I have not looked at the document you were working from, but I have another approach that does not depend on whether the cable sags below the lower support.
My idea is this. The general equation for a catenary is

, where
a is a parameter to be determined. Suppose we can find a value of
a for which there are two points

and

on the curve with horizontal separation
d and vertical separation
h, such that the curve length between these two points is
s, then we can translate the curve so as to fit between the two given support points.
So the given information is that

,

,

.
Using addition formulae for hyperbolic functions, you can write (2) and (3) as

,

.
Now using cosh^2 – sinh^2 = 1, we can square (4) and (5) and subtract, to get

, or

.
That is an equation for
a in terms of the known constants
d,
s and
h. Unfortunately, (6) does not have an explicit solution in terms of standard functions. But you can solve it numerically to any desired degree of accuracy, using some technique such as Newton–Raphson.
Once you have found
a, you can get

and

as follows. Divide (4) by (5) to get

, from which (using the expression for the inverse tanh function as a logarithm)

.
Combine this with (1) to get

,

.
Here's an example of how this works numerically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by elbarto An example of the problem I am trying to solve is:
A cable of length 20.7m is hung from point (0,10) to point (20,15). What is the equation of the profile of the cable? |
In that example, the horizontal separation is

, the vertical separation is

, and the cable length is

. Equation (6) becomes

. In this equation, the constant 20.087 is close to the smallest value (namely 20) for which the equation has a solution (corresponding to the fact that the cable is tightly stretched in this example). By trial and error, and successive approximation, I found that the solution is approximately

. Then equations (8) and (9) give

,

, with corresponding y values

,

. Finally, since you want the support points to be (0,10) and (20,15), you need to shift the x and y coordinates, and you get the solution

.
There are two possible snags to this method. One is the necessity to get a sufficiently good approximate solution for

in equation (6). The other is that I think I have assumed that h>0. If h<0 (in other words, if the right-hand support point is lower than the left one) then probably some modification to the formulae will be needed.