Moments of Inertia by Integration

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the calculation of Moments of Inertia (MOI) using direct integration methods. The participants clarify the definitions of the formulas for MOI, specifically $$ I_x = \int y^2 dA $$ and $$ I_y = \int x^2 dA $$, and the alternative formulation $$ dI_x = \frac{1}{3} y^3 dx $$, which simplifies calculations in certain scenarios. The conversation emphasizes that while the first method is more general, the second can be advantageous when integrating over vertical strips. Participants also discuss the importance of understanding the use of $$dA$$ in the context of the original definition.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of calculus, specifically integration techniques.
  • Familiarity with the concept of Moments of Inertia in physics.
  • Knowledge of geometric shapes and their properties.
  • Experience with LaTeX for mathematical notation.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of Moments of Inertia for various geometric shapes.
  • Learn how to apply the integration method for calculating $$I_x$$ and $$I_y$$ using different coordinate systems.
  • Explore the use of $$dA$$ in integration and its implications in physics problems.
  • Practice solving MOI problems using both the original definition and alternative formulations.
USEFUL FOR

Students in physics or engineering courses, educators teaching mechanics, and anyone interested in mastering the calculation of Moments of Inertia through integration methods.

CivilSigma
Messages
227
Reaction score
58

Homework Statement


I am having trouble understanding the formula for Moments Of Inertia by direct integration.

Homework Equations


I understand the following (which is the definition) :

$$ I_x = \int y^2 dA $$ $$I_y = \int x^2 dA $$

However come to application on a problem, my book doesn't even use those formulas.

The authors derived a new formula:

$$ dI_x =\frac{1}{3} y^3 dx $$ $$I_x = \int dI_x$$

Here is a screen shot of what they did:

http://tinypic.com/r/2vjr5vq/8

Why do they do that? Why not just use the definition and solve?

The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
The first formula for ##I_x## is a summation over horizontal strips between ##y## and ##y+dy##. The integration is over ##y## so in the integrand ##y## is the integration variable. The strips are not assumed to be all the same width, so the shape being integrated need not be a rectangle, and need not touch the ##x## axis.

The second formula for ##I_x## is a summation over vertical strips between ##x## and ##x+dx##. The integration is over ##x##. In the integrand ##y## represents the height of the top of the vertical strip above the ##x## axis. It assumes that the base of the strip is the ##x## axis.

The second formula is derived from the first, by using the formula for MOI of a vertical rectangle that was just derived.

The alternative formulation is provided because sometimes it will be easier to integrate over ##x## than over ##y##. In any given situation, one can choose the method that gives the easiest calculation. Note however that the first method is more general, as the second can only be used when the base of the shape is flat and runs along the ##x## axis, and the shape has no parts that project sideways beyond the base.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: CivilSigma
Thank you for the reply andrewkirk!

I have to understand the use of $dI_x$ in the formula because we are summing up the moments of inertia of all the rectangles.

So, I'm just curious, how would I go about solving problems given the original (definition) equation for moments inertia?
 
sakonpure6 said:
how would I go about solving problems given the original (definition) equation for moments inertia?
You use the first formula you've written above, and you replace ##dA## by ##w(y)dy## where ##w(y)## is the width of the shape at height ##y##.
 
For both $I_x$ and $I_y$ ?
 
No, just for ##I_x##. To do ##I_y## you swap ##x## and ##y## in all formulas.

By the way, the code to get in-line latex math symbols on physicsforums is two consecutive # characters, not a single $. That's an annoying difference with Texmaker, which is what I use elsewhere.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: CivilSigma
Thank you Andre! I'll try some problems and hopefully I get them right.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K