let¶s compute the derivative and the root.

As you can see keeping the function in the form is going to

lead to a very easy integral. To see what would happen if we tried to work with the function

in the form see the next example.

Let¶s get the length.

As noted in the last example we really do have a choice as to which { we use. Provided we
can get the function in the form required for a particular { we can use it. However, as also
noted above, there will often be a significant difference in difficulty in the resulting integrals.
Let¶s take a quick look at what would happen in the previous example if we did put the

function into the form .

×
Redo the previous example using the function in the form
instead.

 

In this case the function and its derivative would be,

The root in the arc length formula would then be.

All the simplification work above was just to put the root into a form that will allow us to do
the integral.

Now, before we write down the integral we¶ll also need to determine the limits. This
particular { requires  limits of integration and we¶ve got limits. They are easy enough to
get however. Since we know  as a function of all we need to do is plug in the
original limits of integration and get the  limits of integration. Doing this gives,

Not easy limits to deal with, but there they are.

Let¶s now write down the integral that will give the length.
That¶s a really unpleasant looking integral. It can be evaluated however using the following
substitution.

Using this substitution the integral becomes,

So, we got the same answer as in the previous example. Although that shouldn¶t really be all
that surprising since we were dealing with the same curve.

From a technical standpoint the integral in the previous example was not that difficult. It was
just a Calculus I substitution. However, from a practical standpoint the integral was
significantly more difficult than the integral we evaluated in Example 2. So, the moral of the
story here is that we can use either formula (provided we can get the function in the correct
form of course) however one will often be significantly easier to actually evaluate.

Okay, let¶s work one more example.

×
Determine the length of for

 . Assume that is positive.
 

We¶ll use the second { for this one as the function is already in the correct form for that
one. Also, the other { would again lead to a particularly difficult integral. The derivative
and root will then be,

Before writing down the length notice that we were given  limits and we will need limits
for this { . With the assumption that is positive there are easy enough to get. All we need
to do is plug  into our equation and solve for . Doing this gives,

The integral for the arc length is then,

This integral will require the following trig substitution.

The length is then,

The first couple of examples ended up being fairly simple Calculus I substitutions. However,
as this last example had shown we can end up with trig substitutions as well for these
integrals.
Ê

Ê
3
  
 
   
By Mark Ryan

When you use integration to calculate arc length, what you¶re doing (sort of) is
dividing a length of curve into infinitesimally small sections, figuring the length of
each small section, and then adding up all the little lengths. The following figure
shows how each section of a curve can be approximated by the hypotenuse of a tiny
right triangle.

The Pythagorean Theorem is the key to the arc length formula.

You can imagine that as you zoom in further and further on a curve, dividing the
curve into more and more sections, the minute sections get straighter and straighter
and the hypotenuses of the right triangles be tter and better approximate the curve.
That¶s why ² when this process of adding up smaller and smaller sections is taken
to the limit ² you get the precise length of the curve.
So, all you have to do is add up all the hypotenuses along the curve between yo ur
start and finish points. The lengths of the legs of each infinitesimal triangle
are { and {
and thus the length of the hypotenuse ² given by the Pythagorean
Theorem ² is

To add up all the hypotenuses from ~ to along the curve, you just integrate: Ê

But first, you¶ve got to tweak this a bit to produce the formula for arc length. Ê

Ê
The arc length along a curve,
( ), from ~ to , is given by the following integral: Ê

The expression inside this integral is simply the length of a representative

hypotenuse.Ê
Try this one: What¶s the length along

from = 1 to = 5?Ê
1. Take the derivative of your function.

2. Plug this into the formula and integrate.

(See how this works? It¶s the guess-and-check integration technique with the
reverse power rule. The 4/9 is the tweak amount you need because of the
coefficient 9/4.)
Now, if you ever find yourself on a road with the shape of

and your odometer¶s broken, you can figure the exact length of your drive. Your
friends will be very impressed ² or very concerned.Ê
crc length
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Determining the        is also called rectification of a curve. Historically,
many methods were used for specific curves. The advent of infinitesimal calculusled to a general formula
that provides closed-form solutions in some cases.

General approach

cpproximation by multiple linear segments

c curve in the plane can be approximated by connecting a finite number of points on the curve
using line segments to create a polygonal path. Since it is straightforward to calculate the length of
each linear segment (using the Pythagorean theorem in Euclidean space, for example), the total
length of the approximation can be found by summing the lengths of each linear segment.

