Geometrical Center: Proving if Area-Centers Lie on X-Y Origin

  • Thread starter Thread starter navalstudent
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Center
AI Thread Summary
In a discussion about the geometrical center of a symmetric three-dimensional object, it is established that if the object is symmetric about the x-z axis, the area-center of each slice in the x-y plane will indeed lie at the origin. This conclusion is supported by the centroid calculations, which show that the integrals for the x and y coordinates yield zero due to symmetry. The conversation also clarifies the terminology, confirming that the "x-z axis" refers to the x-z plane. The mathematical proofs provided reinforce the understanding that the centroid remains at the origin for each cross-section. Overall, the symmetry of the object ensures that the area-centers align with the x-y origin.
navalstudent
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hey, this is actually a question arising from physics, but it is actually only mathematical.

Let's say you have a 3 dimensional object, with the origin in the volume-center.

-the object is symmetric about the x-z axis

-If we look at slices in the x-y-plane(z=constant). Will then the area-center of each slice be in the x-y origin?

If this is true then my engineering text-books makes sense. If not, I need to ask the professors about something. Can you guys help me?

It would be cool if one could prove this. I

PS: If the above is not true, can it be true that the area-center allways will lie along the y-axis of each slice?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What do you mean by "x-z axis"? I know the x-axis and the z-axis but I do not recognize an "x-z axis". Or do you mean xz plane?

The concept here is "centroid". The center, or "centroid", of a three dimensional figure has coordinates \left(\overline{x}, \overline{y}, \overline{z}\right) where
\overline{x}= \frac{\int\int\int x dxdydz}{\int\int\int dxdydz}
\overline{y}= \frac{\int\int\int y dxdydz}{\int\int\int dxdydz}
\overline{z}= \frac{\int\int\int z dxdydz}{\int\int\int dxdydz}

The denominator in each case is just the volume of the figure, which we can call "V".

If the figure is symmetrical about the z- axis, then we can think of it as a "volume of rotation" of some curve r= f(z) about the z. In that case, we can put the problem in cylindrical coordinates and the integrals become
\overline{x}= \frac{\int_{z=z_0}^z_1\int_{r= 0}^{r(z)} r cos(\theta) r drd\theta}{V}
\overline{y}= \frac{\int_{z=z_0}^z_1\int_{r= 0}^{r(z)} r sin(\theta) r drd\theta}{V}
\overline{x}= \frac{\int_{z=z_0}^z_1\int_{r= 0}^{r(z)} z r drd\theta}{V}

But now it is easy to see that the integral with respect to \theta
is
\int_{\theta= 0}^{2\pi} cos(\theta) d\theta= sin(\theta)\right|_0^{2\pi}= 0
and
\int_{\theta= 0}^{2\pi} sin(\theta) d\theta= cos(\theta)\right|_0^{2\pi}= 0

so that the centroid is, indeed, on the axis of symmetry.

For each cross section at a given z value, we would find the centroid in exactly the same way except that we would not do the "z" integral and the denominator of each fraction would be the area of the cross section. For a given z, the area is bounded by r= f(z) rotated around the origin so we would again have
\overline{x}= \frac{\int_{r= 0}^{f(z)}\int_{\theta= 0}^{2\pi} r cos(\theta)d\theta dr}{A(z)}
and
\overline{y}= \frac{\int_{r= 0}^{f(z)}\int_{\theta= 0}^{2\pi} r sin(\theta) d\theta dr}{A(z)}
where "A(z)" is the area of that particular cross section.

Again, the "\theta" integrals are 0 irrespective of the "r" integrals so the centoid of each cross section is again at (0, 0).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry I meant about the x-z plane not object symmetric about the z-axis. Is it still valid then?

Thanks for your reply!
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Back
Top