0
$\begingroup$

Is there a reference about determining the minimum radius of a circle that would cover n circles of radius 1 that are in a square packing configuration ( see Wolfram's MathWorld packing packing description)?

This is a different problem than the "best known packing of equal circles in a circle", though for n=1, 2, and 4 it would have the same result.

For a hexagonal packing configuration, n=1, 2, 3, 7, would have the same result as "best know packing of equal circles in a circle". Believe 6 also does, but would actually cover 7.

  • 0
    Nasser: Not interested in circles fitting in a square. Interested in covering by a circle of n circles that are square packed. See diagram for what constitutes "square packing of circles". Klett: You are right it -- question probably should have gone there. Thought I was on that site until after I hit send. My apologies.2012-12-21

1 Answers 1

1

If you don't have a square number of small circles, you need to define which ones are missing. It is easy to say "the corners" if you have at least $n^2-4$, but what about if you have $89$ small circles? Asking for the minimum radius is fair.

A partial answer is that if you have a diagonal of $n$ unit circles, the length from one end to the other is $1+(n-1)\sqrt 2$, so the radius of the enclosing circle would be half that. The next layer would be if the farthest center is $n$ units one direction and $m$ units the other from the center (where $n,m$ can both be half integral or integral) the radius is $\frac 12(1+\sqrt{n^2+m^2})$ The minimum is just a constant increase over the size of the circle to contain a given number of lattice points. This is the Gauss circle problem, still unsolved.

  • 0
    $T$he solution for the next layer seems usable but I think it would have the solution for 5 would be the same solution as for 6. However 5 solution for the problem should for a + formation aka 1 3 1 find a radius 1.5 circle which covers 5 circles of radius 1.2012-12-23