 My Math Forum Is this calculation correct (Double Integration)?

 Calculus Calculus Math Forum

 August 16th, 2018, 07:36 AM #1 Senior Member   Joined: Oct 2015 From: Greece Posts: 139 Thanks: 8 Is this calculation correct (Double Integration)? $\displaystyle w = \int_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} \int_{x_{1}}^{x_{2}} [-m \cdot g + T \cdot \frac{-x + (h - y)}{h}] \cdot dxdy = \int_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} \int_{x_{1}}^{x_{2}}-m \cdot g \cdot dxdy + \int_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} \int_{x_{1}}^{x_{2}} T \cdot \frac{-x + (h - y)}{h} \cdot dxdy = -m \cdot g \cdot \int_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} \int_{x_{1}}^{x_{2}} dxdy + \frac{T}{h} \cdot \int_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} \int_{x_{1}}^{x_{2}} [-x + (h - y)] \cdot dxdy$ $\displaystyle I_{1} = -m \cdot g \cdot \int_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} \int_{x_{1}}^{x_{2}} dxdy$ $\displaystyle I_{2} = \frac{T}{h} \cdot \int_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} \int_{x_{1}}^{x_{2}} [-x + (h - y)] \cdot dxdy$ $\displaystyle w = I_{1} + I_{2}$ $\displaystyle I_{1} = -m \cdot g \cdot \int_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} \int_{x_{1}}^{x_{2}} dxdy = -m \cdot g \cdot \int_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} [x]_{x_{1}}^{x_{2}} \cdot dy = -m \cdot g \cdot \int_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} (x_{2} - x_{1}) \cdot dy = -m \cdot g \cdot [x_{2} \cdot y - x_{1} \cdot y]_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} = -m \cdot g \cdot ( x_{2} \cdot y_{2} - x_{1} \cdot y_{2} - x_{2} \cdot y_{1} + x_{1} \cdot y_{1}) = -m \cdot g \cdot [x_{2}(y_{2}-y_{1}) - x_{1}(y_{2}-y_{1})] \Leftrightarrow I_{1} = -m \cdot g \cdot (y_{2}-y_{1}) (x_{2} - x_{1})$ $\displaystyle I_{2} = \frac{T}{h} \cdot \int_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} \int_{x_{1}}^{x_{2}} [-x + (h - y)] \cdot dxdy = \frac{T}{h} \cdot \int_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} [-\frac{x^{2}}{2} + h \cdot x - y \cdot x]_{x_{1}}^{x{2}} \cdot dy = \frac{T}{h} \cdot \int_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} [-\frac{x_{2}^{2}}{2} + h \cdot x_{2} - y \cdot x_{2} + \frac{x_{1}^{2}}{2} - h \cdot x_{1} + y \cdot x_{1}] \cdot dy = \frac{T}{h} \cdot [-\frac{x_{2}^{2}}{2} \cdot y + h \cdot x_{2} \cdot y - \frac{y^{2}}{2} \cdot x_{2} + \frac{x_{1}^{2}}{2} \cdot y - h \cdot x_{1} \cdot y + \frac{y^{2}}{2} \cdot x_{1}]_{y_{1}}^{y_{2}} = \frac{T}{h} \cdot [-\frac{x_{2}^{2}}{2} \cdot y_{2} + h \cdot x_{2} \cdot y_{2} - \frac{y_{2}^{2}}{2} \cdot x_{2} + \frac{x_{1}^{2}}{2} \cdot y_{2} - h \cdot x_{1} \cdot y_{2} + \frac{y_{2}^{2}}{2} \cdot x_{1} + \frac{x_{2}^{2}}{2} \cdot y_{1} - h \cdot x_{2} \cdot y_{1} + \frac{y_{1}^{2}}{2} \cdot x_{2} - \frac{x_{1}^{2}}{2} \cdot y_{1} + h \cdot x_{1} \cdot y_{1} - \frac{y_{1}^{2}}{2} \cdot x_{1} ] = \frac{T}{h} \cdot [ -\frac{x_{2}^{2}}{2}(y_{2} - y_{1}) + h(x_{2} \cdot y_{2} - x_{1} \cdot y_{2} - x_{2} \cdot y_{1} + x_{1} \cdot y_{1}) - \frac{y_{2}^{2}}{2}(x_{2} - x_{1}) + \frac{x_{1}^{2}}{2}(y_{2} - y_{1}) + \frac{y_{1}^{2}}{2}(x_{2} - x_{1})] = \frac{T}{h} \cdot [(y_{2} - y_{1})( \frac{x_{1}^{2}}{2} - \frac{x_{2}^{2}}{2}) + (x_{2} - x_{1})(\frac{y_{1}^{2}}{2} - \frac{y_{2}^{2}}{2}) + h(x_{2} \cdot y_{2} - x_{1} \cdot y_{2} - x_{2} \cdot y_{1} + x_{1} \cdot y_{1})] = \frac{T}{h} \cdot [(y_{2} - y_{1})( \frac{x_{1}^{2}}{2} - \frac{x_{2}^{2}}{2}) + (x_{2} - x_{1})(\frac{y_{1}^{2}}{2} - \frac{y_{2}^{2}}{2}) + h(x_{2}(y_{2}-y_{1}) - x_{1}(y_{2}-y_{1}))] = \frac{T}{h} \cdot [(y_{2} - y_{1})( \frac{x_{1}^{2}}{2} - \frac{x_{2}^{2}}{2}) + (x_{2} - x_{1})(\frac{y_{1}^{2}}{2} - \frac{y_{2}^{2}}{2}) + h \cdot (y_{2}-y_{1})(x_{2}-x_{1})] = \frac{T}{h} \cdot [\frac{1}{2} \cdot (y_{2} - y_{1})( x_{1}^{2} - x_{2}^{2}) + \frac{1}{2} \cdot (x_{2} - x_{1})(y_{1}^{2} - y_{2}^{2}) + h \cdot (y_{2}-y_{1})(x_{2}-x_{1})]$ $\displaystyle w = -m \cdot g \cdot (y_{2}-y_{1}) (x_{2} - x_{1}) + \frac{T}{h} \cdot [\frac{1}{2} \cdot (y_{2} - y_{1})( x_{1}^{2} - x_{2}^{2}) + \frac{1}{2} \cdot (x_{2} - x_{1})(y_{1}^{2} - y_{2}^{2}) + h \cdot (y_{2}-y_{1})(x_{2}-x_{1})]$ OMG 1 hour to write the latex code, I hope I didn't do anything wrong... Last edited by skipjack; August 16th, 2018 at 02:30 PM. August 16th, 2018, 01:25 PM #2 Global Moderator   Joined: May 2007 Posts: 6,855 Thanks: 744 It's correct, but unnecessarily tedious. I looked at your final answer and the original statement and was able to see it is correct without writing anything down. Everything in between seems pointless. For example $I_1=-mg\int_{y_1}^{y_2}\int_{x_1}^{x_2}dxdy=-mg(y_2-y_1)(x_2-x_1)$. You don't need any intermediate steps. Thanks from topsquark and babaliaris August 16th, 2018, 03:09 PM   #3
Senior Member

