Trouble with minimum surface area for a cylinder

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the minimum surface area of a cylinder, represented by the equation A = 2*PI*r^2 + 2*PI*r*h, under the constraint of a fixed volume V. The correct approach involves substituting the volume equation V = PI*r^2*h into the surface area equation, leading to A = 2*PI*r^2 + 2V/r. By taking the derivative and setting it to zero, the relationship h = 2r is established. The confusion arises from the misconception of treating height h as a constant while differentiating, which is incorrect since both r and h are interdependent variables.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of calculus, specifically differentiation
  • Familiarity with geometric formulas for cylinders
  • Knowledge of volume and surface area relationships
  • Basic algebra for manipulating equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the method of Lagrange multipliers for constrained optimization
  • Learn about implicit differentiation and its applications
  • Explore geometric properties of cylinders in greater detail
  • Investigate real-world applications of minimizing surface area in engineering
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, engineering, and physics who are interested in optimization problems and geometric analysis.

rela
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Dear all,

I was reading through my notes and I was kinda like stumbled in the way the minimum surface area of a cylinder has been derived.

First,

A= 2*PI*r^2 + 2*PI*r*h

and given the condition that the volume has been fixed, the resulting area equation becomes

A= 2*PI*r^2 + 2V/r since V = PI*r^2*h

Taking the first derivative of A,

A' = 4*PI*r - 2V/r^2

Letting A' = 0 and solving for h will give us h = 2r.

Everything seems nice and well defined. However, I have some confusion in my head.

In the first place why can't we take the derivative of the first area equation directly (A= 2*PI*r^2 + 2*PI*r*h) and fixing h to be like a constant? I tried doing it and i got h = -2r? The negative sign simply indicates that it's not right.. I'm puzzled..?

And also,since volume is also a function of both 'r' and 'h', it doesn't really make sense to fix volume as a constant. I just find it weird. I mean we can fix 'h' for the volume but 'r' is still in it which in fact causes the volume to vary still. So how in the first place can we fix the volume with 'r', a variable being in it the first plcae?

Gosh, Hope I'm sounding right. I look foward to valuable inputs from all of you.

Thanks
Rela
 
Physics news on Phys.org
rela said:
In the first place why can't we take the derivative of the first area equation directly (A= 2*PI*r^2 + 2*PI*r*h) and fixing h to be like a constant? I tried doing it and i got h = -2r? The negative sign simply indicates that it's not right.. I'm puzzled..?

Because you have to vary r and h at the same time (because they're connected - increase one, it automatically decreases the other).

But you can't differentiate with respect to both, so you eliminate one of them (either h or r - try it with r instead, just for practice!) by expressing in terms of the other and V.

Since V is a constant, you now have only one variable, and you can go ahead.

And also,since volume is also a function of both 'r' and 'h', it doesn't really make sense to fix volume as a constant. I just find it weird. I mean we can fix 'h' for the volume but 'r' is still in it which in fact causes the volume to vary still. So how in the first place can we fix the volume with 'r', a variable being in it the first plcae?

As a matter of "natural justice", yes, there's nothing to choose between r h and V - they're all variables.

But we can make anything a constant - in this example, we've chosen V.

Unfair? Maybe. But it's just maths … :smile:
 
Blast, another person who is giving excellent responses before I get to them!

I particularly like the "natural justice"!
 
Relativistic Momentum, Mass, and Energy Momentum and mass (...), the classic equations for conserving momentum and energy are not adequate for the analysis of high-speed collisions. (...) The momentum of a particle moving with velocity ##v## is given by $$p=\cfrac{mv}{\sqrt{1-(v^2/c^2)}}\qquad{R-10}$$ ENERGY In relativistic mechanics, as in classic mechanics, the net force on a particle is equal to the time rate of change of the momentum of the particle. Considering one-dimensional...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K