Finding the volume - Polar coordinates

In summary, the conversation discusses how to find the volume of a region bounded by a cylinder and a paraboloid surface. The first attempt suggests converting the equations to polar coordinates and setting up a double integral, but the solution presented uses a different approach. The conversation ends with a clarification that the region also needs to be limited by the paraboloid surface.
  • #1
Dilemma
15
1
Hello everyone,

1. Homework Statement

Question : Find the volume of the region which remains inside the cyclinder x 2 + y 2 = 2y, and is bounded from above by the paraboloid surface x 2 + y 2 + z = 1 and from below by the plane z = 0

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



This looks like a pretty straightforward question. First thing to do is converting equations to polar coordinates. When they are converted, the cylinder's region can be written as r = 2sinθ. Parabolaid surface's eq. is (1-r2).Through these, a double integral can easily be set up as the following:

∫(from 0 to π)∫from 0 to 2sinθ) (1-r2)rdrdθ.

However, the solution to this problem proposes a different approach which does not return the same answer.

Here it is:
Mm1ZSoV.png


Thanks in advance,
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Dilemma said:
Hello everyone,Question : Find the volume of the region which remains inside the cyclinder x 2 + y 2 = 2y, and is bounded from above by the paraboloid surface x 2 + y 2 + z = 1 and from below by the plane z = 0

Attempt : This looks like a pretty straightforward question. First thing to do is converting equations to polar coordinates. When they are converted, the cylinder's region can be written as r = 2sinθ
No.
If you convert the cylinder's equation to polar coordinates, you get ##r^2 = 2r\sin(\theta)##, which is different from what you show.
Dilemma said:
. Parabolaid surface's eq. is (1-r2).
What you show here is not an equation. What equation do you get?
Dilemma said:
Through these, a double integral can easily be set up as the following:

∫(from 0 to π)∫from 0 to 2sinθ) (1-r2)rdrdθ.

However, the solution to this problem proposes a different approach which does not return the same answer.

Here it is:
Mm1ZSoV.png


Thanks in advance,
 
  • #3
Hello Mark,

I am sorry for the inconvenience I caused.

Mark44 said:
No.
If you convert the cylinder's equation to polar coordinates, you get ##r^2 = 2r\sin(\theta)##, which is different from what you show.
What you show here is not an equation. What equation do you get?

I simplified ##r^2 = 2r\sin(\theta)##.

Then, I converted parabolaid's surface equation.

##z = 1 - x^{2}-y^{2}##
##z = 1 - r^{2}##​
 
  • #4
Dilemma said:
Hello Mark,

I am sorry for the inconvenience I caused.
No problem. That's what we're here for.
Dilemma said:
I simplified ##r^2 = 2r\sin(\theta)##.

Then, I converted parabolaid's surface equation.

##z = 1 - x^{2}-y^{2}##
##z = 1 - r^{2}##​
You should get a different result from these equations.
 
  • #5
Here is my reasoning :

By polar coordinates definition ##x = r\cos(\theta)## and ##y = r\sin(\theta)##. Therefore, ##x^{2}+y^{2} = r^{2}## I do not see any problem. Also, the answer confirms my logic. The only problem is that the answer divides the integral into two, one of them is from 0 to ##\pi/6##, and the other is from ##\pi/6## to ##\pi/2##. However, second part of the integral's "r" range is 0 to 1, and I am having difficult times understanding this. My coursebook has a similar question solved in a similar manner as mine.
 
  • #6
You know, I feel like you're missing an extra integral sign. Shouldn't you use cylindrical coordinates, or something?
 
  • #7
Dilemma said:
Here is my reasoning :

By polar coordinates definition ##x = r\cos(\theta)## and ##y = r\sin(\theta)##. Therefore, ##x^{2}+y^{2} = r^{2}## I do not see any problem. Also, the answer confirms my logic. The only problem is that the answer divides the integral into two, one of them is from 0 to ##\pi/6##, and the other is from ##\pi/6## to ##\pi/2##. However, second part of the integral's "r" range is 0 to 1, and I am having difficult times understanding this. My coursebook has a similar question solved in a similar manner as mine.

Look at the first quadrant in this picture, which shows the circle traces in the ##xy## plane:
upload_2017-1-2_11-46-6.png

The brown region is the polar area over which you need to integrate. The ##30^\circ## line divides the area into two parts. In the lower sliver under the line ##r## goes from ##0## to the pink circle. Above the line ##r## goes from ##0## to the brown circle.
 
  • Like
Likes Dilemma
  • #8
Thank you. I now understand that I did not consider the region which is limited by the surface x 2 + y 2 + z = 1.
 

FAQ: Finding the volume - Polar coordinates

1. What are polar coordinates and how are they different from Cartesian coordinates?

Polar coordinates are a two-dimensional coordinate system used to locate points on a plane. They are different from Cartesian coordinates because they use a distance from the origin and an angle from a reference line to describe a point, rather than using x and y coordinates.

2. How do you find the volume of a shape using polar coordinates?

To find the volume of a shape using polar coordinates, you first need to convert the polar coordinates to Cartesian coordinates. Then, you can use the standard formula for finding volume in Cartesian coordinates: V = ∫∫∫ f(x,y,z) dV. This integral will be in terms of r and θ, which you can substitute back in to find the final volume in terms of polar coordinates.

3. What is the formula for converting polar coordinates to Cartesian coordinates?

The formula for converting polar coordinates (r, θ) to Cartesian coordinates (x, y) is x = r*cos(θ) and y = r*sin(θ). This is derived from the relationship between polar and Cartesian coordinates, where r represents the distance from the origin and θ represents the angle from the reference line.

4. Can you find the volume of any shape using polar coordinates?

Yes, you can find the volume of any shape using polar coordinates as long as you can express the shape in terms of a polar equation. This means that the shape can be described using r and θ, rather than x and y coordinates.

5. Are there any advantages to using polar coordinates over Cartesian coordinates when finding volume?

There are a few advantages to using polar coordinates when finding volume. One advantage is that certain shapes, such as cylinders and cones, have simpler equations in polar coordinates, making the integration process easier. Additionally, if a shape has rotational symmetry, finding the volume using polar coordinates can be more efficient and accurate compared to using Cartesian coordinates.

Back
Top