Math IA: Optimization of
Plastic Cylinder Containers
Done by: Adhvaitha Hitesh
1
Introduction:
Plastic pollution is one of the most prominent issues that is currently affecting us as a society
today. The production of plastic has increased exponentially from 2.3 million tons in 1950 to 488
million tons in 2015 (Parker, Laura). Around 300 millions tons of plastic waste is produced every
year. Everyday household items such as plastic bottles, bags and containers are not
biodegradable and take up to thousands of years to degrade therefore staying in our environment
forever. Plastic pollution contributes to air, water and land pollution which in term negatively
impact humans, wildlife, flora and our planet earth.
The inspiration behind this investigation all begin with being assigned homework to prepare for a
debate on climate change in Biology. Each team represented a country and my team represented
India. We debated the causes and consequences of climate change alongside identifying 5 ways
to prevent this change from being irreversible. We came up with solutions such as saving energy,
reduction of deforestation etc. Unfortunately, none of these were small and quick solutions that
can be implemented by us every day. However , when my teacher was teaching optimization and
discussed a question on the minimum area of a simple square land and fence, I began to ponder
other ways I could use optimization to model a real-life situation that I could relate to.
This made me wonder if there was any way to reduce the amount of plastic produced by using
optimization. I wondered if finding the minimum surface area of 5 different types of cylinder
container, could potentially change the plastic required to make the bottles.
This exploration will investigate how optimization can be used to reduce the plastic used when
making plastic bottles by finding the minimum surface area for 5 different cylinder containers. I
aim to find the dimensions of the bottle that gives the smallest surface area for using the least
amount of material.
Optimization is a concept that makes use of calculus and functions to find the minimum or
maximum function relative to the set. Optimization can be found using various different methods
however I will be using functions and the first and second derivative test to find the minimum
surface area. I will also be using mathematical modelling where I will be applying optimization to
solve a real-life problem/situation.
Data Collection:
2
I collected 5 plastic cylinders of different measurement to optimize the surface area. Table 1
consists of the measurements, Volume and Surface Area. Note that all measurements and
answers will be rounded to 3 significant figure to maintain accuracy and consistency
Containers Diameter Radius Height Volume Surface Area
3
(cm) (cm) (cm) (𝑐𝑚 ) (𝑐𝑚2 )
Pens 7.5 3.75 16.3 720 472
Mullbery lead 6.9 3.45 9 336 270
extract powder
Cotton bud 7 3.5 8.6 330 266
Toothpick 4.8 2.4 6.9 124 140
3
Rose scrub 6.2 3.1 3.6 108 130.50
Math Process:
To optimize the surface area, I will be keeping the height (h) constant as some of the products
such as the toothpick and pens have the containers height catered to the length of the product.
The primary equation is the surface area formula: 𝑆𝐴 = 2𝜋𝑟 2 + 2𝜋𝑟ℎ and the secondary equation
is the volume formula: 𝑉 = 𝜋𝑟 2 ℎ.
Since the h occurs in the primary equation and we are optimizing r , we will make the secondary
equation in terms of h so that we can substitute it in the primary equation and make it in terms of
the variable “r’’.
𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 = 𝜋𝑟 2 ℎ
𝑣
ℎ=
𝜋𝑟 2
I substituted the h equation into the primary equations
𝑆 = 2𝜋𝑟 2 + 2𝜋𝑟ℎ
2𝜋𝑟𝑣
𝑆 = 2𝜋𝑟 2 +
𝜋𝑟 2
4
2𝑣
𝑆 = 2𝜋𝑟 2 +
𝑟
To find the minimum of r, I differentiated the primary equation
𝑑𝑠 2𝑣
= 2𝝅𝑟 2 +
𝑑𝑟 𝑟
𝒅𝒔 𝒅𝒔 𝟏
=2𝝅
𝒅𝒓
(𝒓𝟐 ) + 𝟐𝒗 ( )
𝒅𝒓 𝒙
𝟐𝒗
𝑆′ = 4𝝅𝒓 −
𝒓𝟐
Using the 𝑆′ equation, I made r the subject to find the minimum r for various containers therefore
equating it to zero
𝟐𝒗
4𝝅𝒓 − 𝟐 = 𝟎
𝒓
4𝝅𝒓𝟑 − 𝟐𝒗 = 𝟎
4𝝅𝒓𝟑 − 2𝑣 = 0
4𝝅𝒓𝟑 = 2𝑣
2𝑣
𝑟3 =
4𝝅
3 2𝑣
𝑟=√
4𝝅
3 𝑣
𝑟=√
2𝝅
After finding the equation for r, I substituted the volume and found the minimized r for all the
3 𝑣 3 720
container. For example, in reference to the pen container: 𝑟 = √2𝝅 = √ 2𝝅 = 4.8571 =
4.86 𝑐𝑚3 . The solutions are converted to centimeters using an online conversion site1. Refer to
the table 2 for the minimized values of r for the remaining containers. They were calculated
using GDC
To verify that the r value is minimized, I found the second derivative of the primary equation and
substituted the r values to see if it greater than zero.