Joined: Oct 2015
From: Greece

Posts: 139
Thanks: 8

Quote:
 Originally Posted by mathman It's correct, but unnecessarily tedious. I looked at your final answer and the original statement and was able to see it is correct without writing anything down. Everything in between seems pointless. For example $I_1=-mg\int_{y_1}^{y_2}\int_{x_1}^{x_2}dxdy=-mg(y_2-y_1)(x_2-x_1)$. You don't need any intermediate steps.
Well probably because i don't have the experience. I'm new in integration.
It literally took me one hour lol. I'm teaching my self by the way and books doesn't show how to do calculations faster.

Last edited by babaliaris; August 16th, 2018 at 03:50 PM. August 17th, 2018, 01:46 PM #4 Global Moderator   Joined: May 2007 Posts: 6,855 Thanks: 744 The main point to simplify is to realize that with fixed limits for x and y you can look at it as a product of single integrals. With $I_2$, you need to break it up into 3 parts, so you can then make the double integral into the product. Once you do that you will have 8 very easy integrals where 6 have a constant integrand. Thanks from babaliaris August 18th, 2018, 01:19 AM   #5
Senior Member

Joined: Oct 2015
From: Greece

Posts: 139
Thanks: 8

Quote:
 Originally Posted by mathman The main point to simplify is to realize that with fixed limits for x and y you can look at it as a product of single integrals. With $I_2$, you need to break it up into 3 parts, so you can then make the double integral into the product. Once you do that you will have 8 very easy integrals where 6 have a constant integrand.
In other words, breaking Integrals to sums its easier than integrating as whole? August 18th, 2018, 02:56 PM   #6
Global Moderator

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 6,855
Thanks: 744

Quote:
 Originally Posted by babaliaris In other words, breaking Integrals to sums its easier than integrating as whole?
Yes, also recognizing when a double integral is the product of two single integrals. Tags calculation, correct, double, integration Thread Tools Show Printable Version Email this Page Display Modes Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Andrzejku98 Calculus 1 November 9th, 2017 10:18 AM Irishsmile Applied Math 2 December 4th, 2014 12:36 PM bitcomet Calculus 16 August 15th, 2013 01:32 PM melvis Calculus 4 February 6th, 2011 02:45 PM questioner1 Calculus 3 March 28th, 2010 12:08 AM

 Contact - Home - Forums - Cryptocurrency Forum - Top      