Moment of Inertia for a Filled Sphere

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the moment of inertia for a filled sphere, specifically addressing the discrepancy between the expected coefficient of 2/5 and the participant's result of 3/5. The participant attempts to solve the problem using single-variable calculus, but it is established that multivariable calculus is necessary to accurately account for the perpendicular distance from the axis of rotation to the mass element. The conversation emphasizes the importance of careful arithmetic and notation in the derivation process.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of moment of inertia concepts
  • Familiarity with single-variable calculus
  • Basic knowledge of multivariable calculus
  • Ability to interpret mathematical notation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of moment of inertia for various shapes
  • Learn about the application of multivariable calculus in physics
  • Review the principles of integration in relation to mass distribution
  • Explore common errors in calculus derivations and how to avoid them
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics and mathematics, particularly those interested in mechanics and calculus, as well as educators looking for clarification on teaching moment of inertia concepts.

wil3
Messages
177
Reaction score
1
Hello. I am attempting to derive the equation for the moment of inertia of a filled sphere. I do not how how to do the proper notation by typing, so I have attached a scan of my work(I apologize if opening the attachment is inconvenient)

I keep getting the correct order final equation, but my coefficient is 3/5 instead of 2/5. I am trying to do this using only single-variable calculus, so please do not use double integrals, etc unless you think they can be explained to a high schooler. If it is actually impossible to solve this problem using only one-variable integration, please tell me so and explain why. Thank you very much.
 

Attachments

  • Filled_Sphere.jpg
    Filled_Sphere.jpg
    10.7 KB · Views: 446
Physics news on Phys.org
Your note is very hard to read. However from past observations of questions like yours, it usually boils down to a simple error in arithmetic that has been overlooked. I suggest you go over your work carefully, line by line.
 
The problem is that the "r" in your moment of inertia definition represents the perpendicular distance from the axis of rotation to the mass element "dm". This is not the same thing as the distance from the origin. You really need to use multivariable calculus to account for this.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
4K