Calculating Surface Area Using a Line Integral: A Case Study

In summary: What your book is doing is basically using the Pythagorean theorem to find the length of the tangent line segment dx across the small element of curve ds.
  • #1
Destroxia
204
7

Homework Statement



Use a line integral to find the area of the surface that extends upward from the semicircle ##y=\sqrt{9-x^2}## in the ##xy##-plane to the surface ##z=3x^4y##

Homework Equations



Parametric Equation for Circle:

## x = rcos(t) ##
## y = rsin(t) ##

Line Integral:

## \int_c F \cdot dr ##

The Attempt at a Solution



(Function):
## F = z = 3x^4y ##

(Variables):
## x = 3cos(t) ##
## y = 3sin(t) ##
## dx = -3sin(t)dt ##
## dy = 3cos(t)dt ##

(Intervals):
## -3 ≤ x ≤ 3 ##
## 0 ≤ y ≤ \sqrt{9-x^2} ##
## 0 ≤ t ≤ \pi ## (plugged x-interval into ## x = 3cos(t) ##)

(Solution):
## \int_{0}^{\pi} 3(3cos^{4}(t))(3sin(t))dt = 27\int_{0}^{\pi} cos^4(t)sin(t)dt = * ##
## * = 27 [\frac {-1} {5} cos^5(t) |_{0}^{\pi}] ##
## = 27 [ \frac {2} {5}]##

(Result):
##= \frac {54} {5}##

(Questions):

1. Are there any flaws in this thought process?

2. Since I am switching from substituting x and y with functions of t, do I need some kind of Jacobian in the integral that would take this into account, and affect my final answer?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
RyanTAsher said:
1. Are there any flaws in this thought process?
No, it all looks fine (in principle. I didn't check the integration or the arithmetic).

2. Since I am switching from substituting x and y with functions of t, do I need some kind of Jacobian in the integral that would take this into account, and affect my final answer?
Yes you need a Jacobian, but you already have it in your calcs. The expressions you wrote for ##dx## and ##dy## in terms of ##dt## are representations of the two elements of the Jacobian one gets in transforming from ##x,y## coordinates to ##t## coordinates.
 
  • #3
I think you have errors in both your concept and your arithmetic. The first error is that the integral is of the form ##\int_C F \cdot dr##. If that is a dot product it doesn't make sense since ##F## is not a vector. If that ##\cdot## is just a multplication sign then ##dr## would be a scalar, what scalar I wouldn't know.

The trouble is that you should be setting up an integral of the form ##\int_C F(x,y)~ds##. Try again, and be careful about parentheses with your exponents.
 
  • #4
andrewkirk said:
No, it all looks fine (in principle. I didn't check the integration or the arithmetic).

Yes you need a Jacobian, but you already have it in your calcs. The expressions you wrote for ##dx## and ##dy## in terms of ##dt## are representations of the two elements of the Jacobian one gets in transforming from ##x,y## coordinates to ##t## coordinates.

So, do I have to plug those in anywhere, or do my final calculations already take the Jacobian into account?

LCKurtz said:
I think you have errors in both your concept and your arithmetic. The first error is that the integral is of the form ##\int_C F \cdot dr##. If that is a dot product it doesn't make sense since ##F## is not a vector. If that ##\cdot## is just a multplication sign then ##dr## would be a scalar, what scalar I wouldn't know.
LCKurtz said:
The trouble is that you should be setting up an integral of the form ##\int_C F(x,y)~ds##. Try again, and be careful about parentheses with your exponents.


Okay, my book sets the ##\int_C F(x,y) ds## as ## \int_C F(x,y) ds = \int_C F(x(t),y(t)) \sqrt{(\frac {dx} {dt})^2 + (\frac {dy} {dt})^2} dt ##

So, I set it up as...

## ds = \sqrt{(\frac {dx} {dt})^2 + (\frac {dy} {dt})^2} dt##

## \int_{0}^{\pi} 3(81cos^4(t))(3sin(t)) \sqrt{ (9cos^2(t) + 9sin^2(t))} dt = *##

## * = 2187 \int_{0}^{\pi} cos^4(t)sin(t) dt = 2187 [ \frac {2} {5} ] = \frac {4374} {5} ##

This seems more complete, just wary of my arithmetic a bit. Is this what you were speaking of, about ##\int_C F ds ##?
 
  • #5
That's much better, even correct. Might have been a bit easier using polar coordinates using ##ds = 3 d\theta##, which is basically what yours came to.
 

FAQ: Calculating Surface Area Using a Line Integral: A Case Study

1. What is a line integral on a surface?

A line integral on a surface is a type of mathematical calculation used in vector calculus to determine the value of a function along a continuous path on a surface. It takes into account both the direction and magnitude of the function along the path.

2. How is a line integral on a surface different from a regular line integral?

A line integral on a surface is different from a regular line integral in that it is calculated on a two-dimensional surface rather than a one-dimensional curve. This means that the path of integration is not limited to a straight line, but can be any continuous curve on the surface.

3. What is the significance of line integrals on surfaces in real-world applications?

Line integrals on surfaces have many practical applications, particularly in physics and engineering. They are used to calculate the work done by a force on a surface, the flow of a fluid across a surface, and the electric and magnetic fields in a given region of space.

4. How is a line integral on a surface calculated?

To calculate a line integral on a surface, the surface is first divided into small segments, and the value of the function is calculated at each segment. The path of integration is then approximated by connecting these points, and the integral is calculated using the appropriate formula. As the size of the segments approaches zero, the accuracy of the calculation increases.

5. Are there any limitations to using line integrals on surfaces?

One limitation of line integrals on surfaces is that they can only be applied to continuous surfaces. Discontinuous surfaces, such as those with sharp edges or corners, cannot be accurately calculated using this method. Additionally, the calculation can become complex for surfaces with irregular shapes or varying functions.

Similar threads

Back
Top