If the curve is not already a polygonal path, better approximations to the curve can be obtained by
following the shape of the curve increasingly more closely. The approach is touse an increasingly
larger number of segments of smaller lengths. The lengths of the successive approximations do not
decrease and will eventually keep increasing²possibly indefinitely, but for smooth curves this will
tend to a limit as the lengths of the segments get arbitrarily small.

For some curves there is a smallest number L that is an upper bound on the length of any polygonal
approximation. If such a number exists, then the curve is said to be   and the curve is
defined to have   L.

efinition
See~
Length e
n
Let
be a curve in Euclidean (or, more generally, a metric) space  = ë , so
is the image of
a continuous function  : [~, ] ĺ  of the interval [~, ] into .

titi
 ~  t < t < ... < t  < t  b
f t it l [~, b] 
ti  fiit 
llti

f
x
 0 í 


it 
t , 
t , ..., 
t , 
t 
 t   C. 
t t i t f
 
t  t

t   d

t , 
t ,
0 í  i i+ i i+


 i
i t
 lt

f t
 li t 
ti t
 t

it .

 

 ~
   
f C i t
 fi t



  t
    i t
 ll 
il  titi

f [~, b]   i 
.


   lt
 i it
 fiit
ifiit. If  < ’ t
   t
t C i 
 ~,  i 
 

 ~
t
 i.
i fiiti

f   lt

 
t  i  t
t C i fi 
iff til f ti
. I ft i  l, t
 
ti

f iff tiilit i 
t fi
  t i
.

c      t i i   . S 
 C l

 t
  t iti

 : [c, d]

. P
i t
t      ijti, t
  i  
ti
 

t
 f ti
 S f
 [~, b] t
[c, d]

t
t !S!t"" # !t"   i  f ti
 Sí$ f
 [c, d] t
[~, b]. It i l t
t   
f t


f
     l t
  
f t
 f

 ti ñ
= (
),  iil l    i
li      l t
   i
li f. S
t

  lt
i  it ii 
 t
f t
  , i t
t it 
 
t 
 t
 

i
f
%
 t i ti
.

&
 fiiti

f   lt
f
t
   i l

 t
t
 fiiti

f t
 t
tl  iti

f  l'
l  f ti
.

xii   lt
  it ti
S
((~
)* i+ti~
trycurv
Consider a real function 6 such that 6 and (its derivative with respect to )
are continuous on [~, ]. The length  of the part of the graph of  between = ~ and = can be
found as follows:

Consider an infinitesimal part of the curve { (or consider this as a limit in which the change in s
½ ½ ½
approaches { ). cccording to Pythagoras' theorem { Ê
Ê{ ÊÊ{
, from which:

{ ½Ê
Ê{½ÊÊ{
½

If a curve is defined parametrically by = (t) and
= (t), then its

arc length between t = ~ and t = is

This is more clearly a consequence of the distance formula

where instead of a A and A
, we take the limit. c useful
mnemonic is

If a function is defined in polar coordinates by Ê
Ê6 then

the arc length is given by

In most cases, including even simple curves, there

are no closed-form solutions of arc length
and numerical integration is necessary.
 Curves with closed-form solution for arc length
include the catenary, circle, cycloid, logarithmic
spiral, parabola, semicubical parabola and
(mathematically, a curve) straight line. The lack of
closed form solution for the arc length of
an elliptic arc led to the development of the elliptic
integrals.

w  

For a small piece of curve, ¨s can be approximated with the Pythagorean theorem

c representative linear element of the function
=t 5, =t3

In order to approximate the arc length of the curve, it is split into many linear segments. To make the
value exact, and not an approximation,infinitely many linear elements are needed. This means that
each element is infinitely small. This fact manifests itself later on when anintegralis used.

Begin by looking at a representative linear segment (see image) and observe that its length (element
of the arc length) will be the differential {. We will call the horizontal element of this distance { , and
the vertical element {
.

The Pythagorean theorem tells us that

Since the function is defined in time, segments ({) are added up across infinitesimally small
intervals of time ({t) yielding the integral

If
is a function of , so that we could take t = , then we have:

which is the arc length from = ~ to = of the graph of the function ƒ.

For example, the curve in this figure is defined by

Subsequently, the arc length integral for values of t from -1 to 1 is

Using computational approximations, we can obtain a very accurate (but

still approximate) arc length of 2.9,5. cn expression in terms of
the hypergeometric function can be obtained: it is

 
       

cpproximation by multiple hypotenuses

Suppose that there exists a rectifiable curve given by a function ( ).

