Using primitives to integrate moments of Inertia

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the integration of moments of inertia using different "primitives," particularly focusing on the moment of inertia for a sphere. The original poster expresses difficulty in aligning their approach with the professor's requirement to use a specific method involving stacks of disks.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to use point particle primitives and multiple integrals for calculating moments of inertia but struggles with the professor's method. They question how to correctly set up the integrals and the relationship between the variables involved.

Discussion Status

Some participants provide insights into the integration process, suggesting the need to find the correct radius of each disk as a function of z and referencing Pythagorean relationships. The original poster indicates progress in their understanding but initially arrives at an incorrect result, prompting further exploration of their reasoning.

Contextual Notes

The original poster mentions that their professor's approach differs from their own due to a lack of prerequisite knowledge in calculus, which may be influencing their understanding of the problem setup.

Nikolas
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
using "primitives" to integrate moments of Inertia

My classmates are lost and I just can't think the way my proffessor does when approaching these problems. He gave us about 50 shapes to find moments of inertia for this weekend and I'm not having any trouble doing them... my way. I can use a point particle primitive (mr^2) and setup a double or triple integral for 2 and 3 dimensional objects and get the right answer without any trouble, but he's making us to use other "primitives." For example to get the moment of Inertia for a sphere we have to use a stack of disks, the primitive being (1/2)MR^2 and dIprim = (1/2)(r^2)dm. But I don't see how that can work with dm being ρdV or ρ(r^2)sinΦdρdΦdθ. The closest I can come to getting his way to work is setting dm to ρrdzdr and running z from -r to r but I end up with (3M(R^2))/(20π) when it should be (3M(R^2))/(5). I don't see how I can get rid of that π since ρ = M/((4/3)π(R^3)).

I think the main incompatibility is that I'm using multiple integrals and whatever coordinate system seems to fit best since that's how I visualize things and how it makes sense to me but since calc 3 isn't a prerequesite for the course he uses a singular integral, and I just can't see how it works.

Thanks,

Nik
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What? He's just done the integral in dΦ and the integral in dr already.
You still have to find the correct radius of each disk as function of z,
before you integrate along dz (from -R to +R ... sound familiar?)
Using Pythagoras, r^2 + z^2 = R^2
 
Last edited:
http://members.cox.net/mr2host2/integral1.gif
in (1/2)(r^2)dm, dm = (rho)(pi)(R^2)dz, (r^2)=(R^2)-(z^2), and rho=(3M)/(4piR^3)... but it gives me I=(1/2)M(R^2) which is wrong. Where am I going wrong in my thinking? I'm closer now than I am before though...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
nevermind I got it finally, the R^2 in dm needed to be r^2 and replaced by R^2-z^2
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
52
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
2K
Replies
25
Views
2K