MoI of a Solid Sphere Derivation

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the moment of inertia (MoI) for a solid sphere, with a focus on an approach involving the decomposition of the sphere into infinitesimally thin discs. The original poster attempts to apply integration techniques to derive the MoI but encounters a logical flaw in their reasoning.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster describes their method of using discs to calculate the MoI and identifies a potential error in assuming a constant radius for the discs. They seek clarification on where their logic may be flawed and whether their method can be adjusted.

Discussion Status

Participants have provided feedback on the original poster's approach, highlighting the need to consider the varying radius of the discs in the calculation. Some suggest using the formula for the moment of inertia of a disc and integrating that instead, while others mention that using vertical cylindrical shells might be a simpler method. The discussion is ongoing, with multiple interpretations and suggestions being explored.

Contextual Notes

The original poster expresses a desire to understand their mistake without abandoning their approach entirely, indicating a willingness to learn from the feedback provided. There is an emphasis on understanding the underlying principles rather than simply obtaining a solution.

alex3
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
I'm aware of many, many solutions to this on the web (and on the forum) that I can follow, but I'm trying a different way (there are many, after all) and I can't figure out why it's not working, and I'd love to know where my logic is flawed.

I have a solid sphere, and I'm splitting it up into infinitely many discs. Taking a table top, the surface is my x-y plane, and up and down (wrt gravity) is my z-axis. I'm using \theta as the angle from the x-y plane to the z-axis, -\frac{\pi}{2} \leq \theta \leq \frac{\pi}{2}.

a is the radius of the sphere, r is the radius of a disc. Then, the thickness of my disc, an angle \theta above the x-y plane, is a\operatorname{d}\theta. The radius of the disc is a \cos{\theta}. Then, the volume of the disc is a^2\pi\cos^2{\theta}\operatorname{d}\theta (the cross-sectional area times the thickness \pi r^2 \operatorname{d}\theta).

The equation for the MoI of a continuous solid is

I = \int r^2 \operatorname{d}m

And here, our \operatorname{d}m is \rho \operatorname{d}V, where \rho is the density of the sphere, and \operatorname{d}V is as defined above. As r = a\cos{\theta}, we get

I = a^5 \rho \pi \int_\frac{-\pi}{2}^\frac{\pi}{2} \cos^4{\theta} \operatorname{d}\theta

The integral evaluates to

\frac{3\pi}{8}

giving

I = \frac{3\pi^2}{8} a^5 \rho

And we know

\rho = \frac{m}{V} = \frac{m}{\frac{4}{3}\pi r^3}

We get the result

I = \frac{9\pi}{32} m a^2

Which is wrong. Obviously there's a flaw, where is it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hi alex3! :smile:

you went wrong after …
alex3 said:
The equation for the MoI of a continuous solid is …

… you're assuming a constant r, but the r for your disc varies across the disc, doesn't it? :wink:

(using vertical cylinders instead of horizontal discs would work :smile:)
 
Aha! The distance from the axis changes along the disc, of course, thank you. Is there a simple (ish) fix that can be applied to my method to compensate for my mistake, of is it best for me to learn another tried-and-tested derivation?
 
I have many doubts about what I read in you post.

You can sum the pile of disks, ok.
But you have to sum the MoI of the single disk, not it's volume.
 
alex3 said:
Aha! The distance from the axis changes along the disc, of course, thank you. Is there a simple (ish) fix that can be applied to my method to compensate for my mistake, of is it best for me to learn another tried-and-tested derivation?

you can use (or prove) the formula for the moment of inertia of a disc, and then integrate that :wink:

(but vertical cylindrical shells is easiest)
 
Brilliant. You've all been very helpful indeed, improved my basic understanding of MoIs no end, thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 63 ·
3
Replies
63
Views
5K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K