Volume of cylinders using double integrals

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the volume of cylinders using double integrals in Cartesian coordinates. The first problem involves finding the volume bounded by the cylinder defined by the equation y² + z² = 4 and the planes x = 2y, x = 0, and z = 0 in the first octant. The integration limits for this problem are established as {(x,y)|0≤x≤4, x/2≤y≤2}. The second problem addresses the volume bounded by the cylinders x² + y² = r² and y² + z² = r², with integration limits derived as {(x,y)|-r≤x≤r, -√(r² - x²)≤y≤√(r² - x²)}. The complexity of the integrals suggests that using polar coordinates may simplify the calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of double integrals in Cartesian coordinates
  • Familiarity with the equations of cylinders in three-dimensional space
  • Knowledge of integration techniques, including trigonometric substitutions
  • Basic concepts of volume elements in calculus
NEXT STEPS
  • Learn how to set up double integrals for volume calculations in Cartesian coordinates
  • Explore the use of polar coordinates for simplifying volume integrals
  • Study trigonometric substitution techniques for complex integrals
  • Investigate the relationship between double and triple integrals in volume calculations
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in calculus, particularly those focusing on multivariable calculus and integration techniques, as well as anyone involved in mathematical modeling of physical systems involving cylindrical volumes.

hadroneater
Messages
56
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


1. Find the volume bounded by the cylinder y^2 + z^2 = 4 and the planes x=2y, x=0, z=0 in the first octant.

2. Find the volume bounded by the cylinders x^2 + y^2 = r^2 and y^2 + z^2 = r^2

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


Both questions are from the section before polar/cylindrical coordinates and triple integrals so we have to use double integrals in cartesian coordinates only.

1. I drew a graph on the xy plane with x=2y. When z=0, y^2 = 4, y=2. So the boundary is the triangle between x=2y and y=2.
the boundary of integration is {(x,y)|0<=x<=4. x/2<=y<=2}, is this right? I think the limits for x are right but y I'm not too sure.

If I continue, then I get V = ∫ ∫f(x,y)dydx = ∫ ∫sqrt(4-y^2)dydx with the limits above. The inner integral gets a bit tricky with trig substitutions. I made y = 2sinu. After a few steps, I got ∫sqrt(4-y^2)dy = y/2*sqrt(4-y^2) + 2arcsin(y/2). Plugging in the limits for y...I got π + x/2 -(x/4)sqrt*4-x^2/4) - arcsin(x/4)
And if I integrate that with respect to x from 0 to 4 I get another messy integral with many terms in the solution. One of the term is 2sqrt(4-x^2). But that is undefined when x = 4! So I did something wrong. I don't think it was the actual integration that I messed up on because I used wolfram to double check.

2. The boundary I got is {(x,y)|-r <= x <= r, -sqrt(r^2 - x^2) <= y <= sqrt(r^2 - x^2)}
The integral is pretty similar to the one above but it's very long and complex with many square roots and arcsines to integrate. Did I make the limits wrong because it seems too complex...

The questions would be a lot simpler in polar form I think.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
i think you need to be a bit careful with setting up the integral

First if you are only integrating over 2 variables, the first step is to decide what a volume element is
dV(x,y) = f(x,y)dxdy

the f(x,y) actually comes form the first step in a triple integral & will be the extent of z for a given x & y.

For the first case, drawing a picture of the "wedge" cut form the cylinder, i think f(x,y) should depend on both x & y. So maybe have another look at your initial volume element.

I also think for that problem, it would be easier to set up the integration in terms x & z. as the volume element should only depend on x in that case (and will given by the difference in y between the planes x = 0 & x = 2y)
\int_a^b (\int_{g(x)}^{h(x)} f(x) dz) dx

note that by setting these up in this way you are pretty much doing a triple integral, just shortcutting the first step anyway
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
10K