Volume by Cylindrical Shells using Method of Shells

  • Thread starter Thread starter tony873004
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Shell Volume
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the volume generated by rotating the region bounded by the curve y=e^(-x^2), x=0, and x=1 about the y-axis using the method of cylindrical shells. Participants are exploring the setup and integration involved in this problem.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the setup of the integral for the volume, with some attempting to clarify the correct formula for cylindrical shells. There are questions about the integration of functions involving e^(-x^2) and the appropriate substitution methods. Some participants express confusion over the correct interpretation of the radius and height in the context of the problem.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on the integration process and the correct setup for the volume integral. There is acknowledgment of mistakes in the initial setup, particularly regarding the formula used for the volume of cylindrical shells. Multiple interpretations of the problem are being explored, and there is a recognition of the need to clarify limits of integration when changing variables.

Contextual Notes

Participants note constraints related to the integration process, including confusion over the limits of integration when switching variables and the implications of using different forms of the integral notation.

tony873004
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
1,753
Reaction score
143
I think I've got it set up correctly, but I'm stuck on the integration.

Use the method of cylindrical shells to find the volume generated by rotating the region bounded by y=e^(-x^2), x=0, x=1, rotated about the y axis.

[tex] \begin{array}{l}<br /> \int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {\pi r^2 h\,\,dx} = \int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {\pi x^2 e^{ - x^2 } \,\,dx} = \\ <br /> \\ <br /> \pi \int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {x^2 e^{ - x^2 } \,\,dx} \\ <br /> \end{array}[/tex]

I just don't know how to anti-deriv xe^(-x^2). I've tried substitution with u= -x2 with no joy. I'll bet this is easy, but it's got me stumped.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So if I understand correctly you rotate a Gaussian around the y-axis and want to know the volume enclosefd up to a distance 1 from the y-axis?

If that is the case I would reconsider the first integral you wrote down. keep in mind that you want to 'add' a lot of infinetesimally high cilinders (volume pi x^2 dy) and use the relation you have between x and y to change variables.

Good luck!

PS:
I just don't know how to anti-deriv xe^(-x^2).
how about -(1/2)e^(-x^2)...
 
tony873004 said:
I think I've got it set up correctly, but I'm stuck on the integration.

Use the method of cylindrical shells to find the volume generated by rotating the region bounded by y=e^(-x^2), x=0, x=1, rotated about the y axis.

[tex] \begin{array}{l}<br /> \int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {\pi r^2 h\,\,dx} = \int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {\pi x^2 e^{ - x^2 } \,\,dx} = \\ <br /> \\ <br /> \pi \int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {x^2 e^{ - x^2 } \,\,dx} \\ <br /> \end{array}[/tex]

I just don't know how to anti-deriv xe^(-x^2). I've tried substitution with u= -x2 with no joy. I'll bet this is easy, but it's got me stumped.
First, [itex]xe^{-x^2}[/itex] is simple to integrate, as Wiemster says, but your problem is integrating [itex]x^2e^{-x^2}[/itex] which is whole different matter.

Your real problem is that your formula, [itex]\pi r^2h dx[/itex], is wrong. It can't possibly be a differential of volume- it has units of distance4! A cylindrical shell has volume [itex]2\pi r[/itex], the circumference around the shell, times h, times the thickness,dy= dx. In this case, the thickness is dr, the height is the y value, [itex]h= e^{-x^2}[/itex], and the radius is r= x.
That does, in fact, reduce to
[tex]\pi \int_0^1 xe^{-x^2}dx[/tex]
and the substitution [itex]u= x^2[/itex] works nicely.
 
tony873004 said:
I just don't know how to anti-deriv xe^(-x^2).

Wiemster said:
how about -(1/2)e^(-x^2)...

Sorry, I forgot to square x. I meant the anti-deriv of x^2*e^(-x^2).
 
radius = function; in this case e^(-x^2). But is it x*e^(-x^2) or e^(-x^2)?
h = dy or dx

If it's x*e^(-x^2), simple u substitution if it's the other it's just it's own derivative however you get ugly numbers.
 
Thanks, everyone. I got the answer (confirmed by the back of the book). But I had to use u=-x^2 instead of x^2, or I would have had to anti-deriv e^-u, which I don't know how to do. Can that be done?

My mistake, as Halls of Ivy pointed out was using pi r squared for circumference instead of 2pi r. oops... Last chapter we were using areas instead of shells. I guess I just got too used to using pi r squared.

[tex] \begin{array}{l}<br /> \int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {\left[ {{\rm{circumference}}} \right]\left[ {{\rm{height}}} \right]\left[ {{\rm{thickness}}} \right]} \\ <br /> \\ <br /> {\rm{circumference}} = 2\pi r,\,\,\,r = x \\ <br /> {\rm{height}} = e^{ - x^2 } \\ <br /> {\rm{thickness}} = \Delta x \\ <br /> \\ <br /> \int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {2\pi rh\,\,dx} = \int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {2\pi xe^{ - x^2 } \,\,dx} = \\ <br /> \\ <br /> 2\pi \int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {xe^{ - x^2 } \,\,dx} ,\,\,\,\,u = - x^2 ,\,\,\frac{{du}}{{dx}} = - 2x,\,\,dx = \frac{{du}}{{ - 2x}} \\ <br /> \\ <br /> 2\pi \int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {xe^{ - x^2 } \,\,dx} = 2\pi \int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {xe^u \,\,\frac{{du}}{{ - 2x}}} = \frac{{2\pi }}{{ - 2}}\int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {e^u \,\,du} = - \pi \int\limits_{\rm{0}}^{\rm{1}} {e^u \,\,du} = \\ <br /> \\ <br /> \left. { - \pi e^u } \right]_0^1 = \left. { - \pi e^{ - x^2 } } \right]_0^1 = \left( { - \pi e^{ - 1^2 } } \right) - \left( { - \pi e^{ - 0^2 } } \right) = - \pi \left( {e^{ - 1} - 1} \right) = \pi \left( { - e^{ - 1} + 1} \right) =\pi \left( {1 - 1/e} \right)<br /> \\ <br /> \end{array}[/tex]

Now although I got the right answer, I think there's still an intermediate mistake I'm making. Once I switch from dx to du, I have to switch the limits of the integration, don't I? I've been getting lazy since I know I'm going to switch back to x before solving. How do I do that? Since my u=-x^2 in this do I just change my 0 and 1 to 0 and -1 wherever I'm using du? And if I do that, should I even bother switching back to x before solving, or just solve with u and my newly-computed limits, which gives me the same answer? I've seen it done both ways, and I'm not sure if there is an advantage of one over the other.

Also, what's the difference between
[tex]\begin{array}{l}<br /> \int_0^1 {} \\ <br /> and \\ <br /> \int\limits_0^1 {} \\ <br /> \end{array}[/tex]
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
11K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K