Work and Fluid Force: Calculus II

In summary, the conversation is about two problems involving finding the work necessary to pump water out of a tank and the fluid force on a submerged plate. The conversation includes setting up integrals, using correct formulas, and clarifying confusion. The expert summarizer provides guidance and clarification on how to correctly solve the problems.
  • #1
think4432
62
0
I worked out these two problems and got an answer but was not sure about the answer...

If you could just check it and if it is not write tell me what I did wrong or give me a step by step, it would be greatly appreciated.

1. A tank is formed by revolving y = 3x^2, x = [0,2] around the y-axis is filled to the 4 feet point with water (w = 62.4 lb/ft^3). Find the work necessary to pump the water out of the tank over the top.

I got the integral being from a = 0 and b = 4 and integrating [12y^(1/2) - y^(3/2)]dy with w and pi as constants outside of the integral.

Would this be correct?

2. A plate shaped as in the figure [question 2.jpg is attached] is submerged vertically in a fluid as indicted. Find the fluid force on the plate if the fluid has weight density 62.4 lb/ft^3

The integral I set up was the limits being -5 to -1 and the integral being (5-y)(-7/4y - 7/4) dy.

Which is integrated out with the limits it comes out to be 665/6, and I was wondering if it was correct or not [the way I did it]

Thank you.

Can someone please step by step show me how to solve this if I am not correct.

Please help! I greatly appreciate it!
 

Attachments

  • Question 2.jpg
    Question 2.jpg
    5 KB · Views: 498
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
think4432 said:
I worked out these two problems and got an answer but was not sure about the answer...

If you could just check it and if it is not write tell me what I did wrong or give me a step by step, it would be greatly appreciated.

1. A tank is formed by revolving y = 3x^2, x = [0,2] around the y-axis is filled to the 4 feet point with water (w = 62.4 lb/ft^3). Find the work necessary to pump the water out of the tank over the top.

I got the integral being from a = 0 and b = 4 and integrating [12y^(1/2) - y^(3/2)]dy with w and pi as constants outside of the integral.

Would this be correct?

No, it wouldn't be correct. Figure out the mass of a circular slab of water of thickness dy and how far it must be lifted. Then integrate that.
 
  • #3
think4432 said:
2. A plate shaped as in the figure [question 2.jpg is attached] is submerged vertically in a fluid as indicted. Find the fluid force on the plate if the fluid has weight density 62.4 lb/ft^3

The integral I set up was the limits being -5 to -1 and the integral being (5-y)(-7/4y - 7/4) dy.

Which is integrated out with the limits it comes out to be 665/6, and I was wondering if it was correct or not.

Why are you using 5 - y as the depth? When y = -5 that would be 10. :confused:
 
  • #4
LCKurtz said:
No, it wouldn't be correct. Figure out the mass of a circular slab of water of thickness dy and how far it must be lifted. Then integrate that.

Mass of the circular slab? Like a slice? How do we find the mass of that? Is that not just the 'w' or the 'weight density'

?
 
  • #5
LCKurtz said:
Why are you using 5 - y as the depth? When y = -5 that would be 10. :confused:

I am using 5-y for the depth because the top of the fluid to the bottom of the plate is y-5?

Is that not correct? I don't understand how it can be 10-y?

Is the other part of the integral correct for that part?
 
  • #6
think4432 said:
Mass of the circular slab? Like a slice? How do we find the mass of that? Is that not just the 'w' or the 'weight density'

?

I should have said "weight". But anyway, you must multiply the weight density by the volume to get the weight. Your tank has circular cross sections being formed by revolving the curve. Your element of volume would be a cylindrical shaped disk of thickness dy. What is its volume dV?
 
  • #7
think4432 said:
I am using 5-y for the depth because the top of the fluid to the bottom of the plate is y-5?

Is that not correct? I don't understand how it can be 10-y?

Is the other part of the integral correct for that part?

Did I say it should be 10 - y??

Apparently you have taken your origin to be at the water level above the point, judging by your equation of the slanted line. That's fine. What is the depth when y = -1? -2? -3? -4?

Use a formula that gives correct answers.

Yes, the other part looks OK.
 
  • #8
LCKurtz said:
I should have said "weight". But anyway, you must multiply the weight density by the volume to get the weight. Your tank has circular cross sections being formed by revolving the curve. Your element of volume would be a cylindrical shaped disk of thickness dy. What is its volume dV?

We set up the integral in the dy, right?

