No School

• AA 1

• FIELDWORK 4: DETERMINING THE AREA OF POLYGONAL FIELD USING ONLY THE TAPE. INTRODUCTION THIS FIELDWORK FOCUSES ON FINDING THE AREA OF AN IRREGULAR POLYGON USING ONLY TAPE BY USING VARIOUS MATHEMATICAL EQUATIONS. AN APPROACH IN DETERMING THE AREA OF A POLYGON IS BREAKING IT INTO TRIANGLES AND ADDING THE AREA OF THE TRIANGLES WHERE THE TOTAL AREA IS THE AREA OF THE IRREGULAR POLYGON. THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS FIELDWORK IS TO DEVELOP SIKLLS IN DETERMINING THE AREA OF A POLYGONAL FIELD WITH THE USE OF TAPE ONLY BY DIVIDING THE AREA INTO TRIANGLES. SAMPLE COMPUTATION INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS Based from the data gathered, it is observed that the results of the 3 methods used in finding the area of the irregular polygon yielded almost the exact same calculated area of the irregular polygon. It can be interpreted that the area of the polygon is around 29 m2 as the first method of by base and altitude method resulted 29.090 m2 , while the second method is the included use of the cosine law where the area is 29.188 m2 , then lastly is the Heron’s formula where the area is 98.773 m2 . APPLICATION The application of this fieldwork is in the field of construction as before building a structure, a specified coordinate for a lot with a given distance to determine the boundary of the construction site. From that data, the area is computed of the lot to determine the cost by the contractor, and for the architect and engineer determine the specification of the house on before the design and how the structure will be built. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The fieldwork determined the area of an irregular polygon using the tape and only by dividing the are into triangles to easily determine the area of the actual irregular polygon. It can be concluded that by breaking an irregular polygon into triangles is a convenient to determine the area of the polygon based from the results yielding almost the same value where Heron’s formula is the easiest to use. Based from the data gathered, it is observed the 3 methods used yielded different results though are almost the same. This is due to errors incurred in doing the fieldwork, specifically human errors and such as reading the instruments. It is recommended in this fieldwork i