MHB What exactly is going on with my integral?

  • Thread starter Thread starter shamieh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integral
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on finding the volume of a solid obtained by rotating the area bounded by the curve y = x - x^2 and the x-axis around the line x = 2. The integral for calculating this volume is established using the shell method, which integrates from x = 0 to x = 1, resulting in the expression V = 2π∫(2 - x)(x - x^2)dx. The confusion arises from the assumption that the integral should start from x = 2, but the correct limits reflect the actual bounds of the region being revolved. The mechanics of the shell method and the reasoning behind the limits are clarified, emphasizing the importance of understanding the geometry of the problem.
shamieh
Messages
538
Reaction score
0
Ex 4: Find the volume of the solid obtained by rotating the region bounded by $$y = x - x^2 $$and $$y = 0$$ about the line $$x = 2$$I did all the algebra, integrated etc etc. But I was thinking that the integral would be from $$\int^2_0$$ since it says about the line $$x = 2$$..How do they get from $$\int^1_0$$? I'm almost positive it has to do with the fact that i am saying $$2 - x$$...But how exactly do I know it's from $$\int^1_0$$. I guess I see the mechanics of what is going on but I don't understand it, or maybe I don't see the mechanics at all and am lost in the dark..Any elaboration would be great. (Malthe)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The region to be revolved extends from $x=0$ to $x=1$ (sketch the graph). I recommend the shell method for this solid of revolution.
 
shamieh said:
Ex 4: Find the volume of the solid obtained by rotating the region bounded by $$y = x - x^2 $$and $$y = 0$$ about the line $$x = 2$$I did all the algebra, integrated etc etc. But I was thinking that the integral would be from $$\int^2_0$$ since it says about the line $$x = 2$$..How do they get from $$\int^1_0$$? I'm almost positive it has to do with the fact that i am saying $$2 - x$$...But how exactly do I know it's from $$\int^1_0$$. I guess I see the mechanics of what is going on but I don't understand it, or maybe I don't see the mechanics at all and am lost in the dark..Any elaboration would be great. (Malthe)
Hello,
we got that $$y=0$$ if we put that into $$y=x-x^2$$ we get $$0=x-x^2=> x_1=0, x_2=1$$
Well like Mark Said, it is better to draw!:)
Have a nice day!
regards,
$$|\pi\rangle$$
 
We can "slice and dice" the region under consideration two ways:

Shell method: in this method we are going to integrate over $x$ using "very thin shells" (cylinders, approximately).

The center of each shell will be at $x = 2$, and the radius will vary from 2 (when $x = 0$) to 1 (when $x = 1$), because the radius of each shell is:

$r(x) = 2 - x$.

The surface area of each shell is:

$2\pi r(x)f(x)$

where $f(x) = x - x^2$, so our volume element that we integrate over will be:

$dV = 2\pi r(x)f(x)dx = 2\pi (2-x)(x - x^2)dx$

yielding the integral:

$\displaystyle V = 2\pi\int_0^1 (2x - 3x^2 + x^3)\ dx$

The solid of revolution itself looks like the "top half" of a doughnut, with a "hole" in the middle that extends from $x = 1$ to $x = 3$. We *could* integrate from 0 to 2, but after $x = 1$ we are "in the hole" and there's no additional volume to add, because we are actually integrating using the function:

$g(x) = \max(f(x),0)$

(past $x = 1$ the parabola is below the $x$-axis, and "outside the boundary").

Disk method: in this method we are actually integrating over $y$ (slicing parallel to the $x$-axis). This isn't as pretty, because now we have two radii, and "getting the radii right" is more of a chore.

So let's look at the parabola $y = x - x^2$ as if $y$ is the independent variable.

Solving for $x$ in terms of $y$ we get:

$x = \frac{1}{2} \pm \sqrt{\frac{1}{4} - y}$

Hopefully it's clear that the positive square root corresponds to the "top" branch of the parabola (when viewed with the $y$-axis horizontally), and the negative square root is the "lower" branch" (we have to consider these two branches, because otherwise we do not get a function of $y$).

The "lower branch" corresponds to the OUTER radius of our disk (well, we actually get a "washer" shape, not a disk, that is to say: an annulus). The "upper branch" corresponds to the inner radius.

The area of each washer is going to be:

$\pi(R(y)^2 - r(y)^2)$

where:

$R(y) = 2 - \left(\frac{1}{2} - \sqrt{\frac{1}{4} - y}\right) = \frac{3}{2} + \sqrt{\frac{1}{4} - y}$

and:

$r(y) = 2 - \left(\frac{1}{2} + \sqrt{\frac{1}{4} - y}\right) = \frac{3}{2} - \sqrt{\frac{1}{4} - y}$

so our volume element in this case will be:

$dV = \pi(R(y)^2 - r(y)^2)dy = 6\pi\sqrt{\frac{1}{4} - y}\ dy$

leaving us with the somewhat ugly integral to calculate:

$\displaystyle V = 6\pi\int_0^{1/4} \sqrt{\frac{1}{4} - y}\ dy$

If you get the same answer both ways, it's likely it is correct :)
 
Thread 'Problem with calculating projections of curl using rotation of contour'
Hello! I tried to calculate projections of curl using rotation of coordinate system but I encountered with following problem. Given: ##rot_xA=\frac{\partial A_z}{\partial y}-\frac{\partial A_y}{\partial z}=0## ##rot_yA=\frac{\partial A_x}{\partial z}-\frac{\partial A_z}{\partial x}=1## ##rot_zA=\frac{\partial A_y}{\partial x}-\frac{\partial A_x}{\partial y}=0## I rotated ##yz##-plane of this coordinate system by an angle ##45## degrees about ##x##-axis and used rotation matrix to...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K