Winning at the fair

Introduction

“Which is the maximum diameter of a disk that can be covered by 6 discs of 10 cm

diameter each? What if there are 5 or more disks? What if we want to cover a square or some
other polygon?”

The solution to this problem varies greatly with the number of disks. There are the trivial cases
of 1,2,3,4 and 7 disks, the center-symmetrical cases of 7,8,9 and 10 ,the particular cases of 5 and
6 disks, in which the figures have only one axis of symmetry and many more.

In many cases it is more convenient to reduce the problem to covering the unit disk with
n smaller, equal disks. Thus, it proceeds as follows:

“Given a Unit Disk, find the smallest Radius r(n) required for n equal disks to completely
cover the Unit Disk.”

For a symmetrical arrangement with n=5 (the five disk case), r(5)=t-1=1/t=0.6180340+,
where t is the Golden Ratio. The first few such values are:

n=nr. of
Radius(cm) Diameter(cm) r(n)
circles
1 5 10 1
2 5 10 1
3 5.77 11.54 0.866
4 7.07 14.14 0.707
5 8.205 16.41 0.618
6 8.99 17.98 0.556
7 10 20 0.5
8 11.23 22.46 0.445
9 12.07 24.14 0.414
10 12.66 25.32 0.394
11 13.155 26.31 0.38
12 13.845 27.69 0.361

[Here, values for n=6, 8, 9, 10 were obtained using computer experimentation by Zahn (1962).]
 While in the trivial cases the discrete solution is of striking simplicity, this could not be
more different for the rest of the cases, especially those with a single axis of symmetry (5 and 6),
where only computer-generated approximations of the solutions have been found. Therefore, it is
beyond the scope of this presentation to go into detail about the complex numerical functional
equations that lead to the aforementioned approximated solutions. For the sake of time and in
order to exemplify a complete solution, we shall only go into a considerable amount of detail for
the five disk case, which bears great resemblance to the six disk case.

Part 1

Six disks case

In the case of 6 disks, which is the main focus of our problem,

there is an asymmetrical method of covering that has been proven
to be most effective by Károly Bezdek in 1979.

First, we must consider a horizontal axis passing through the

center(O) of the larger disk. On it, equally far from the center but
closer to it than the unit radius, are placed the centers of two unit
disks (A and C). Thus, the two intersect at two points, M and M'.
We will name the intersections of Circle(A,1) with the larger
circle N and N'. The next two unit circles, the centers of which we
shall name B and B', must pass through M and N respectively M'
and N'. We will name the intersections of Circles B and B' with C
other than M and M' X and X' respectively. We will also name the two intersections of Circle C
with the larger circle Y and Y' and the intersections of circles B and B' with the larger circle,
other than N and N', P and P'. Thus, in order for the last two unit disks (D and D') to cover the
remainder of the larger disk, they must either intersect or encompass the points P, X and Y and
P', X' and Y' respectively.

The best (practically viable) way to obtain full coverage in drawing the figure is to select a
positioning of D and D' in such a way that their respective disks intersect two of the three
aforementioned points and encompass the third. Ideally and in order for absolute maximum
coverage efficiency to be achieved, P, X and Y must be intersected by the circle D and P', X', and
Y' by the circle D'.

For such an ideal case, it has been found (Károly Bezdek, 1979) that the ratio between the
radius of the larger disk and that of the unit disk is 1.798+. Thus the maximum radius of a
disk that can be covered with six disks with a diameter of 10 cm each is R=17.98+cm.

Five disks case

Which is the maximum diameter of a disk that can be covered by N= 5 disks of diameter 10 cm each?

The case for 5 disks is the first nontrivial case. The first solution was given by Eric H. Neville in
1915. The covering is not totally symmetrical, like in the N = 3, N = 4 and N = 7 cases, but it is taken for
granted that there is symmetry about one line, a diameter of the large circle and one of the small circle.

In order to ease the calculation, we are trying to find what is the minimum radius r(N) of the five
disks for a complete covering of a unit disk. Thus, the maximum diameter that can be covered by 5 disks

of diameter 10 cm each will be ()
 .

