Solving a 400 Gal Linear Mixing Problem for Dioxin

  • Thread starter Thread starter Yoss
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Linear Mixing
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a first-order linear mixing problem involving dioxin concentration in a tank. The scenario describes a 400-gallon tank initially containing water with a specific concentration of dioxin, with additional water flowing in at a different concentration and rate. Participants are analyzing the mathematical modeling of the situation to determine the concentration of dioxin when the tank is full.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are examining the differential equations derived from the problem setup, questioning the correctness of initial equations and assumptions regarding the rates of dioxin entering and leaving the tank. Some are exploring the use of concentration rather than total amount in their equations.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing examination of the mathematical approaches taken by the original poster and others. Some participants have pointed out potential errors in the initial setup and suggested alternative formulations. The discussion is productive, with participants offering guidance on notation and methods without reaching a consensus on the correct approach yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants have noted confusion regarding notation and the treatment of concentrations in parts per billion (ppb). There is also mention of imposed homework rules that may limit the depth of exploration in the discussion.

Yoss
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Ok, first order linear mixing problem.

"A 400 gal. tank initially contains 200 gal. of water containing 2 ppb by weight of dioxin, an extremely potent carcinogen. Suppose water containing 5 ppb of dioxin flows into the top of the tank at a rate of 4 gal/min. The water in the tank is kept well mixed, and 2 gal/min are removed from the bottom of the tank. How much dioxin is in the tank when the tank is full?

Ok. Vo = 200 gal., a = 2 ppb, b = 5 ppb, e = 4 gal/min, f = 2 gal/min
(Vo = initial volume of water, a = initial amount of dioxin, b = amount of dioxin flowing in, e = rate of b, f = rate going out)
So, if Q is the amount of dioxin in the mixture at any time t,

dQ/dt + 2/(200 + 2t) = 20 (from dQ/dt + f/(Vo + (e-f)t) = be)

So, my a(t) = 2/(200+2t), r(t) = 20. u(t) = e^((int)a(t)dt),

u(t) = e^(int)(2/(200 + 2t))dt

u(t) = e^(ln|200 + 2t|) = 200 + 2t
//(int) -integral (too lazy for Latex)

So, Q(t) = 1/u(t)[(int)u(t)r(t)dt] + c/u(t)

Q(t) = 1/(200 + 2t)[(int)(200 + 2t)(20)dt] + c/(200 + 2t)

Q(t) = [1/(200 + 2t)](4000t + 20t^2) + c/(200 + 2t)

Q(t) = (20t^2 + 4000t + c)/(200 + 2t)

Ok, since Q(0) = a = 2ppb then

Q(0) = a = 2 = (c/200), so c = 400, then

Q(t) = (20t^2 + 4000t + 400)/(200 + 2t)

Now, when the tank is full (400 gal, I need the amount of dioxin, so
200 + 2t = 400, when t = 100min)

Q(100) = (20(100^2) + 4000(100) + 400)/(400)

Q(100) = 1501 ppb.

Which is a little absurd(from 2ppb initially). Also, this is wrong because the answer is 4.25ppb.

Can someone go through my math and see if I made a mistake? Because I can't seem to find what went wrong.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think your starting equation is incorrect. The rate at which dioxin leaves the container is proportional to the amount of dioxin in the tank.

Incidentally, 4.25 ppb is the correct answer!
 
Last edited:
Tide said:
I think your starting equation is incorrect. The rate at which dioxin leaves the container is proportional to the amount of dioxin in the tank.

Incidentally, 4.25 ppb is the correct answer!

Oops, I did mean dQ/dt + (2/200 + 2t)Q = 20, but that's how I did work it out on paper and got that answer. What do you mean exactly?
 
Last edited:
Your notation is confusing and it would help a LOT if you would take the time to LaTeX your equations!

In any case, I find it easier to work with concentrations rather than the actual amount of contaminant. You should be able to recast your equations into this form:

[tex]\frac {dC}{dt} = \frac {R_{in}}{V}\left(C_i - C\right)[/tex]

where C(t) is the concentration of contaminant in the tank, [itex]C_i[/itex] is the concentration of the inflow, V is the volume of water in the tank which can be written as

[tex]V = V_0 + (R_{in} - R_{out})t[/tex]

The R's are the rates (constant) of flow into and out of the tank. The integration is straightforward.
 
Tide said:
Your notation is confusing and it would help a LOT if you would take the time to LaTeX your equations!

In any case, I find it easier to work with concentrations rather than the actual amount of contaminant. You should be able to recast your equations into this form:

[tex]\frac {dC}{dt} = \frac {R_{in}}{V}\left(C_i - C\right)[/tex]

where C(t) is the concentration of contaminant in the tank, [itex]C_i[/itex] is the concentration of the inflow, V is the volume of water in the tank which can be written as

[tex]V = V_0 + (R_{in} - R_{out})t[/tex]

The R's are the rates (constant) of flow into and out of the tank. The integration is straightforward.

Thanks Tide, I got it. Sorry about the confusing notation. I'm not too savvy in LaTeX yet, and I was sort of in a rush. Been studying all night for my exam.
 
I'm having an issue with this same exact problem. This is the DE that I got from the initial problem.

[tex]\frac{\mathrm{d} C}{\mathrm{d} t} = \frac{4gal}{min}(5ppb)-\left( \frac{2ppb}{200gal+(2gal)t}\right )C[/tex]

Is this anywhere close to the equation that I should be finding? I've solved the differential and obtained an enormous number for the final ppb (parts per billion) when the tank is full. I am very uncertain about how to do the math where the ppb is concerned. I am counting it as a whole number and am unsure whether I should treat it as [tex]5\times10e^{-9}[/tex] instead. Thanks for the help.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K