Compensation factor for converting dy dx to cylindrical coordinates?

In summary, the region R can be found by integrating the area of the region R' using the Jacobian determinant.
  • #1
WK95
139
1

Homework Statement


What is the compensation factor for converting dy dx to cylindrical coordinates?

Homework Equations


None that I know of besides the bottom ones as part of the attempt

The Attempt at a Solution


So I know that the conversion formulas for going from Cartesian (x,y,z) coordinates to Cylindrical (r, θ, z) coordinates are as follows.
##x^2 + y^2 = r^2##
##x = r cos(θ)##
##y = r sin(θ)##
##z = z##
"When evaluating an integral, the integrating factors have a slightly different formula." - My professor regarding these formulas at the above question.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Don't forget your jacobian.
 
  • #3
Zondrina said:
Don't forget your jacobian.
Since my class pretty much rests on the idea of giving us stuff we haven't really covered, I don't know how to use a Jacobian. Be right back, researching that.
 
  • #4
WK95 said:
Since my class pretty much rests on the idea of giving us stuff we haven't really covered, I don't know how to use a Jacobian. Be right back, researching that.

You accidentally posted another thread I see. What is it you don't understand? I've already told you what you were missing.

This should help you : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobian
 
  • #5
Zondrina said:
You accidentally posted another thread I see. What is it you don't understand? I've already told you what you were missing.

This should help you : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobian

Thanks. I know how to find the Jacobian Determinant now, even the 3D ones. But I still don't know how to apply them to this problem to find a compensation factor.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
What is a compensation factor? I've never heard this in connection with integrals.

You find the area element in arbitrary coordinates [itex](q^1,q^2)[/itex] by using the Jacobian determinant, because this gives the area of the surface elements spanned by the coordinate lines,
[tex]d^2 \vec{x}=\mathrm{det} \frac{\partial (x^1,x^2)}{\partial (q^1,q^2)} \mathrm{d}x^1 \mathrm{d} x^2,[/tex]
where
[tex]\frac{\partial (x^1,x^2)}{\partial (q^1,q^2)} = \begin{pmatrix}
\partial x^1/\partial q^1 & \partial x^1/\partial q^2\\
\partial x^2/\partial q^1 & \partial x^2/\partial q^2
\end{pmatrix}
[/tex]
For polar coordinates you can even read it off from the geometry of the coordinate lines which are radial straight lines and circles around the origin. Obviously this gives immediately
[tex]\mathrm{d^2} \vec{x}=\mathrm{d}r \mathrm{d} \varphi r,[/tex]
which you can easily check using the Jacobian.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #7
One way to approach this problem is purely "geometric": Imagine two points with coordinates [itex](rcos(\theta), r(sin(theta), z)[/itex] and [itex]((r+dr)cos(\theta+ d\theta), (r+ dr)sin(\theta+ d\theta), z+dz)[/itex]. Drawing the appropriate "coordinate lines" (lines from (0, 0, z) to [itex](rcos(\theta), r(sin(theta), z)[/itex], [itex](rcos(\theta), r(sin(theta), z+dz)[/itex], [itex]((r+ dr)cos(\theta+d\theta), (r+dr)sin(theta+d\theta), z+dz)[/itex], the cylinders at r and r+ dr, we have a curved figure that is almost a rectangular solid. The "height" is dz, the "width" is dr and the smaller "length" (the curved sides) is [itex]rd\theta[/itex] (the larger is (r+ dr)d\theta). The difference between those two lengths won't matter in the limit so we can take as the volume the product of those: [itex](dz)(dr)(r+ dr)d\theta= rdrd\theta dz+ (dr)^2d\theta dz[/itex]. As those all go to 0, the term with [itex]dr^2[/itex] will go to 0 faster than the first term so in the limit we have [itex]rdrd\theta dz[/itex].

(Of course, since "cylindrical coordinates" is just "polar coordinates" with z added, the differential of volume is just the differential of area in polar coorrdinates, [itex]rdrd\theta[/itex] with "dz" multiplied.)
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #8
I'm assuming what your professor is trying to show you is this :

##\int \int \int_R f(x,y,z) dxdydz = \int \int \int_{R'} f(r, \theta, z) |J| drdθdz##

This equivalence is actually based off a much simpler relationship. Try convincing yourself of this first ( and then after convincing yourself, you will be able to show a much more general case and then even extend it to higher dimensions yourself ). This method is a good way to understand this, but if you don't know about curves and such it might not be the best.

