Skip to main content

Do Over: Integration Over a Region in a Plane

Throughout the semester we have covered a variety of topics and how their mathematical orientation applies to real world scenarios. One topic we discussed, and I would like to revisit, is integration over a region in a plane which involves calculating a double integral. Integrating functions of two variables allows us to calculate the volume under the function in a 3D space. You can see a more in depth description and my previous example in my blog post, https://ukyma391.blogspot.com/2021/09/integration-for-over-regions-in-plane_27.html.

I want to revisit this topic because in my previous attempt my volume calculations were incorrect, and my print lacked structural stability. I believed this print and calculation was the topic I could most improve on and wanted to give it another chance.




What needed Improvement?

The function used previously was f(x) = cos(xy) bounded on [-3,3] x [-1,3].

After solving for the estimated and actual volume, it was difficult to represent in a print because some blocks would have negative volumes and some would have positive volumes. This caused some of the blocks to never touch because they only intersected at the corners, and all fell apart when I removed supports. It was as if, I printed floating blocks. This led me to change the domain, so that none of the individual prism volumes is below zero and all build up from a base and will have shared faces. I also think it would be beneficial to focus on a smaller portion of the function to provide a clear demonstration of the change in volume compared to my previous example that had a broad range and didn’t see much change.

The Improvement

To implement these improvements, I first adjusted the function to add and intercept, f(x) = cos(xy) +1. Then, I changed the domain to integrate on [0,3] x [0,3]. This allows for all the prisms to have a positive volume and build up from the base, so there will be no floating blocks. It also shows a single quadrant of the function to better show the volume change even though we know these volume changes occur similarly in all four quadrants. This resulted in a more accurate estimated volume compared to the actual volume, especially compared to my previous attempt. Below are my calculations to support these changes.

The estimated volume is 36.25 cubic units and represented in the table below. I used the top right corner of the prisms to calculate the individual prism volumes. 


The actual volume is 10.85 cubic unit which is solved by taking the double integral   


 






Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Knot 9-31

Knot 9-31 A knot is mathematics is defined as a closed, non-self-intersecting curve that is placed in three dimensions and cannot be the "unknot". The main difference between a knot in the real world and a known in mathematics is that a knot in mathematics does not contain any extra strands. The example following will help visualize this. Today, I have specifically chosen knot 9-31 from the Knot Atlas. This knot is very unique and contains some very interesting properties that we are going to look into. The Crossing Number For my knot today, I chose knot 9-31 from the Knot Atlas. This knot contains 9 crossings! The Unknotting Number The unknotting number is exactly what is sounds like. This is the minimum number of times the knot must be passed through itself to untie it. Luckily, the Knot Atlas is super useful and provides the unknotting number for us, but I still...
Post a Comment
Read more

Do Over: Integration for Over Regions in the Plane

Introduction Earlier in the semester, we visited the topic of integration for over region regions in the plane. This was our first experience with taking integration in the third dimension. To do this, we had to use double integrals to calculate the volume of a region between two surfaces. This topic seems relatively straightforward and anyone who has taken a higher calculus class knows of double integrals. Today, we are going to revisit this topic for a couple of reasons. Why Double Integrals Again? As mentioned before, I am revisiting this topic for a couple of reasons. One of the main reasons is due to how the 3D print turned out. Due to the function, I chose, the final rectangular prism was stand alone. When printing, this resulted in a sloppy prism that lacked structural integrity. The image below is a reference to my original design that includes the prism that had the issue. The main cause of ...
Post a Comment
Read more