A Fluid Dynamics Problem with Confusing Results

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a fluid dynamics problem involving a barge with a hole leaking water, where the user is confused by their calculations. They applied Bernoulli's equation but found their results implausibly quick, leading to concerns about the validity of their assumptions. Participants suggest that the problem's complexity increases when accounting for the barge's sinking and the changing water head, recommending a differential equation approach for a more accurate solution. They emphasize the importance of considering the small size of the hole relative to the barge's area and the minor change in water level compared to the initial submersion. Ultimately, a simpler analysis using mean values may provide a reasonable estimate of the time required for the water to reach the alarm level.
Aldnoahz
Messages
37
Reaction score
1
Hi all,

I encountered a fairly straightforward problem involving fluid dynamics, but the result I got is very confusing and I seem not to understand where I got wrong.

This is the question:

A rectangular flat-bottom barge with a bottom area A=50 m2A=50~\text{m}^2A=50 m2 is loaded so that the bottom is at H=1 m below the surface. The density of water is ρ=103 kg/m3\rho=10^3~\text{kg/m}^3ρ=103 kg/m3 , and the water surface is perfectly still. A round hole with radius r=1 cm is made in the bottom of the barge, and the water starts leaking in. When the water level reaches h=5 cm, a bilge alarm will alert the barge operator. How long will it take for the water to reach the level 5 cm? (Assume that the Bernoulli’s equation is applicable.)

My attempt to the question:

First, at the surface of the water outside the boat: P_0 + rho*g* H = const
Second, inside the small hole at the barge where I call point 2: P_2 + 1/2*rho*(v_2)^2 = const
Third, at the surface of water inside the boat above the barge, where I call point 1:
P_0 + 1/2*rho*(v_1)^2 + rho*g*h = constApplying Bernoulli's equation, I now set first equation equal to the second,

P_0 + rho*g* H = P_2 + 1/2*rho*(v_2)^2

and for second and third:

P_2 + 1/2*rho*(v_2)^2 = P_0 + 1/2*rho*(v_1)^2 + rho*g*h

but what I find strange is that there is no way to get P_2 and v_2 and they get substituted as an intermediate value, and solving this equation set I can only get equivalence of first and third equations:

P_0 + rho*g* H = P_0 + 1/2*rho*(v_1)^2 + rho*g*h

rho*g*H = 1/2*rho*(v_1)^2 + rho*g*h

solving for v_1 = dh/dt = sqrt(2*g*(H-h))

and this gives me an extremely small time, smaller than 1, which is obviously physically not plausible.

I asked a lot of people and they don't seem to figure out why this is not correct, so I am posting to ask for help.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are two possible solutions to this problem depending on whether you consider the sinking of the barge and the variation of the head of water driving the flow to be a significant factors in the analysis or not .

If you consider - or better can demonstrate - that these factors are not important then you can use a very simple Bernoulli's principle analysis .

A more complete analysis taking those factors into account would need to use both Bernoulli's principle and Archimedes principle . The neatest way to get an actual solution would be to set the problem up as a differential equation and solve it .

if you are not familiar with differential equations then there are other ways of getting an approximate solution .

First thing to do in any case is to post a clear diagram showing the basic geometry of the problem . It helps in problems like this to draw diagrams with relevant dimensions shown in correct proportion to each other .
 
Last edited:
To be honest, under no condition is Bernoulli's equation valid during a problem like this because the depth (and therefore the flow) is varying in time. This is why the problem says to simply assume Bernoulli's equation is valid. That said, as @Nidum pointed out, there are a couple levels of difficulty here depending on how much of the physics you want to consider. If you don't consider the slow sinking of the barge that accompanies the filling, then this takes one form, and if you do consider that effect, the problem becomes harder. However, unless I am missing something, I don't see how you do this without a differential equation.

Either way you have a time-varying quantity in both the height of the water and the flow rate through the hole (and possibly the depth of the barge), so you are going to have to do some calculus.
 
The barge only fills with 5 cm depth of water . That is a small change of level compared to the bottom of the barge being initially submerged by 1 metre .

Also the hole is very small compared to the bottom area of the barge . That suggests slow filling and slow sinking of the barge .

If I was doing this problem for some real purpose I would probably just do a very simple analysis using mean values .
 
Nidum said:
The barge only fills with 5 cm depth of water . That is a small change of level compared to the bottom of the barge being initially submerged by 1 metre .

Also the hole is very small compared to the bottom area of the barge . That suggests slow filling and slow sinking of the barge .

If I was doing this problem for some real purpose I would probably just do a very simple analysis using mean values .

I suppose you could take it to its logical conclusions, say that since 1 m is 20 times larger than 5 cm, then the flow through the hole is effectively constant (even though it isn't really) and just do volume divided by flow rate to estimate the time. It would probably be pretty interesting to look at the error incurred by those two approaches as a function of the height ratio of the water levels.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top