Moment of inertia of a solid sphere derivation.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The derivation of the moment of inertia for a solid sphere involves integrating the mass distribution of the sphere. The correct formula is I = (2/5)MR², where M is the mass and R is the radius of the sphere. The discussion highlights common mistakes, such as confusing the radius of the shell with the distance from the axis of rotation. A successful approach involves using infinitesimally thin disks and integrating their contributions to the moment of inertia.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of moment of inertia concepts
  • Familiarity with calculus, specifically integration techniques
  • Knowledge of spherical coordinates and their application in physics
  • Basic principles of mass distribution in three-dimensional objects
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of moment of inertia for different shapes, such as cylinders and disks
  • Learn about the application of integration in physics, particularly in calculating moments of inertia
  • Explore the use of spherical coordinates in physics problems
  • Investigate the relationship between mass density and moment of inertia in various geometries
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, mechanical engineering, and applied mathematics who are interested in understanding the principles of rotational dynamics and moment of inertia calculations.

physicsod
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hello! I'm trying to derive the formula for the moment of inertia of a solid sphere, and I keep running into a strange solution.

I set up the infinitesimally mass of an infinitesimally thin "shell" of the sphere:

dm = 4\rho\pir2 dr

And then solved for the moment of inertia:

I = \intr2dm

= \intr2(4\rho\pir2 dr)

= 4\rho\pi\intr4 dr

= (4/5)\rho\pir5

And solving for \rho we get the following:

\rho = M/((4/3)\pir3).

Substituting that into the previously solved equation for I, I get the following:

I = (3/5)Mr3.

What am I doing wrong? I know the formula involves a coefficient of 2/5, not 3/5, but I can't find my problem.

Thank you in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
oops bad idea, think about adding lots of thin disks together

so dI=(1/2)(r^2)dm=(1/2)(r^2)(rho)dV=1/2(r^4)(rho)(pi)dh

then integrate from -R to R, and sub (r^4) as (R^2-h^2)^2
 
Last edited:
One problem is that you have two different r's in there. The r in dm is the spherical distance of the shell from the origin. The r in the r^2 of the I calculation is supposed to be the distance from the axis of rotation. Revisit finding I for the shell. You'll need to split the shell up into rings.
 
@6.283...: Well if you integrate both sides of the original equation, you get m = (4/3)*(pi)*(r^3)*(rho), so the volume part is correct I think...

@Dick: Oh, so I treat the first r (let's call the second one R) as a constant in the first line for evaluating the integral? So I just bring out "r" and integrate R^2 dR?
 
physicsod said:
@6.283...: Well if you integrate both sides of the original equation, you get m = (4/3)*(pi)*(r^3)*(rho), so the volume part is correct I think...

@Dick: Oh, so I treat the first r (let's call the second one R) as a constant in the first line for evaluating the integral? So I just bring out "r" and integrate R^2 dR?

Something like that, yes. One r is the radius of the shell. The other r depends on an angle variable.
 
yeah haha I think the disk idea is better..I can't type very fast atm, you don't need any angles
 
Still not sure exactly how to relate R to r. Is it like, r is the distance from the origin of the shell, and R is the radius of the infinitesimally small disk? Can anybody tell me where to go from my mistake above?
 
The r that you want to calculate should be the distance from the axis of rotation.

Let's say that the axis of ration is the z-axis. Using spherical coordinates, what is the distance from the z-axis in terms of r?
 
Wait okay, I think I got it. So, instead of involving spherical coordinates, I just let the radius of the sphere be R, and the distance to the infinitesimally thin disk be z, and then the radius of the disk, y, would be sqrt(R^2 - z^2), and so you integrate [(1/2)*(rho)*(pi)*(y^4) dz] since you're just using the inertia of a disk, right?

Substitute for y, remove the constants and you get I = (1/2)*(rho)*(pi) * (integral<-R, R> of [R^2 - z^2]^2 dz). If you integrate that, you get I = (8/15)*(rho)*(pi)*(R^5). I think that works, because then you substitute in (rho), and you get I = (2/5)MR^2.

Did I get lucky, or is that one way to do it? I don't particularly like spherical coordinates, so I try and avoid them whenever possible. :)
 
  • #10
physicsod said:
Wait okay, I think I got it. So, instead of involving spherical coordinates, I just let the radius of the sphere be R, and the distance to the infinitesimally thin disk be z, and then the radius of the disk, y, would be sqrt(R^2 - z^2), and so you integrate [(1/2)*(rho)*(pi)*(y^4) dz] since you're just using the inertia of a disk, right?

Substitute for y, remove the constants and you get I = (1/2)*(rho)*(pi) * (integral<-R, R> of [R^2 - z^2]^2 dz). If you integrate that, you get I = (8/15)*(rho)*(pi)*(R^5). I think that works, because then you substitute in (rho), and you get I = (2/5)MR^2.

Did I get lucky, or is that one way to do it? I don't particularly like spherical coordinates, so I try and avoid them whenever possible. :)

I think that's ok. If you want to it completely in spherical coordinates, the distance to the z axis where the polar angular coordinate, phi, goes from 0 at one pole to pi at the other pole is r*sin(phi). So you want to integrate (r*sin(phi))^2 times the spherical volume element r^2*sin(phi)*d(phi)*d(theta)*dr. If you integrate r from 0 to R. phi from 0 to pi and theta from 0 to 2*pi, you get (8/15)*pi*R^5. You can not like spherical coordinates, but they do work all the same.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K