So we would use pi(r)^2 for the base of the circle/cylindrical disk
Meaning pi[ 1/[2(sqrt)3] y^(-1/2)]

Because I solved y=3x^2 for y and squared it, right?

And we multiply that by by (12-y)?

Would I have the weight (density X pi) / 18 root(3) outside the integral and y^(1/2)(12-y) dy inside to integrate?

I think I am more confused then I started. :[
 
  • #9
LCKurtz said:
Did I say it should be 10 - y??

Apparently you have taken your origin to be at the water level above the point, judging by your equation of the slanted line. That's fine. What is the depth when y = -1? -2? -3? -4?

Use a formula that gives correct answers.

Yes, the other part looks OK.

Wait...so, the answer I have is correct?

I don't understand this post by you.

Im sorry!
 
  • #10
think4432 said:
We set up the integral in the dy, right?

So we would use pi(r)^2 for the base of the circle/cylindrical disk
Meaning pi[ 1/[2(sqrt)3] y^(-1/2)]

Because I solved y=3x^2 for y and squared it, right?

When you revolve it around the y-axis the radius is measured in the x direction.
 
  • #11
LCKurtz said:
When you revolve it around the y-axis the radius is measured in the x direction.

I do have it in the x direction...right?

Im not sure what you're trying to say...
 
  • #12
LCKurtz said:
Did I say it should be 10 - y??

Apparently you have taken your origin to be at the water level above the point, judging by your equation of the slanted line. That's fine. What is the depth when y = -1? -2? -3? -4?

Use a formula that gives correct answers.

Yes, the other part looks OK.

think4432 said:
Wait...so, the answer I have is correct?

I don't understand this post by you.

Im sorry!

No, your formula of 5 - y for the depth is not correct. What does it give when you try y = -1 or -2 or -3 or -4? Does it give the correct depth? Can you fix it?
 
  • #13
think4432 said:
I do have it in the x direction...right?

Im not sure what you're trying to say...

I'm saying that the radius of your little disk is the x value not the y value of the point on your curve. Have you drawn a picture?
 
  • #14
LCKurtz said:
No, your formula of 5 - y for the depth is not correct. What does it give when you try y = -1 or -2 or -3 or -4? Does it give the correct depth? Can you fix it?


Why would I try y = -1 or -2 or -3 or -4?


I really appreciate your help!
 
  • #15
think4432 said:
Why would I try y = -1 or -2 or -3 or -4?


I really appreciate your help!

Because in the coordinate system you have chosen, those are example values of y where the triangle is located.
 
  • #16
LCKurtz said:
Because in the coordinate system you have chosen, those are example values of y where the triangle is located.

So you want me to plug in those values in where to find the exact location of the depth?
 
  • #17
LCKurtz said:
I'm saying that the radius of your little disk is the x value not the y value of the point on your curve. Have you drawn a picture?

So do I solve the equation for y? And then do the integral?

I think setting up the integral is the hardest part! And I am getting so confused by looking in the book and trying to figure it out and trying to do what you are telling me to!

:[
 
  • #18
think4432 said:
So you want me to plug in those values in where to find the exact location of the depth?

You are using the formula 5 - y for the depth. I am telling you that it doesn't work and you can check it for yourself by trying those example numbers and comparing what you get with the actual depth. You need to use a formula that gives the correct depth.
 
  • #19
LCKurtz said:
You are using the formula 5 - y for the depth. I am telling you that it doesn't work and you can check it for yourself by trying those example numbers and comparing what you get with the actual depth. You need to use a formula that gives the correct depth.


Oh. Ok, So the actual depth is 5 ft, correct?

So if I put 0 into y it will give me the actual depth? Is that what you're saying?

But how does that help at all?
 
  • #20
think4432 said:
Oh. Ok, So the actual depth is 5 ft, correct?

So if I put 0 into y it will give me the actual depth? Is that what you're saying?

But how does that help at all?

In your choice of coordinates, the triangle sits at a level where the y values are between -5 at the bottom and and -1 at the top of the triangle, right? And the actual depth of points in the triangle range from 5 at the bottom to 1 at the top, measured in how far it is under water.

You need a formula that for any y between -5 and -1 gives the correct depth. 5-y doesn't do it. You are making it much harder than it is.
 
  • #21
LCKurtz said:
I'm saying that the radius of your little disk is the x value not the y value of the point on your curve. Have you drawn a picture?

think4432 said:
So do I solve the equation for y? And then do the integral?

I think setting up the integral is the hardest part! And I am getting so confused by looking in the book and trying to figure it out and trying to do what you are telling me to!