Suppose that ##R## and ##R'## are bounded, connected regions such that Green's Theorem holds. Then :

Area of a region R = ##\int \int_R 1dxdy = \int \int_{R'} |J|dudv## where |J| is the Jacobian.

How do we show this?

Suppose the boundary of ##R## is a smooth curve ##C## given by ##P(t) = (x(t), y(t))## for ##t \in [a,b]## such that :

##\int_C x(t) dy = \int \int_R 1dxdy##

Now, take the boundary of ##R'## to be another smooth curve ##C'## oriented so that the transformation ##u = h(x,y), v = k(x,y)##
maps ##C → C'##.

Then we have ( Note I'm using the chain rule here and the subscripts for the functions are the derivatives of that function with respect to that variable ) :

##\int_C xdy = \int_{a}^{b} x(t)y'(t) dt = \int_{a}^{b} f(u,v) \frac{∂}{∂t} (g(u,v)) dt = \int_{C'} f(u,v) g_u(u,v) du + f(u,v) g_v(u,v) dv##

Continuing ( I'll drop the (u,v)'s for the functions to make this easier to read ) :

##\int_{C'} fg_u du + fg_v dv = ± \int \int_{R'} \frac{∂}{∂u}(fg_v) - \frac{∂}{∂v} (fg_u) dudv = ± \int \int_{R'} f_ug_v - f_vg_u dudv = ± \int \int_{R'} J dudv = \int \int_{R'} |J| dudv ##

Hence the result is shown. Now using this result, you can show how to compute the area for any general function in any dimension.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #9
HallsofIvy said:
One way to approach this problem is purely "geometric": Imagine two points with coordinates [itex](rcos(\theta), r(sin(theta), z)[/itex] and [itex]((r+dr)cos(\theta+ d\theta), (r+ dr)sin(\theta+ d\theta), z+dz)[/itex]. Drawing the appropriate "coordinate lines" (lines from (0, 0, z) to [itex](rcos(\theta), r(sin(theta), z)[/itex], [itex](rcos(\theta), r(sin(theta), z+dz)[/itex], [itex]((r+ dr)cos(\theta+d\theta), (r+dr)sin(theta+d\theta), z+dz)[/itex], the cylinders at r and r+ dr, we have a curved figure that is almost a rectangular solid. The "height" is dz, the "width" is dr and the smaller "length" (the curved sides) is [itex]rd\theta[/itex] (the larger is (r+ dr)d\theta). The difference between those two lengths won't matter in the limit so we can take as the volume the product of those: [itex](dz)(dr)(r+ dr)d\theta= rdrd\theta dz+ (dr)^2d\theta dz[/itex]. As those all go to 0, the term with [itex]dr^2[/itex] will go to 0 faster than the first term so in the limit we have [itex]rdrd\theta dz[/itex].

(Of course, since "cylindrical coordinates" is just "polar coordinates" with z added, the differential of volume is just the differential of area in polar coorrdinates, [itex]rdrd\theta[/itex] with "dz" multiplied.)

Thanks. I just looked through your post and it looks like I got the answer right.
 

1. What is the purpose of the compensation factor in converting dy dx to cylindrical coordinates?

The compensation factor is used to account for the difference in distance units between rectangular coordinates (dy dx) and cylindrical coordinates (dr dθ). This allows for accurate conversion between the two coordinate systems.

2. How is the compensation factor calculated?

The compensation factor is calculated by taking the square root of the sum of the squares of the coefficients of the two coordinate systems. In the case of converting dy dx to cylindrical coordinates, the compensation factor is equal to √(1 + (dy/dx)^2).

3. Does the compensation factor change for different coordinate systems?

Yes, the compensation factor will change depending on the specific coordinate systems being used. It is important to use the correct compensation factor for accurate conversion between coordinate systems.

4. What is the significance of the compensation factor in physics and engineering?

The compensation factor is important in physics and engineering as it allows for precise conversion between different coordinate systems, which is often necessary for solving complex mathematical problems and accurately describing physical phenomena.

5. Can the compensation factor be negative?

No, the compensation factor cannot be negative. It is always a positive value, as it is calculated by taking the square root of a sum of squares, which will always result in a positive value.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
897
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
924
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
953
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
657
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
17
Views
4K
Back
Top