Calculating the loss of Potential Energy of water in turbine

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the loss of potential energy of water in a turbine, specifically addressing the height from which the water is considered to fall. The original poster presents a scenario involving a mass of seawater and its potential energy loss due to height differences, raising questions about the appropriate height to use in calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the reasoning behind using a height of 5m instead of 10m for potential energy calculations, questioning the relevance of the distance from the turbine exit to the sea bed.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the assumptions regarding the height of the water above the turbine and how it affects potential energy calculations. Some participants suggest that the average height of the water level may be relevant, while others emphasize the importance of the center of mass in determining potential energy.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the lack of explicit information about the total height of the water and the implications of varying water levels as the reservoir empties, which complicates the calculations.

TiernanW
Messages
25
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


jXFGTpv.jpg


Homework Equations


Power = Work Done / Time
Work Done = Force * Displacement
PE = mass * gravity * height

The Attempt at a Solution


I got the first part (i) right, so the mass of the sea water is 1.32 x 10^12 kg.

Part (ii) is the bit I am stuck on. My thoughts were that it must fall 10m, so the max loss in PE is (1.32 x 10^12)(9.81)(10), but the mark scheme says the height is 5m, so that it is (1.32 x 10^12)(9.81)(5). Why do we take the height to be 5m here when it falls through 10m?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I could be wrong, but if we use the 10m as a scale, it looks like there is a distance of less than 5m from the turbines to the sea bed. The water is being released from the turbines so the gpe lost should be 5mg as a maximum value. It shouldn't be 10, at least, because it isn't being released from that height.
 
Mycelium said:
I could be wrong, but if we use the 10m as a scale, it looks like there is a distance of less than 5m from the turbines to the sea bed. The water is being released from the turbines so the gpe lost should be 5mg as a maximum value. It shouldn't be 10, at least, because it isn't being released from that height.
Ah I can see where you are coming from. The loss of potential for the water going INTO the turbines would be 10, but for the water leaving it is less than that. We aren't given the total height though. That is odd.
 
Post #2 isn't right. The distance from the turbine exit to the sea bed is irrelevant.

What happens to the water level as the reservoir empties?
In other words, is all the water 10m above the exit? Or just an infinitesimal slice?
 
billy_joule said:
Post #2 isn't right. The distance from the turbine exit to the sea bed is irrelevant.

What happens to the water level as the reservoir empties?
In other words, is all the water 10m above the exit? Or just an infinitesimal slice?
This I had also thought about, but I didn't really know how to approach it because the equation looks for a value of h. The water level falls. Is it like the average water level because 5 is half-way between 10 and 0?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: CWatters
TiernanW said:
This I had also thought about, but I didn't really know how to approach it because the equation looks for a value of h. The water level falls. Is it like the average water level because 5 is half-way between 10 and 0?
Yes, it's the height of the centre of mass of the water above the turbine.
It happens to be half way as the planar cross section of the water is constant, if the reservoir walls were sloped( like most real hydro dam reservoirs are) then it wouldn't be half way.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: CWatters
why is the centre of gravity the crucial fact here?

I suppose one could say that when the center of gravity has "shifted downwards" the amount of 10m. Then the entire watervolume above the turbine would have fallen below the waterline at the turbine level... In this case it seems the watervolume in question, from the oceanside, would have gone through the turbine to the beachside of the wall. (?)wouldn't each "segment of water" have different potential energy because each height is different relative to the fixed location of the turbine at the base of the wall.

If you had very short height cuboids (of water) then each cuboid (area * height)would have different energy. because each cuboud has differing altitude compared to the other ones.

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/hydropower-d_1359.html
 
Yes each horizontal slice or segment has different PE. But if the walls are vertical then the PE of a slice depends only on its height and the total PE depends on the average height which is 5m.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TiernanW

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
44
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
8K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K