:[

You have to use x for the radius. If you are doing a dy integral you will have to get it in terms of y to integrate it, won't you.
 
  • #22
LCKurtz said:
In your choice of coordinates, the triangle sits at a level where the y values are between -5 at the bottom and and -1 at the top of the triangle, right? And the actual depth of points in the triangle range from 5 at the bottom to 1 at the top, measured in how far it is under water.

You need a formula that for any y between -5 and -1 gives the correct depth. 5-y doesn't do it. You are making it much harder than it is.

Would -5-y work as the formula? Because if I plug in -1 into y, it would be -4 which is still in the triangle? Is that what you're trying to say?

I don't know why, I just can't understand these 2 problems! I completed everything on the homework sheet, except these two!
 
  • #23
LCKurtz said:
In your choice of coordinates, the triangle sits at a level where the y values are between -5 at the bottom and and -1 at the top of the triangle, right? And the actual depth of points in the triangle range from 5 at the bottom to 1 at the top, measured in how far it is under water.

You need a formula that for any y between -5 and -1 gives the correct depth. 5-y doesn't do it. You are making it much harder than it is.

think4432 said:
Would -5-y work as the formula? Because if I plug in -1 into y, it would be -4 which is still in the triangle? Is that what you're trying to say?

I don't know why, I just can't understand these 2 problems! I completed everything on the homework sheet, except these two!

Here's what I want you to do. Fill in this table (actually do it):

[tex]\begin{array}{ccc}
y-value &|& actual depth\\
-1&|&?\\
-2&|&?\\
-3&|&?\\
-4&|&?\\
-5&|&?
\end{array}[/tex]

Then see if you can figure out a formula in terms of y that works.
 
  • #24
LCKurtz said:
You have to use x for the radius. If you are doing a dy integral you will have to get it in terms of y to integrate it, won't you.

Ok. So if I solve y = 3x^2 for x

I get x = y^(1/2) / root 3

And the formula is wpi(r)^2 dy

So I get w [pi (y^(1/2) / root 3))^2 dy]

So w [pi (y / (root 3)^2 dy]

?

[Probably totally wrong...but I gave it a shot with the equation solved for x, so it can be dy according to the picture I drew.
 
  • #25
LCKurtz said:
Here's what I want you to do. Fill in this table (actually do it):

[tex]\begin{array}{ccc}
y-value &|& actual depth\\
-1&|&?\\
-2&|&?\\
-3&|&?\\
-4&|&?\\
-5&|&?
\end{array}[/tex]

Then see if you can figure out a formula in terms of y that works.

6
7
8
9
10

y-10?
 
  • #26
think4432 said:
Ok. So if I solve y = 3x^2 for x

I get x = y^(1/2) / root 3

And the formula is wpi(r)^2 dy

So I get w [pi (y^(1/2) / root 3))^2 dy]

So w [pi (y / (root 3)^2 dy]

?

[Probably totally wrong...but I gave it a shot with the equation solved for x, so it can be dy according to the picture I drew.

Of course, (root(3))2 is just 3, no? So now you have the weight of the circular slab correct. (*Whew!*).

Now, given that, show me the integral you need to do to calculate the work lifting the water out the top.
 
  • #27
LCKurtz said:
Here's what I want you to do. Fill in this table (actually do it):

[tex]\begin{array}{ccc}
y-value &|& actual depth\\
-1&|&?\\
-2&|&?\\
-3&|&?\\
-4&|&?\\
-5&|&?
\end{array}[/tex]

Then see if you can figure out a formula in terms of y that works.

think4432 said:
6
7
8
9
10

y-10?

Why are you giving me these numbers for the depths? No part of your triangle is that deep.
 
  • #28
LCKurtz said:
Of course, (root(3))2 is just 3, no? So now you have the weight of the circular slab correct. (*Whew!*).

Now, given that, show me the integral you need to do to calculate the work lifting the water out the top.

Yes. Whew. One part down...the other part to go.

Integrating a = 0, and b = 2, so integrating wpi [y/3 - (y-4)]
 
  • #29
LCKurtz said:
Why are you giving me these numbers for the depths? No part of your triangle is that deep.

y-1, if you plug in all the values...it would be on the triangle, except for -5.

For -5 to be on it...the formula just has to be 'y'

Which is probably not right...?
 
  • #30
think4432 said:
Yes. Whew. One part down...the other part to go.

Integrating a = 0, and b = 2, so integrating wpi [y/3 - (y-4)]

No, not even close. For one thing, a dy integral requires y limits.

