MHB Kendra N's question at Yahoo Answers regarding work done to empty a conical tank

AI Thread Summary
The discussion addresses a physics problem involving the calculation of work required to empty an inverted conical tank filled with water. The tank has a height of 10 meters and a base radius of 4 meters, with water filled to a height of 8 meters. The solution involves using integration to derive a formula for work, incorporating variables such as the density of water and gravitational acceleration. The work is calculated by integrating the force needed to move water slices to the top of the tank. The final formula yields a specific value for the work required, encouraging further discussion on similar calculus-based physics problems.
MarkFL
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
13,284
Reaction score
12
Here is the question:

Applying integration to physics and engineering?

A tank has the shape of an inverted circular cone with height 10 m and base radius 4 m. It is filled with water to a height of 8 m. Find the work required to empty the tank by pumping all of the water to the top of the tank (the density of water is 1000 kg per cubic meter).

PLEASE HELP! I do not understand how it is explained in the textbook.

Here is a link to the question:

Applying integration to physics and engineering? - Yahoo! Answers

I have posted a link there to this topic so the OP can find my response.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hello Kendra N,

I prefer to work problems like this in general terms, and derive a formula we may then plug our data into. Let's let the base radius of the conical tank be $r$, and the height be $h$.

Let's orient a vertical $y$-axis along the axis of symmetry of the tank, where the origin is at the bottom of the tank, and the initial depth of the fluid in the tank is $y_0$. We wish to find the amount of work $W$ is needed to pump all of the fluid to the top of the tank.

Now, if we imagine slicing the cone of water we wish to remove into disks, we may state, using work is force $F$ times distance $d$ for a constant force:

$$dW=Fd=mgd$$

The force exerted is equal to the weight of the slice, which is the product of the mass and the acceleration due to gravity.

The mass $m$ of the slice is the product of the mass density $\rho$ (in [math]\frac{\text{kg}}{\text{m}^3}[/math]) and the volume [math]V=\pi r_s^2\,dy[/math] of the slice, i.e.:

$m=\rho\pi r_s^2\,dy$

The radius of the slice can be found by similarity. Please refer to the following diagram:

https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/804._xfImport

$$\frac{r_s}{y}=\frac{r}{h}\,\therefore\,r_s=\frac{r}{h}y$$

The distance the slice must be vertically moved against gravity is:

$d=h-y$

Putting it all together, we have:

$$dW=\frac{gr^2\rho\pi}{h^2}\left(hy^2-y^3 \right)\,dy$$

Summing up all the work elements through integration, we obtain:

$$W=\frac{gr^2\rho\pi}{h^2}\int_0^{y_0} hy^2-y^3\,dy$$

Applying the anti-derivative form of the FTOC, there results:

$$W=\frac{gr^2\rho\pi}{12h^2}\left[4hy^3-3y^4 \right]_0^{y_0}=\frac{gr^2\rho y_0^3\pi}{12h^2}\left(4h-3y_0 \right)$$

We now have a formula into which we may plug the given and known data:

$$g=9.8\,\frac{\text{m}}{\text{s}^2}$$

$$r=4\text{ m}$$

$$\rho=1000\,\frac{\text{kg}}{\text{m}^3}$$

$$h=10\text{ m}$$

$$y_0=8\text{ m}$$

and so we find:

$$W=\frac{\left(9.8\,\frac{\text{m}}{\text{s}^2} \right)\left(4\text{ m} \right)^2\left(1000\,\frac{\text{kg}}{\text{m}^3} \right)\left(8\text{ m} \right)^3\pi}{12\left(10\text{ m} \right)^2}\left(4\left(10\text{ m} \right)-3\left(8\text{ m} \right) \right)=\frac{3211264\pi}{3}\,\text{J}$$

To Kendra N and any other guests viewing this topic, I invite and encourage you to post other calculus based physics problems in our http://www.mathhelpboards.com/f16/ forum.

Best Regards,

Mark.
 

Attachments

  • kendran.jpg
    kendran.jpg
    3.2 KB · Views: 124
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top