Volume Between Two Surfaces Defined by Boundary Values

  • Thread starter Thread starter Inertigratus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Boundary Integral
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
5 replies · 1K views
Inertigratus
Messages
123
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Find the volume between z = x2 + y2 and z = 2 - (x2 + y2).


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


if r2 = x2 + y2
then the lower part of the volume is defined by:
r2 [itex]\leq[/itex] z [itex]\leq[/itex] 2 - r2
and: 0 [itex]\leq[/itex] r [itex]\leq[/itex] 1
the upper part by:
2 - r2 [itex]\leq[/itex] z [itex]\leq[/itex] r2
and: 1 [itex]\leq[/itex] r [itex]\leq[/itex] [itex]\sqrt{2}[/itex]

[itex]\int\int\int[/itex]1 dxdydz, after switching to polar coordinates I get
[itex]\int\int\int[/itex]r drd[itex]\Theta[/itex]dz

Theta varies from 0 to 2 pi. That leaves me with taking the integral with respect to r and z.
I do it for z first, then finally for r. Then add the two volumes. But it's wrong.

Any ideas?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
those 2 curves intersect at x=1 and the plane z=1 , I would break it up into 2 parts and go from z=1 to the top of the paraboloid and then do the second part from the bottom paraboloid to the plane z=1 , because if you don't do that your radius is not always going to the same thing. Actually now that I look at it you kinda did that.
 
Hi Inertigratus! :smile:

(have a square-root: √ and a pi: π and a ≤ :wink:)
Inertigratus said:
Find the volume between z = x2 + y2 and z = 2 - (x2 + y2).

… the lower part of the volume is defined by:
r2 [itex]\leq[/itex] z [itex]\leq[/itex] 2 - r2
and: 0 [itex]\leq[/itex] r [itex]\leq[/itex] 1

nooo :redface:, that's the whole of the volume :wink:
 
Hehe, now you got me confused... :P
It's the whole volume?
I split it, because when r = 1, then 1 ≤ z ≤ 1, if you go up to r = √(2) then 2 ≤ z ≤ 0, which looks a bit weird since 0 is not greater than 2...
So lower part from 0 ≤ r ≤ 1, upper part from 1 ≤ r ≤ √(2)
Is that wrong? :P
 
I guess the question is: what do you mean by the "lower part"? What you have, [itex]2- r^2\le z\le r^2[/itex], is incorrect because the paraboloid [itex]z= 2- r^2[/itex] is above the parabolid [itex]z= r^2[/itex].
 
It's confusing...
Because, I know that when r = 0, then 2−r2 is obviously larger than r2.
What's confusing me is that when r is increasing, and reaches r2 = 2, then the inequality doesn't make any sense. 2 ≤ z ≤ 0 makes no sense.
So I was thinking as I said in my first post, that I would have to split it into volumes.
Above z = 1 and below z = 1.