Double Integrals with Polar Coordinates

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the volume of a solid bounded by the paraboloid defined by the equation z = 47 - 5x² - 5y² and the plane z = 2 using polar coordinates. The user correctly identifies the boundaries and sets up the double integral as ∫[0,2π]∫[0,3] (47 - 5(r²))r dr dθ. However, the user initially misinterprets the height of the solid, leading to an incorrect volume calculation of (441π)/2. The key correction is recognizing that the lower boundary is z = 2, not z = 0.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of polar coordinates and their application in double integrals
  • Familiarity with the concept of volume under surfaces
  • Knowledge of the paraboloid equation and its geometric interpretation
  • Proficiency in evaluating double integrals
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and application of polar coordinates in double integrals
  • Learn how to calculate volumes of solids bounded by surfaces using integration techniques
  • Explore the properties of paraboloids and their intersections with planes
  • Practice solving similar problems involving double integrals and different coordinate systems
USEFUL FOR

Students studying calculus, particularly those focusing on multivariable calculus and integration techniques, as well as educators seeking to clarify concepts related to volume calculations in three-dimensional space.

InertialRef
Messages
24
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Use polar coordinates to find the volume of the solid bounded by the paraboloid z = 47 - 5x2 - 5y2 and the plane z = 2.

Homework Equations



x2 + y2 = r2
x = rcosθ
y = rsinθ

The Attempt at a Solution



I substituted the z = 2 into the equation given,

2 = 47 - 5x2 - 5y2
45 = 5x2 + 5y2
9 = x2 + y2

So from here, I know that r = 3, and 0<r<3.
Since it's a circle, I know that 0<θ<2∏

Then, I know that x2 + y2 = r2, so,

z = 47 - 5(x2+y2)
= 47 - 5(r2)

∫[0,2∏]∫[0,3] (47 - 5(r2))rdrdθ

When I take the double integral, I get (441∏)/2. This is incorrect. It seems like a very simple question, and my math looks correct. Have I made a conceptual mistake somewhere?

Thanks for any help! :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The height of the solid object is not the function value, as your lower border is z=2 instead of z=0.
 
Ohhh. Yes, that makes sense. Thank you so much! :)
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K