You have this disk slab of water whose weight is wπ/3. This disk is at location y vertically. How far does it have to be lifted to get out the top? Because, remember, work is force times distance.
 
  • #31
think4432 said:
y-1, if you plug in all the values...it would be on the triangle, except for -5.

For -5 to be on it...the formula just has to be 'y'

Which is probably not right...?

You are just guessing. Fill in the table with the correct numbers and show it to me.
 
  • #32
LCKurtz said:
You are just guessing. Fill in the table with the correct numbers and show it to me.

The thing is I don't know where to plug in the numbers to fill in the table, which is why I am trying to think of a formula to plug in those numbers that would be on the triangle.
 
  • #33
LCKurtz said:
No, not even close. For one thing, a dy integral requires y limits.

You have this disk slab of water whose weight is wπ/3. This disk is at location y vertically. How far does it have to be lifted to get out the top? Because, remember, work is force times distance.

It has to be lifted the the height of the function? Which is just 3x^2?

But in terms of y,

x = y^(1/2)/root 3

So integration of a=0 to b=2 and the integration of wpi [ y/3 - y^(1/2)/root 3 ]

?
 
  • #34
think4432 said:
The thing is I don't know where to plug in the numbers to fill in the table, which is why I am trying to think of a formula to plug in those numbers that would be on the triangle.

Draw the line y = -2 across your triangle. How deep is that line under the waterline? Put that number in the table for the actual depth. Do the other values of y. Once you have filled in the table, then see if you can figure out the formula. (It's obvious, you're going to kick yourself).
 
  • #35
LCKurtz said:
No, not even close. For one thing, a dy integral requires y limits.

You have this disk slab of water whose weight is wπ/3. This disk is at location y vertically. How far does it have to be lifted to get out the top? Because, remember, work is force times distance.

think4432 said:
It has to be lifted the the height of the function? Which is just 3x^2?

You were given a fixed parabolic container. It doesn't go on forever. How tall is it (a specific number)? How far does a slab of water at height y have to be lifted to get to the top?

So integration of a=0 to b=2 ..

Did you even read what I said about y limits? Those are still x limits.
 
<h2>1. What is the definition of work in calculus?</h2><p>In calculus, work is defined as the product of the force applied to an object and the distance over which the object is moved in the direction of the force.</p><h2>2. How is work calculated using calculus?</h2><p>To calculate work using calculus, you must first find the derivative of the force function to get the force at each point. Then, you integrate the force function over the distance the object is moved in the direction of the force. This will give you the total work done.</p><h2>3. What is fluid force in calculus?</h2><p>In calculus, fluid force is the force exerted by a fluid, such as water or air, on an object placed in the fluid. It is calculated by integrating the pressure function over the surface area of the object.</p><h2>4. How is fluid force related to work in calculus?</h2><p>Fluid force and work are related because when an object is submerged in a fluid, the fluid exerts a force on the object. This force can do work on the object as it moves through the fluid. The work done by the fluid force is equal to the negative of the change in potential energy of the object.</p><h2>5. What are some real-world applications of work and fluid force in calculus?</h2><p>Work and fluid force have many real-world applications, such as calculating the force needed to lift an object out of water, determining the optimal shape for an airplane wing to minimize fluid force, and analyzing the work done by the heart to pump blood through the body. These concepts are also used in engineering and physics to design and optimize various structures and systems.</p>

1. What is the definition of work in calculus?

In calculus, work is defined as the product of the force applied to an object and the distance over which the object is moved in the direction of the force.

2. How is work calculated using calculus?

To calculate work using calculus, you must first find the derivative of the force function to get the force at each point. Then, you integrate the force function over the distance the object is moved in the direction of the force. This will give you the total work done.

3. What is fluid force in calculus?

In calculus, fluid force is the force exerted by a fluid, such as water or air, on an object placed in the fluid. It is calculated by integrating the pressure function over the surface area of the object.

4. How is fluid force related to work in calculus?

Fluid force and work are related because when an object is submerged in a fluid, the fluid exerts a force on the object. This force can do work on the object as it moves through the fluid. The work done by the fluid force is equal to the negative of the change in potential energy of the object.

5. What are some real-world applications of work and fluid force in calculus?

Work and fluid force have many real-world applications, such as calculating the force needed to lift an object out of water, determining the optimal shape for an airplane wing to minimize fluid force, and analyzing the work done by the heart to pump blood through the body. These concepts are also used in engineering and physics to design and optimize various structures and systems.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
20
Views
382
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
948
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
112
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
639
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
21
Views
754
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top