To approximate the arc length S along between two points ~ and in
that curve, construct a series of right triangles whose concatenated
hypotenuses "cover" the arc of curve chosen as shown in the figure.
For convenience, the bases of all those triangles can be set equal
to A, so that for each one an associated A
exists. The length of any
given hypotenuse is given by the Pythagorean Theorem:

The summation of the lengths of the  hypotenuses

approximates :

Multiplying the radicand by produces:

Then, our previous result becomes:

cs the length A of these segments decreases, the

approximation improves. The limit of the
approximation, as A goes to zero, is equal to :
 [edit]
  
We know that the formula for a line integral

is . If we set the surface

f(x,y) to 1, we will get arc length multiplied by 1,

or . If = t, and
= (t),
then
= ( ), from when x is a to when is . If we
set these equations into our formula we

get: (Note: If =t then {t = { ).

This is the arc length formula.
[edit]
  
The length of an arc of a circle is the central angle
divided by 36 ° multiplied by the circumference.
The circumference of a circle is CÊ
ʽ , where  is
the radius, or CÊ
Ê {, where { is the diameter.
crc lengths are denoted by s, since arcs "subtend"
an angle.
In a semicircle, s = .

Historical methods
[edit]
 

For much of the history of mathematics, even the greatest thinkers considered it impossible to
compute the     . clthough crchimedes had pioneered a way of finding the
area beneath a curve with his Ãeth{e h~tin, few believed it was even possible for curves to
have definite lengths, as do straight lines. The first ground was broken in this field, as it often has
been in calculus, by approximation. People began to inscribe polygons within the curves and compute
the length of the sides for a somewhat accurate measurement of the length. By using more segments,
and by decreasing the length of each segment, they were able to obtain a more and more accurate
approximation. In particular, by inscribing a polygon of many sides in a circle, they were able to find
approximate values of ʌ.
[edit]


In the 17th century, the method of exhaustion led to the rectification by geometrical methods of
several transcendental curves: the logarithmic spiral by Evangelista Torricelli in 1645 (some sources
say John Wallis in the 165-s), the cycloid by Christopher Wren in 1658, and the catenary by Gottfried
Leibniz in 1691.

In 1659, Wallis credited William Neile's discovery of the first rectification of a nontrivial algebraic
curve, the semicubical parabola.

   
Before the full formal development of the calculus, the basis for the modern integral form for arc
length was independently discovered by Hendrik van Heuraet and Pierre Fermat.

In 1659 van Heuraet published a construction showing that arc lengthcould be interpreted as the area
under a curve²this integral, in effect²and applied it to the parabola. In 166-, Fermat published a
more general theory containing the same result in hiswe
ine~Ã ~ÃÃ
ineieti
à ~~tine{iet~tigeÃeti~.

Fermat's method of determining arc length

Building on his previous work with tangents, Fermat used the curve

whose tangent at = ~ had a slope of

 so the tangent line would have the equation

Next, he increased ~ by a small amount to ~ . , making segment 

a relatively
good approximation for the length of the curve from  to w. To find the length of the
segment 
, he used the Pythagorean theorem:

which, when solved, yields

In order to approximate the length, Fermat would sum up a sequence of

short segments.

Curves with infinite length

The Koch curve.

The graph of sin(1/ ).

cs mentioned above, some curves are non-rectifiable, that is, there is no upper bound on the lengths
of polygonal approximations; the length can be madearbitrarily large. Informally, such curves are said
to have infinite length. There are continuous curves on which every arc (other than a single-point arc)
has infinite length. cn example of such a curve is the Koch curve. cnother example of a curve with
/
infinite length is the graph of the function defined by ( ) = sin(1/ ) for any open set with as one of
/ /
its delimiters and ( ) = . Sometimes the Hausdorff dimension and Hausdorff measure are used to
"measure" the size of infinite-length curves.

eneralization to (pseudo-)Riemannian manifolds

/
Let  be a (pseudo-)Riemannian manifold,  : [ , 1] ĺ  a curve in  and g the (pseudo-) metric
tensor.

The length of  is defined to be

where t) l (t) is the tangent vector of  at t. The sign in the square root is chosen once for a
given curve, to ensure that the square root is a real number. The positive sign is chosen for
spacelike curves; in a pseudo-Riemannian manifold, the negative sign may be chosen for
timelike curves.

In theory of relativity, arc-length of timelike curves (world lines) is the proper time elapsed along
the world line.
Ê