𝟐𝒗
𝑆′ = 4𝝅𝒓 −
𝒓𝟐
1 [Link]
5
ds ds 1
𝑆 ′′ = 4𝝅 (𝒓) − 𝟐𝒗
dr dr 𝑟2
′′ −𝟑
𝑆 = 4𝝅(𝟏) − 𝟐 (−𝟐)𝒓 (𝒗)
𝟒𝒗
𝑆 ′′ = 4𝝅 +
𝒓𝟑
I submitted the minimized r value for pens into the equation and found that it was greater than zero
therefore proving that 3.94 is the minimized r value for the container. Please refer to Table 2 for the
reminder of the values which were calculated using GDC.
𝟒𝒗
4𝝅 + >𝟎
𝟏. 𝟔𝟗𝟑
𝟒(720)
4𝝅 + >𝟎
(𝟏. 𝟔𝟗)𝟑
𝟔𝟎𝟗 > 𝟎
After finding the minimized values of r, I found the new surface areas by inputting the
minimized r values into the primary equation as shown in Table 3. I compared new surface area
to the original surface area using a bar graph to show the difference between the original and
new surface area.
Container Minimized r Minimized r using Original New surface
(cm) second derivative Surface Area Area
Pen 1.69 609 > 0 472 191
Mulberry Extract 1.55 373 > 0 270 102
Powder
Cotton Bud 1.55 367 > 0 266 98.9
Toothpick 1.39 197 > 0 140 72.4
6
Rose Scrub 1.37 180 > 0 130 42.8
Different between the original surface area and new
surface area with minimized r
500
Surface area of container (cm)
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Pen Mullbery Extract Cotton Bud Toothpick Rose scrub
Powder
Containers
Original Surface Area New Surface Area
As shown in the graph above, there is a significant reduction between the old and new surface
area.
To understand whether the minimized r is the most efficient r, a ratio was derived using the
differentiated primary equation and secondary equation. First, I made V subject using the 𝑆′
equation.
𝟐𝒗
S′ = 4𝝅𝒓 − 𝒓𝟐
4𝝅𝒓(𝒓𝟐 ) = 𝟐𝒗
4𝜋𝑟 (𝑟 2 )
=V
2
2𝝅𝒓𝟑 = V
Then, I substituted this equation into the primary equation to get the h:r ratio that determines
how efficient the r is.
7
𝑣
ℎ=
𝜋𝑟 2
2𝜋𝑟3
ℎ=
𝜋𝑟 2
h = 2r
Container h/r ratio In reference to table 4, the most efficient containers would
ℎ
be have a h:2r in regards to = 2. This means that to
𝑟
Pen 9.64 understand how efficient the packaging is , the h/r ratio
should be close to 2. From the table, it clear that the rose
Mulberry 5.81 scrub container has the most efficient packaging as it is
Extract Powder closest to 2.
Cotton Bud 5.55
Toothpick 4.96
Rose Scrub 2.63
Extension: It would be interesting to investigate the optimization of different shaped container as
it will have different dimension and would have store different types of items. Therefore, I decided
to optimize an open toped rectangular box (pencil holder) to addresses one of the limitation in my
exploration that it is only constrained to one shape. Comparing my findings to a different shape
would give us insight on how difference shap
es use different quantities of packaging material.
To being my investigation, I found the dimension of the open toped box that I will using and found
the volume and surface are. Refer to the table below
Container Length (cm) Height (cm) Volume Surface
(𝑐𝑚3 ) Area
(𝑐𝑚2 )
8
Open toped box: 9 11.1 899 3677
Now To optimize the surface area, I will be keeping the height (h) constant so that items such as
ruler, pens etc fit into the pencil holder optimally. The primary equation is the surface area formula:
𝑆𝐴 = 𝑥 2 + 4𝑥ℎ and the secondary equation is the volume formula: 𝑉 = 𝑥 2 𝑦.
Since the h occurs in the primary equation and we are optimizing x , we will make the secondary
equation in terms of h so that we can substitute it in the primary equation and make it in terms of
the variable “r’’.
𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 = 𝑥 2 ℎ
𝑣
h=
𝑥2
I substituted the h equation into the primary equations
𝑆𝐴 = 𝑥 2 + 4𝑥ℎ
𝑣
𝑆 = 𝑥 2 + 4𝑥 2
𝑥
𝑣
𝑆 = 𝑥2 + 4
𝑥
To find the minimum of x, I differentiated the primary equation
𝑑𝑠 𝑣
= 𝑥2 + 4
𝑑𝑥 𝑥
𝑑 𝑑 𝟏
𝑆′ = (2𝑥 2−1 ) + 4𝑣 ( )
𝑑𝑥 𝑑𝑥 𝒙
𝑑 −1
𝑆 ′ = 2𝑥 + 4𝑣 𝑥
𝑑𝑥
𝑑
𝑆 ′ = 2𝑥 + 4𝑣 − 1 × 𝑥 −1−1
𝑑𝑥
1
𝑆 ′ = 2𝑥 + 4𝑣 × −
𝑥2
9
4𝑣
𝑆 ′ = 2𝑥 −
𝑥2
Using the 𝑆′ equation, I made x the subject to find the minimum x for various containers
therefore equating it to zero
4𝑣
2𝑥 − 2 = 0
𝑥
3
2𝑥 − 4𝑣 = 0
2𝑥 3 = 4𝑣
4𝑣
𝑥3 =
2
3
𝑥 = √2𝑣
After finding the equation for x, I substituted the volume and found the minimized x. This was
calculated using a GDC. The solutions are converted to centimeters using an online conversion
site.
3 3
𝑥 = √2𝑣 = √2(899) = 12.2 𝑐𝑚3 = 2.302 𝑐𝑚
To verify that the x value is minimized, I found the second derivative of the primary equation
and substituted the x values to see if it greater than zero.
4𝑣
𝑆 ′ = 2𝑥 −
𝑥2
𝑑𝑠 𝑑𝑠 1
𝑆 ′′ = 2 (𝑥) − 4𝑣 ( )
𝑑𝑥 𝑑𝑥 𝑥2
𝑑𝑠
𝑆 ′′ = 2 − 4𝑣 𝑥−2
𝑑𝑥
𝑆 ′′ = 2 − 4𝑣 − 2 × 𝑥−2−1
𝑆 ′′ = 2 − 4𝑣 − 2 × 𝑥−3
8𝑣
𝑆 ′′ = 2 +
𝑥3
I submitted the minimized x value into the 𝑆 ′′ equation and found that it was greater than zero therefore
proving that 2.302 is the minimized x value for the container. Please refer to Table 2 for the reminder of
the values which were calculated using GDC.
10
8𝑣
2+ >𝟎
𝑥3
8(899)
2+ >𝟎
2.3023
𝟓𝟗𝟏 > 𝟎
After finding the minimized values of x, I found the new surface areas by inputting the
minimized x values into the primary equation.
𝑆𝐴 = 𝑥 2 + 4𝑥ℎ
= (2.302)2 + 4 (2.302)(11.1)
= 107 𝑐𝑚3
A bar graph was inputted to show the significant difference between the surface areas.
Change in surface area
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Surface Area
Original Surface Area New Surface Area
11
Evaluation and Conclusion:
For the first part of my investigation, minimizing the r value was successful because the minimized
r has reduced the surface area which mean less plastic is used to make the containers. This can be
seen from the bar graph used to represent the change in the surface area. Therefore, If the
minimized r is used the container will use the least amount of plastic to make product which is
proven using the second derivative equation, therefore causing less damage to the environment.
However, it is unrealistic as if companies reduce their r to the minimized r for their container, they
will have to reduce the amount of products that can place in the container. This means they will
have to sell less goods in one container which could affect their sales as companies make products
and its packaging based on consumer desire and aesthetic. Therefore, companies will only change
their packaging if consumer demand less amount of products in one container or want to buy
products that are environmentally friendly. On the other hand, companies can benefit from using
less material as they will waster less money and resources. They can use the money in other areas
of the manufacturing process such as investing in green technology. In terms of efficiency, the pen
container would have the least efficient packing as the radius is the farthest from 2 while the rose
scrub will have the most efficiency for its packaging.
The same can be deduced from the second part of the investigation. The surface area had
exponentially reduced which told me that the company did not bother optimizing the material used
but only designed it according to aesthetic purposes. The shape was different from the cylinder
and had the most surface area and yet it reduced the most. This shows that a more efficient
container would be an open toped rectangular box. However, only dry products can be stored in
such a container. It would be unhygienic to contain products such as scrubs in an open toped
rectangular box.
12
An extension to my exploration could be to compare different shapes of containers and see which
are more efficient. This could encourage buyers to be more conscious of their products and buy
shapes that would damage the environment less.
13
Work cited
Elmore, Bart. “Plastic Bottles Are a Recycling Disaster. Coca-Cola Should Have Known
Better | Bart Elmore.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 2 May 2017,
[Link]/commentisfree/2017/may/02/plastic-bottles-coca-cola-recycling-
coke.
“ENDMEMO.” EndMemo, 2015, [Link]/cconvert/[Link].
Parley. “A New Link Between Plastic and Climate Change.” PARLEY, PARLEY, 1 Aug.
2018, [Link]/updates/2018/7/23/a-new-link-between-plastic-and-climate-change.
Parker, Laura. “The World's Plastic Pollution Crisis Explained.” Plastic Pollution Facts
and Information, 7 June 2019, [Link]/environment/habitats/plastic-
pollution/.
14
