Calculating Percentage Error in Canyon Depth Ignoring Sound Time

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves calculating the depth of a canyon based on the time it takes for a stone to fall and the sound of it hitting the bottom to travel back to the top. The subject area includes kinematics and the physics of sound. The original poster seeks to determine the percentage error in depth calculation when ignoring the time for sound to travel.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss calculating the canyon depth in two ways: one that includes the time for sound travel and one that ignores it. There are attempts to clarify how to separate the time taken for the stone to fall from the time taken for the sound to travel back.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided calculations and suggested methods for determining the time components involved. There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of ignoring sound travel time on the depth calculation, with some questioning the accuracy of their percentage error results.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of a homework problem, which may impose specific methods or assumptions regarding the calculations. There is a noted confusion regarding the correct interpretation of the percentage error calculation.

munther
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
A stone is dropped into a deep canyon and is heard to strike the bottom 13.4 s after release (the speed sound is 343m/s) What would be the percentage error in the depth if the time required for the sound to reach the canyon rim were ignored?

I found the depth of the canyon =2298m
then what is the next step?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How did you do calculate the depth?

The point is to calculate it two ways: once ignoring the time for the sound to travel; once taking it into account.
 
sorrry
the distance = 1/2 a t^2
= .5 x 9.8 x (13.4/2)^2 = 219.961 m^2


that is when i take the time into account

but how i will not take it??
 
Last edited:
munther said:
the distance = 1/2 a t^2
= .5 x 9.8 x (13.4/2)^2 = 219.961 m^2
The time needed here is the time that the stone was falling. Why did you divide by 2?

Think of the time to hear the echo as having two parts:
(1) The time that the stone was falling.
(2) The time it takes for the sound of the stone hitting the canyon floor to travel up to the top.

Time #1 + Time #2 = 13.4 seconds

Since sound travels pretty fast compared to the stone, time #2 will be small.
 
ok that is very good

then how i will divide the time between the falling and the echo
 
munther said:
then how i will divide the time between the falling and the echo
To incorporate the time delay due to the speed of sound, you'll need to set up equations and solve for the times. Hint: Set up two equations (one for the falling rock; one for the sound) relating distance and time.
 
ok

d= .5xgxt1 = 343t2
t1+t2 =13.4
by solving both equations
t1= 11.51
t2= 1.89

then the depth = 648.9 m

is it right


next step:

%=(depth1-depth2)x100/(depth1)

we found one depth

the second depth when we ignored the time
is the second depth when time = 13.4 for the d=.5x9.8xt
 
munther said:
ok

d= .5xgxt1 = 343t2
t1+t2 =13.4
by solving both equations
t1= 11.51
t2= 1.89

then the depth = 648.9 m

is it right
Looks good to me.
is the second depth when time = 13.4 for the d=.5x9.8xt
Right. (You have a typo in your formula--that should be t^2.)
 
thanks

i posted it ...but it is wrong!

(879.844-648.9)/(879.844)=26.2% xxx Wrong xxx !

why??
 
  • #10
munther said:
thanks

i posted it ...but it is wrong!

(879.844-648.9)/(879.844)=26.2% xxx Wrong xxx !

why??
You need to read the question very carefully. I think they are asking for the percentage error the incorrect method (that ignores the sound travel time) introduces with respect to the correct method. The correct measurement should be in the denominator.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
9K