We make the following notations:

 is the center of the large circle

 D is the center of the small circle which diameter
is part of the symmetry axis
 B is the intersection of OD with the big circle,
which is not covered by the small circle with D as
its center.
 C the point in which the small circle cuts DB
 G, H the points in which the small circle cuts the
large circle
 E, F the points in which the two circles that pass
through B intersect the large circle on the arcs BG and respectively BH.
 m(∢BOE) = 2θ
 m(∢DOG) = ϕ
 m(∢BCE) = ψ
 m(∢ODG) =  – χ
 a = the radius of a small circle
 b = the radius of the large circle
 c = OD

We want to find a system of equations by which to determine the measures of the four angles,
thus determining the exact spot of each small disk and also their radius a.
 Using the Law of sines for the BE and GH chords, once for a small circle, and once for the large
one, we find the following two equations:

asinψ= bsin θ

asinχ= bsin ϕ

 
In the ΔCEO, from the Law of sines:  (∢ ) =  (∢ ) ⇔

 
 (∢ )
=  (°) from where we find:

(a–c) sin ψ= bsin( ψ-2θ)

In the ΔODG we find the fourth equation:

c = b cos ϕ – a cos χ

These four equations determine θ, ϕ, ψ, χ in terms of c. With a and b being supposed constant, the
best arrangement of the first three disks is that in which c has the value that makes EG and FH as small as
possible, which is found by making 2θ + ϕ a maximum subject to these equations. The condition for this
is:

sin 2ψsin(χ–ϕ) = cos χ{1 –cos 2(ψ–θ)}

When the position is such that these five equations are all satisfied, EG and FH are less than 2a,
and the other two disks can be set down to completely cover the rest of the large disk. The least value of a
which allows the covering is that in which EG and FH are equal to 2a. This value can be found by adding
to the five equations already written, the equation:

a= bcos(θ+  )

After these six equations are found, we require a numerical solution. A crude approximation for
θ, ϕ, ψ, χ is given by the values 36° , 36° , 72° , 72° . Neville finds another series of equations, eliminating
the ratios a : b : c from the equations already written: 3
  
2 sin θ – sin(θ +  + ψ) – sin(ψ – θ –  ) = 0

 
2 sin ϕ – sin(θ +  +χ) – sin(χ – θ – ) = 0
 

2 sin θ + sin(χ + θ) – sin(χ – θ) – sin(ψ + ϕ) – sin(ψ – ϕ) – 2sin(ψ – 2θ) = 0

cos(2ψ – χ + ϕ) – cos(2ψ + χ – ϕ) – 2cos χ + cos(2ψ + χ – 2θ) + cos(2ψ – χ – 2θ) = 0

In order to solve these equations, very complex mathematical methods are required. However,
these can be included in a computer program which finds a very close approximation.

So, using computer calculus we find that r(5) = 0.6093828640…

The answer for this case is eventually R=10/r(5)=16.4100446382…

Circular Coverage for the trivial cases

The problem of completely covering the planar unit disk D by N smaller equal sub-disks
is complicated. Here overlap is substantial and contributes to the difficulty of solution. Let r be
the minimum radius for which there exists a covering. If the circle is covered,then in
particular its boundary (the unit circle) must be covered. Because we want the radius r to be
minimum, every smaller circle should cover as much as the others.
To cover a unitcircular subarc of length 2π/N requires a disk of radius at least sin(π/N).
Therefore we have the bound :
r ≥ sin(π/N)

For the case of N=1 it is obvious that the circle will be covered by another circle with the same
radius:
r(1) = 1
Equality occurs, in fact, for N = 2, 3, and 4, which have the following results:
r(2) = sin(π/2) = 1
r(3) = sin(π/3)=√32 = 0.866025 ...
r(4) = sin(π/4)=√22 = 0.707106 ...

