Obliv said:
Thank you for the explanations. I dislike the idea of accounting for empty space so I choose to look at the shape as a trapezoidal container of water.
I don't know what you mean by this.
I started my integration at a depth 3 feet below the apex of the triangle
because there is no water present, hence no pressure on the triangle. If you don't account for the empty space in some manner, you will not calculate the correct amount of force the water exerts on the triangle. It's as simple as that.
I tried integrating ##\int^5_0(pg*y)*x*dy## where y is then (5-y) and x = 3y/4 and got a totally wrong answer. I thought the width will be the same if I modeled it as a trapezoid.. not sure where I went wrong.
You're placing too much blind faith in trying to integrate simple expressions for the pressure, without making sure that these are the
correct expressions.
This problem can be solved assuming a trapezoid, if you do it properly.
Let's look at what you're integrating. It appears you want the depth to be measured down from the surface of the water, hence d = (5 - y), which also assumes that the bottom of the trapezoid is located at y = 0 feet. Now, you also used the width of the trapezoid as x = 3y/4. Let's check a few points and see if they correlate with what we know about the trapezoid:
When y = 0 feet, the depth of the water is (5 - 0) = 5 feet, and the width of the trapezoid is 6 feet, according to the diagram in the problem. Substituting y = 0 into x = 3y/4 means that x = 0 feet, which is not the width of the trapezoid. This is a big red flag that what you have
assumed to be the width of the trapezoid is in fact
not true. Well, let's check another point. When y = 5 feet, the depth is (5 - 5) = 0 feet, which is true according to the figure. Checking the width at this location gives x = 3*5/4 = 3.75 feet. It's a little harder to check this last result, but we know for a fact that the width x = 3y/4 is wrong when y = 0. so let's see if we can fix it.
We can calculate the slope of the sides of the triangle using the dimensions given in the figure. The vertical axis drawn through the apex of the triangle perpendicular to the base is also an axis of symmetry, and we can use this fact to simplify calculations somewhat.
If we look at the slope of the left side of the triangle, we can easily see that the rise is 8 feet and the run is 3 feet, so the formula fro the slope ##m = \frac{rise}{run}## gives us m = 8/3. The equation of the line which forms the left side of the trapezoid is y = 8x/3.
Normally, the equation of a line is used to find a series of y values if we plug in a series of x values, but in this case, we wish to find the x values which correspond with the series of y values we are plugging in, so we must modify the equation of the line y = 8x/3 to give x = 3y/8.
The width of the trapezoid is decreasing as we move up from its base, so it would seem that a good trial function for the width would be x = 3 - 3*y / 8. The value of x measures half the width of the trapezoid from the axis of symmetry, so the expression for x must be multiplied by 2, which means
x = total width of the trapezoid = 2 * (3 - 3*y / 8) = 6 - 6y / 8 = 6 - 3y / 4.
Let's check a few points to see if the width we are calculating with the formula for x matches the trapezoid as drawn.
When y = 0 feet, we are at the base, and x = 6 - 3 * 0 / 4 = 6 feet, which is the distance shown on the figure. So far, so good.
When y = 8 feet, we are at the tip of the triangle, from which the trapezoid is formed, and x = 6 - 3 * 8 / 4 = 6 - 24 / 4 = 6 - 6 = 0 feet. It looks like we have a winner!
Now, it appears we have the key ingredients to make our integral for the hydrostatic pressure on the trapezoid:
##F=\int_0^5 ρgd * dA = \int_0^5 ρgd * width * dy = \int_0^5 ρg * (5 - y) * (6 - 3y/4) * dy##
ρg = 62.4 lbs / ft
3 is a constant, so
##F= ρg \int_0^5 (5 - y) * (6 - 3y/4) * dy##
expanding the integrand,
##F= ρg \int_0^5 (30 + (-6 - 15/4)* y + 3y^2/4) dy = ρg \int_0^5 (30 - 39*y/4 + 3y^2/4) dy##
Running through the integration:
##F= ρg * [(30y - 39*y^2/8 + 3y^3/12)]|_0^5##
##F= 62.4*[150 - 39*25/8 + 3*125/12] = 62.4 * 59.375 = 3705\; lbs.##
which force matches the other calculation.
