MechSimulator

Moment of Inertia of a Hollow Circle

Tubes & Pipes • I, Polar Moment J & Section Modulus

Mode
Units
Cross-Section Shape
💡 Pick a shape and drag any slider to see Ix, Iy, Sx, and the centroid update live. Right-click the diagram for export and reset options.
📖 Learning panels
Σ Live equations — formulas + values for the current shape
💡 What-if coach — design insights from current values

Moment of Inertia of a Hollow Circle — Formula and Worked Example

A tube removes material from where it contributes least — near the neutral axis — and keeps it where the r² weighting matters most. That is why a hollow shaft is dramatically stiffer per unit mass than a solid one of the same weight.

Formulas

QuantityExpression
AreaA = π(D² − d²) / 4
Second moment (any centroidal axis)I = π(D⁴ − d⁴) / 64
Polar second momentJ = π(D⁴ − d⁴) / 32
Section modulusS = 2I / D
Radius of gyrationr = √(D² + d²) / 4

The fourth-power terms subtract, so removing the middle costs surprisingly little stiffness. A 60/40 mm tube keeps about 80% of the I of a 60 mm solid bar while using only 56% of the material. Setting d = 0 correctly recovers the solid-circle formulas.

Worked Example — A 60 mm outside / 40 mm inside tube

QuantityValue
D (outside)60 mm
d (inside)40 mm
A1,571 mm²
I510.5 × 10³ mm⁴
J = 2I1,021.0 × 10³ mm⁴
S = 2I/D17.0 × 10³ mm³
I retained vs 60 mm solid80%
material used vs solid56%

Values computed by the calculator above. Change any dimension and every property updates live.

What is the moment of inertia of a hollow tube?

I = π(D⁴ − d⁴)/64, where D is the outside diameter and d the inside diameter. The polar moment is twice that, J = π(D⁴ − d⁴)/32.

Why is a hollow shaft more efficient than a solid one?

Second moment weights area by the square of its distance from the axis, so material near the centre barely contributes. Removing it saves a lot of mass for very little loss of I or J. A 60/40 mm tube retains roughly 80% of the stiffness of a 60 mm solid bar with 56% of the material.

Can I use these formulas for a thin-walled tube?

Yes, they are exact for any wall thickness. For a very thin wall the approximation I ≈ πr³t (with r the mean radius and t the wall) is often quicker and is accurate to within a few percent once D/t exceeds about 20.

Why Removing the Core Costs So Little

Because I weights area by the square of its distance from the axis, material near the centre contributes almost nothing. Boring out a 60 mm bar, holding the outside diameter constant:

Bore (mm)A (mm²)A keptI (mm⁴)I keptStiffness per unit mass
solid2,827100%636,173100%1.00
202,51389%628,31999%1.11
302,12175%596,41294%1.25
401,57156%510,50980%1.44
451,23744%434,88468%1.56
5086431%329,37652%1.69

The last column is the point: at a 40 mm bore the tube keeps 80% of the stiffness with 56% of the material, so stiffness per unit mass is 1.44× that of the solid bar. Push to a 50 mm bore and it reaches 1.69×. The limit is set by local buckling and by wall thickness practicalities, not by the maths.

Thin-Wall Approximation

When the wall is thin relative to the radius, I ≈ πr³t is often quicker, where r is the mean radius and t the wall thickness. For the 60/40 tube above, r = 25 mm and t = 10 mm gives π(25)³(10) = 490,900 mm⁴ against the exact 510,509 mm⁴ — about 4% low. The approximation tightens rapidly as D/t grows and is within 1% once D/t exceeds roughly 20.

Why does a bicycle frame use tubes rather than solid rods?

For the same reason: a frame must resist bending and torsion, both of which depend on material being far from the axis. A tube delivers nearly the same I and J as a solid rod of the same outside diameter at roughly half the mass. The trade-off is that thin walls become vulnerable to local denting and buckling, which is why tube walls are butted — thicker at the ends where stresses concentrate.

Other Cross-Sections

The same calculator handles all eight standard sections:

For the full section-property reference and the parallel-axis theorem, see the Moment of Inertia Calculator hub.