The case for N = 7 is also straightforward: A regular hexagon inscribed in the boundary has
edges of length 1, so at least six disks of radius 1/2 are needed to cover the boundary. A seventh
disk of radius R=1/2 is then sufficient to cover the remaining central portion of the disk D.
 1
"(7) = #$%( ) = = 0,5
7−1 2
Because the problem asks the diameter of the bigger disk R in fuction of the diameter of the
smaller disks (which is equal to 10 cm) will have:
10
*(+) =
"(%)

So we will have the following results:

R(1) = 10 cm
R(2) = 10 cm
R(3) = 5,7735 cm
R(4) = 7,071 cm
R(7) = 10 cm
 Case for more than 6 circles

For a coverage with 7 or more

circles, we found a proved demonstration
by Gabor Fejes Toth which is based on a
symmetrical method of arranging smaller
discs in the biggest one. With the aim of
finding the maximum diameter, we want
our circles to overlap as less as possible.
The algorithm is not very difficult, placing
a small disc in the centre of the largest
disc. These two circles must have the
same centre. After that, all other circles
have to be on the edge of the big disc.

As an example, we have studied the case for coverage with 7 circles. n=6(the number of circles
placed on the edge)

Let O be -the centre of those circles which are on the bottom of figure, ,(-) -the centre of disc number n,
placed on the edges. Let .(-) -the point in which 2 circles intersect the big circle, /(-) -be the point where
2 circles from the edge intersect the central circle and the height [ON] on [MP], N being on the MP
segment. We consider R-the radius of the large disc, r-the radius of the smaller discs.(r=10cm) and D-the
diameter of the large disc.

Using the triangles ,0 ,/ and / ,0 . are isosceles and ,0 + becomes height, mediator, median and
12° 12°
bisector, we find that . / = 2"#$% 3-
, .(-) /(-) = 2"#$% 3-

*4 =. , = . / + / , = " + . / , n-the number circles placed on the edge.

* = .(-) , = .(-) /(-) + /(-) , = " + .(-) /(-)

12° 12°
The final formula for R is * = " + 2"#$% = "(1 + 2#$% )
3- 3-

12°
D= 2"(1 + 2#$% )
3-

For the case of 7 circles, *4 = 2" = 20 and 64 = 4" = 40

 This type of covering the big circles works until we can place only one little circle in the centre of
the big one. It is proved by Gabor Feies Toth that using such an efficient idea is good between 7 and 10
circles. If we want to cover a circle with more than 10 discs, there are several cases basing on a settlement
of 2, 3 or more circles inside the largest disc. It is about symmetrical ways of arranging the discs in order
to obtain the maximum radius of the big disc, found by Hans Melisse.

12 discs

11 discs

* = 2,769"

6 = 2* = 5,538r
* = 2,631"

6 = 2* = 5,262"
 All of these results are made by Melisse, using a symmetrical way of placing the discs. Moreover,
we can observe axis of symmetry which are illustrated with red lines. The algorithm discovered by this
mathematician is not so different as the previous one. The most significant difference is that in the second
method, it is very hard to observe the similarities between angles.

Here are our results for all cases which we have studied. Obviously, we make some
approximations in order to do the calculate more easily.

Number Radius(cm) Diameter(cm)

of
circles
1 5 10
2 5 10
3 5,77 11,54
4 7,07 14,14
5 8,205 16,41
6 8,99 17,98
7 10 20
8 11,23 22,46
9 12,07 24,14
10 12,66 25,32
11 13,155 26,31
12 13,845 17,69

Part 2
Rectangle and Square

It is obvious that the best (thinnest) coverings of R with six equal circles are going to
depend on the value of ratio between length and width (let it be a). There were found some very
thin coverings which we conjecture to be optimal. These conjectures are based on extensive
computer simulations. When increasing the aspect ratio a, starting from 1, the covering that we
obtained for the square is “stretched” in one direction, but its topology remains intact at first.
Then, at certain values, the topology of the covering changes abruptly, similar to the behavior of
the thinnest coverings with smaller numbers of circles.
 Apparently, there are four different types of optimal coverings. The type I configuration ,
which holds for 1⩽a⩽a0=2.9237955836…, is obtained by “stretching” the covering that we saw
already for the square. It is symmetric in the centre of the rectangle.

