+0  
 
0
42
3
avatar+1 


To make an argument that it does, we try breaking the shape down into many small squares of side length 



To find the volume of revolution of the entire shape, we can find the volume of revolution of each small square, then add them all up.

The goal of this part of the problem is to write an equation expressing this "add up all the squares" process. We can do that with summation notation.

 



In this equation, we label the squares with a number:



When  for example, we look at this square:



That square has mass  $m_{17}$ and position vector $r_{17}$ The next square has mass  and position vector  etc.

The expression  means that we take  for each square and add them all together (using vector addition).

M is the total mass of a shape.

The part  means that there is some slight error when we approximate a shape by a bunch of squares, due to the edges having partial squares. If we cut the shape into smaller and smaller squares, the square shape gets closer and closer to the original shape, so the error gets smaller and smaller.

If we want to break the center of mass into components, we have




Build a summation for the volume of revolution of a shape revolved around an axis, assuming the shape is broken down into squares of side length S. The axis of rotation points in the y direction.

 Sep 13, 2023

4 Online Users

avatar
avatar
avatar