Sorry, I should add this now:
With the tools i have, it is possible to approximately
measure the diameters where the diameter crosses the
"centre" of the shape. Remember, they are
approximately cirles. So I can approximately have the
measuring tool be centred. In that case, your
curvey-triangle shape would not give all the same
diameters. So anyway this should make the calculation
more easy.
And sorry, as already stated, i will not have the time
to map out so many many many many maps on graph paper.
Thanks!
Justin

--- Adrian Rossiter <adrian_r@...> wrote:

> Hi Justin
>
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2006, justinasia wrote:
> > By the way I figured if I actually used the
> diameters
> > to plot out a map on graph paper, I could count
> the
> > little squares to find the area!! However, as I
> have
> > to do a large number of such calculations, that is
> not
> > practical. I feel sure there must be a suitable
> > formula.
>
> Just a couple of extra comments.
>
> If you could draw the cross-sections then there is a
> tool called a planimeter that will measure the area
> from the boundary
>
>
>
http://persweb.wabash.edu/facstaff/footer/Planimeter/PLANIMETER.HTM
>
> However, the diameter measurements if they are just
> widths
> won't necessarily give the cross-sectional shape or
> its area.
> For example, there are shapes of constant width that
> aren't
> circles, and that have a different area to a circle
> of the
> same width
>
>
> http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ReuleauxTriangle.html
>
> Adrian.
> --
> Adrian Rossiter
> adrian@...
> Home: http://antiprism.com/adrian
>




________________________________________________________________________________\
____
Want to start your own business?
Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-index