Then, from a0, the type II configuration takes over. It has an axis of symmetry and two
circles are with their centers on an edge of the rectangle. The numerical computation of the
transition value a0 at which the types I and II coverings are equally good is by no means trivial.
One of the difficulties here is that the connectivity graph shown in .........., that is used to compute
the covering radius, gives rise to an underdetermined system of equations. The system can only
be solved by taking into account the extra constraint that the covering radius is minimal. This
amounts to solving a system of eight non-linear equations in eight unknowns, even if the
symmetry is taken into account. In the type II covering , that takes over for a0⩽a⩽2+5/2, we
have the following relation between the aspect ratio and the covering radius r:

a=24" 0 -1+2r+4" 0 -14

Explicit expression of r in terms of a involves the solution of the cubic equation

2048ar3+(−896−256a2)r2+(−544a−128a3)r+225+136a2+16a4=0.

In the type III coverings, which hold for 2+5/2⩽a⩽23, we have that a=44" 0 −1+2r.(Fig. 3)

Finally, for a⩾23 we have the “sausage” covering and a=64r2−1. (Fig.4)

FIG. 1

FIG. 2
 FIG. 3

FIG. 4

Equilateral Triangle

As for the other regular polygons, the optimal coverage is symmetrical. Therefore, each
center of a small circle would be on triangle’s mediators.

As in the figures, three disks will cover the triangle’s tips, leaving the central region
uncovered. The other three disks (dark blue) will intersect overlap in the red marked region. For
an optimal coverage, this region, as the other overlays of three disks should be minimal.
Therefore, these regions can be reduced to one point, in the center of the triangle, as well as on
the mediators. Thus, we obtain the optimal coverage, shown in the second figure. Making the
calculus the length of the triangle’s side is 3√3 ". So, the answer is 15√3  .

Non-optimal coverage Optimal coverage

 Pentagon

The following case is about the

coverage of a pentagon with 6 discs. As
shown by the case of 7 circles, we put a
smaller disc right in the center of the
biggest one, both of them share the same
center. Instead of placing 6 circles on the
edges, we use only 5, the pentagon being
a 5-sided regular polygon. The same
algorithm is used and the equations are
similar. Inside the large circle is a
pentagon is drawn which has the tips in the points where 2 smaller circles intersect the big one
(., .0 , .1 , .3 , .> )
12°
R, is the radius of the largest circle, is the same: * = "(1 + 2#$% 3-
), r is the radius of
the smaller circle and n is the number of arranged discs on the edge.

Using a formula which we have proved in our generalization from the end of the
12°
presentation, we come to ? = 2*#$% -
.

360° 180°
? = 2" @1 + 2#$% A #$%
4% %

The side of the pentagon: ? = 9,491 

 Hexagon

The case for a hexagon is not

all that different from others. A similar
figure is used and a hexagon is draw
inside the biggest circle instead of a
pentagon. We know the fact that a
hexagon is made of 6 equal equilateral
triangles, its diagonal being 2
multiplied by l’.(l’-the side of the
triangles) Moreover, l’ is the radius of
the largest disc. Following the
previous reasoning, we obtain the
mathematical relationship:
12°
? ′ = * = "(1 + 2#$% ), n-the number of arranged circles on the edge of the big disc
3-

12°
? = 2? ′ = 2"(1 + 2#$% 3-
)

So, the side of the hexagon: ? = 16,18 

Part 3
The coverage of the n-sided regular
polygon with n+1 disks

Starting from the case in which we

have to cover a circle with other 7 smaller
circles, we obtain a generalization for most
of the regular polygons with more than 4
sides. As we presented in the previous
circumstances, we place a disk inside the
biggest one, both of them having the same
center. After that, we simply arrange the rest of the disks on the edges. Having n+1 circles, we try to built
the largest disk with the maximums radius in which we draw a n-sided regular polygon. Basing on a
symmetrical way of placing all of these disks, we find a formula for calculating the maximum side of a n-
sided regular polygon when we have n+1 available circles and only one circle has a similar center with
the biggest one.

For instance, B , B0 , B1 , … . , B- can be the tips of the n-sided polygon, O-the center of the largest
disk and [OP]-the height from O on B- B segment. If we have this type of polygon, it means there are n
congruent angles. Let also consider l-the side of the polygon, r-the radius of smaller disks and R-the
radius of the circle. Using trigonometric equations, we obtain the relationships:

180° 180° ?
cos G90° − H = #$% =
% % 2*

180°
? = 2*#$%
%

360°
* = "(1 + 2#$% )
4%

360° 180°
? = 2" G1 + 2#$% H #$%
4% %

I.