MHB Where is the Center of Mass of a Thin Plate with Given Boundaries?

karush
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,240
Reaction score
5
$\textsf{Find the center of mass of a thin plate of density}$
$\textsf{ $\delta=3$ bounded by the lines $x=0, y=x$, and the parabola
$y=2-x^2$ in the $Q1$}$
$\begin{array}{llcr}\displaystyle
&\textit{Mass}\\
&&\displaystyle M=\iint\limits_{R}\delta \, dA\\
&\textit{First Moments}\\
&&\displaystyle M_y=\iint\limits_{R}x\delta \, dA
&\displaystyle M_x=\iint\limits_{R}y\delta \, dA\\
&\textit{Center of mass}\\
&&\displaystyle\bar{x}=\displaystyle\frac{M_y}{M},
\displaystyle\bar{y}=\displaystyle\frac{M_x}{M}\\
\\
&&\color{red}
{\displaystyle \, \bar{x}=\frac{5}{14},
\bar{y}=\displaystyle\frac{38}{35}}\\
\end{array}$ok I just barely had to time to post this
equations are just from reference
red is answer
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Ok I'm starting over on this a small step at a time...

$\textsf{Find the center of mass of a thin plate of density}\\$
$\textsf{$\delta=3$ bounded by the lines $x=0, y=x$, and the parabola
$y=2-x^2$ in $Q1$}\\$
\begin{align*}\displaystyle
M&=\int_{0}^{\sqrt{2}}\int_{2-x^2}^{1}3 \, dy \, dx\\
&=3\int_{0}^{\sqrt{2}}\biggr[y\biggr]_{y=2-x^2}^{y=1}\, dx
=3\int_{0}^{\sqrt{2}}(x^2-1) \, dx
=3\biggr[\frac{x^3}{3}-x\biggr]_0^{\sqrt{2}}=\sqrt{2}\\
M_y&=\int_{0}^{\sqrt{2}}\int_{2-x^2}^{1} \, dy \, dx
=\int_{0}^{\sqrt{2}}\biggr[y\biggr]_{y=2-x^2}^{y=1}\, dx\\
&=\int_{0}^{\sqrt{2}}(x^2-1) \, dx = -\sqrt{2}\\
\end{align*}

something isn't happening right!


$\textsf{the answer utimately is:}\\$
$\color{red}{\, \bar{x}=\displaystyle\frac{5}{14},\bar{y}=\frac{38}{35}}$
 
Last edited:
The first thing I would do is sketch the bounded area:

View attachment 7772

Now, let's compute the mass (noting that the curves $y=x$ and $y=2-x^2$ intersect at $x=1$ in QI):

$$m=\rho A=3\int_{0}^{1}\int_{x}^{2-x^2}\,dy\,dx=3\int_{0}^{1}2-x-x^2\,dx=3\left(2-\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{3}\right)=\frac{7}{2}$$

Next, let's compute the moments of the lamina:

$$M_x=3\int_{0}^{1}\int_{x}^{2-x^2}y\,dy\,dx=\frac{3}{2}\int_{0}^{1}\left(2-x^2\right)^2-x^2\,dx=\frac{3}{2}\int_{0}^{1}x^4-5x^2+4\,dx=\frac{19}{5}$$

$$M_y=3\int_{0}^{1}x\int_{x}^{2-x^2}\,dy\,dx=3\int_{0}^{1}2x-x^2-x^3\,dx=\frac{5}{4}$$

Hence:

$$\overline{x}=\frac{M_y}{m}=\frac{\frac{5}{4}}{\frac{7}{2}}=\frac{5}{14}$$

$$\overline{y}=\frac{M_x}{m}=\frac{\frac{19}{5}}{\frac{7}{2}}=\frac{38}{35}$$
 

Attachments

  • karush_com_001.png
    karush_com_001.png
    3.2 KB · Views: 127

Attachments

  • Capture+_2018-02-12-17-31-00-1.png
    Capture+_2018-02-12-17-31-00-1.png
    5.1 KB · Views: 126
karush said:
$\textsf{Find the center of mass of a thin plate of density}$
$\textsf{ $\delta=3$ bounded by the lines $\color{red}{x=0}$, $ y=x$, and the parabola
$y=2-x^2$ in the $Q1$}$

$\color{red}{x=0}$ is the y-axis as shown in Mark’s sketch, not the x-axis as shown in your sketch.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Back
Top