Change of variable in triple integrals

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the volume above the xy-plane and below the paraboloid defined by the equation z=1-x²/a²-y²/b². Participants are exploring the implications of variable substitutions and integration limits in the context of triple integrals.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the initial substitutions made for the variables and how these affect the volume calculation. There is a focus on the limits of integration, particularly the dependence of the upper limit on other variables. Questions arise regarding the correct interpretation of the paraboloid's equation and the implications of using cylindrical coordinates.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, questioning the setup and limits of integration. Some have identified potential errors in the original problem statement and the variable substitutions. There is a recognition of the need to clarify the limits of integration based on the geometry of the problem.

Contextual Notes

There is an acknowledgment of the original problem's notation and the potential confusion caused by variable renaming. Participants are also considering the implications of the problem's constraints on their calculations.

Smusko
Messages
20
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Solve for the volume above the xy-plane and below the paraboloid z=1-x2/a2-y2/b2

I have gotten an answer that is close to the correct one, but I can't figure out where I am wrong.

Homework Equations



Solution: Volume is = ab[tex]\pi[/tex]/2

The Attempt at a Solution



First I substituted
u=x/a,
v=y/b,
w=z,

That changed dV = ab*dudvdw = dV*

Now the domain looks like this: Above the uv-plane and below 1=u2+v2+w


I substitute again to Cylindrical coordinates.

u=r*cos([tex]\theta[/tex])
v=r*sin([tex]\theta[/tex])
w=t

The are element becomes dV* = abr*drd[tex]\theta[/tex]dt

So now if I have TripleIntegral(abr)drdtd[tex]\theta[/tex]
From that I get ab*(r2/2)*(t)*(theta)
Evaluate this over
0≤r≤1
0≤[tex]\theta[/tex]theta≤2pi
0≤t≤1

and I get ab*pi but the solution section says it becomes ab*pi/2 and I can't figure out where I am wrong or made a mistake.

Sorry for the alternating use of greek symbols and text. Sometimes the Latex reference works for me, sometimes it don't.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
There appears to be either an error with how you've written the problem, or your first substitution. Is the a and b in the original equation for the paraboloid supposed to be squared? You've proceeded as if this were the case.
 
Thanks, you are right. a and b are supposed to be squared in the problem statement. I'll edit it right away.
 
Smusko said:
So now if I have TripleIntegral(abr)drdtd[tex]\theta[/tex]
From that I get ab*(r2/2)*(t)*(theta)
Evaluate this over
0≤r≤1
0≤[tex]\theta[/tex]theta≤2pi
0≤t≤1

and I get ab*pi but the solution section says it becomes ab*pi/2 and I can't figure out where I am wrong or made a mistake.

Sorry for the alternating use of greek symbols and text. Sometimes the Latex reference works for me, sometimes it don't.

But t doesn't go from 0 to 1. The upper limit depends on r and θ.
 
You are right. I'l check into that. Thanks.
 
Actually the height is dependent on t. It is a cylinder and R and theta only decides the area of the circle. So that can't be what's wrong.
What I'm not 100 percent sure of is the limit.
 
Last edited:
Smusko said:

Homework Statement



Solve for the volume above the xy-plane and below the paraboloid z=1-x2/a2-y2/b2

I have gotten an answer that is close to the correct one, but I can't figure out where I am wrong.

Homework Equations



Solution: Volume is = ab[tex]\pi[/tex]/2

The Attempt at a Solution



First I substituted
u=x/a,
v=y/b,
w=z,

That changed dV = ab*dudvdw = dV*

Now the domain looks like this: Above the uv-plane and below 1=u2+v2+w


I substitute again to Cylindrical coordinates.

u=r*cos([tex]\theta[/tex])
v=r*sin([tex]\theta[/tex])
w=t

The are element becomes dV* = abr*drd[tex]\theta[/tex]dt

So now if I have TripleIntegral(abr)drdtd[tex]\theta[/tex]
From that I get ab*(r2/2)*(t)*(theta)
Evaluate this over
0≤r≤1
0≤[tex]\theta[/tex]theta≤2pi
0≤t≤1

and I get ab*pi but the solution section says it becomes ab*pi/2 and I can't figure out where I am wrong or made a mistake.

Sorry for the alternating use of greek symbols and text. Sometimes the Latex reference works for me, sometimes it don't.

LCKurtz said:
But t doesn't go from 0 to 1. The upper limit depends on r and θ.

Smusko said:
Actually the height is dependent on t. It is a cylinder and R and theta only decides the area of the circle. So that can't be what's wrong.
What I'm not 100 percent sure of is the limit.

Look at what I have highlighted in red. Your t is the same as w. The upper limit isn't constant. It depends on the other two variables as given by the w in the red equation.
 
Ahhhhhh. Now I see... I think. How do I do to form an expression for w then? Or get its limit.
 
Smusko said:
Ahhhhhh. Now I see... I think. How do I do to form an expression for w then? Or get its limit.

Well, you have renamed the variable z to w to t. You needn't have changed it in the first place, but never mind that. So whether you call it z or w or t, it goes from 0 to whatever you get when you solve the red equation for w or the original equation for z, expressed in terms of your final variables. As usual in triple integrals, z goes from the bottom surface to the top surface if you integrate it first.
 
  • #10
LCKurtz said:
Well, you have renamed the variable z to w to t. You needn't have changed it in the first place, but never mind that. So whether you call it z or w or t, it goes from 0 to whatever you get when you solve the red equation for w or the original equation for z, expressed in terms of your final variables. As usual in triple integrals, z goes from the bottom surface to the top surface if you integrate it first.

Of course. How stupid of me.

I think I have solved it now. I tried again with the new limit and failed, but then I noticed that I by mistake took the square of something that should not be squared. When I correct that mistake it should work out.

The source of error in these calculations are huge.

Thank you LCKurtz and coto for your help. :)
 

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K