Moment of inertia of a solid sphere derivation.

In summary, the conversation discusses the process of deriving the formula for the moment of inertia of a solid sphere. The individual is trying to solve the equation but keeps getting a different result from the expected one. They discuss the use of infinitesimally thin "shells" and the integration of the equation to find the moment of inertia. They also consider the use of spherical coordinates and the distance from the axis of rotation. In the end, they come to a solution of I = (2/5)MR^2.
  • #1
physicsod
9
0
Hello! I'm trying to derive the formula for the moment of inertia of a solid sphere, and I keep running into a strange solution.

I set up the infinitesimally mass of an infinitesimally thin "shell" of the sphere:

dm = 4[itex]\rho[/itex][itex]\pi[/itex]r2 dr

And then solved for the moment of inertia:

I = [itex]\int[/itex]r2dm

= [itex]\int[/itex]r2(4[itex]\rho[/itex][itex]\pi[/itex]r2 dr)

= 4[itex]\rho[/itex][itex]\pi[/itex][itex]\int[/itex]r4 dr

= (4/5)[itex]\rho[/itex][itex]\pi[/itex]r5

And solving for [itex]\rho[/itex] we get the following:

[itex]\rho[/itex] = M/((4/3)[itex]\pi[/itex]r3).

Substituting that into the previously solved equation for I, I get the following:

I = (3/5)Mr3.

What am I doing wrong? I know the formula involves a coefficient of 2/5, not 3/5, but I can't find my problem.

Thank you in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
oops bad idea, think about adding lots of thin disks together

so dI=(1/2)(r^2)dm=(1/2)(r^2)(rho)dV=1/2(r^4)(rho)(pi)dh

then integrate from -R to R, and sub (r^4) as (R^2-h^2)^2
 
Last edited:
  • #3
One problem is that you have two different r's in there. The r in dm is the spherical distance of the shell from the origin. The r in the r^2 of the I calculation is supposed to be the distance from the axis of rotation. Revisit finding I for the shell. You'll need to split the shell up into rings.
 
  • #4
@6.283...: Well if you integrate both sides of the original equation, you get m = (4/3)*(pi)*(r^3)*(rho), so the volume part is correct I think...

@Dick: Oh, so I treat the first r (let's call the second one R) as a constant in the first line for evaluating the integral? So I just bring out "r" and integrate R^2 dR?
 
  • #5
physicsod said:
@6.283...: Well if you integrate both sides of the original equation, you get m = (4/3)*(pi)*(r^3)*(rho), so the volume part is correct I think...

@Dick: Oh, so I treat the first r (let's call the second one R) as a constant in the first line for evaluating the integral? So I just bring out "r" and integrate R^2 dR?

Something like that, yes. One r is the radius of the shell. The other r depends on an angle variable.
 
  • #6
yeah haha I think the disk idea is better..I can't type very fast atm, you don't need any angles
 
  • #7
Still not sure exactly how to relate R to r. Is it like, r is the distance from the origin of the shell, and R is the radius of the infinitesimally small disk? Can anybody tell me where to go from my mistake above?
 
  • #8
The r that you want to calculate should be the distance from the axis of rotation.

Let's say that the axis of ration is the z-axis. Using spherical coordinates, what is the distance from the z-axis in terms of r?
 
  • #9
Wait okay, I think I got it. So, instead of involving spherical coordinates, I just let the radius of the sphere be R, and the distance to the infinitesimally thin disk be z, and then the radius of the disk, y, would be sqrt(R^2 - z^2), and so you integrate [(1/2)*(rho)*(pi)*(y^4) dz] since you're just using the inertia of a disk, right?

Substitute for y, remove the constants and you get I = (1/2)*(rho)*(pi) * (integral<-R, R> of [R^2 - z^2]^2 dz). If you integrate that, you get I = (8/15)*(rho)*(pi)*(R^5). I think that works, because then you substitute in (rho), and you get I = (2/5)MR^2.

Did I get lucky, or is that one way to do it? I don't particularly like spherical coordinates, so I try and avoid them whenever possible. :)
 
  • #10
physicsod said:
Wait okay, I think I got it. So, instead of involving spherical coordinates, I just let the radius of the sphere be R, and the distance to the infinitesimally thin disk be z, and then the radius of the disk, y, would be sqrt(R^2 - z^2), and so you integrate [(1/2)*(rho)*(pi)*(y^4) dz] since you're just using the inertia of a disk, right?

Substitute for y, remove the constants and you get I = (1/2)*(rho)*(pi) * (integral<-R, R> of [R^2 - z^2]^2 dz). If you integrate that, you get I = (8/15)*(rho)*(pi)*(R^5). I think that works, because then you substitute in (rho), and you get I = (2/5)MR^2.

Did I get lucky, or is that one way to do it? I don't particularly like spherical coordinates, so I try and avoid them whenever possible. :)

I think that's ok. If you want to it completely in spherical coordinates, the distance to the z axis where the polar angular coordinate, phi, goes from 0 at one pole to pi at the other pole is r*sin(phi). So you want to integrate (r*sin(phi))^2 times the spherical volume element r^2*sin(phi)*d(phi)*d(theta)*dr. If you integrate r from 0 to R. phi from 0 to pi and theta from 0 to 2*pi, you get (8/15)*pi*R^5. You can not like spherical coordinates, but they do work all the same.
 

Related to Moment of inertia of a solid sphere derivation.

1. What is the formula for the moment of inertia of a solid sphere?

The formula for the moment of inertia of a solid sphere is I = (2/5) * MR^2, where M is the mass of the sphere and R is the radius of the sphere.

2. How is the moment of inertia of a solid sphere derived?

The moment of inertia of a solid sphere is derived by using the formula for the moment of inertia of a point mass and integrating it over the entire volume of the sphere. This results in the formula I = (2/5) * MR^2.

3. What are the assumptions made in the derivation of the moment of inertia of a solid sphere?

The derivation assumes that the sphere is a homogeneous solid object with a constant density and that it is rotating around a central axis passing through its center of mass.

4. How does the moment of inertia of a solid sphere compare to that of a hollow sphere?

The moment of inertia of a solid sphere is greater than that of a hollow sphere with the same mass and radius. This is because the material in a solid sphere is distributed further from the axis of rotation, resulting in a larger moment of inertia.

5. Why is the moment of inertia of a solid sphere an important concept in physics?

The moment of inertia of a solid sphere is an important concept in physics because it is used to calculate the rotational kinetic energy of the sphere and can also be used to analyze the rotational motion of objects in various systems, such as a spinning top or a planet rotating on its axis.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
130
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • Classical Physics
2
Replies
61
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
986
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
17
Views
451
Back
Top