Calculating Tidal Reservoir Energy: Using Average vs Maximum Height

  • Thread starter Thread starter sparkle123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Tidal
AI Thread Summary
When calculating tidal reservoir energy, the average height of water is often used instead of the maximum height to simplify calculations. This is because the total potential energy of particles at varying heights can be equivalent to that of particles at the average height. For example, in a reservoir with a height of 100m, two particles at 25m and 75m have the same total potential energy as two particles at 50m. By using the average height, the calculation becomes more straightforward, allowing for easier assessments of energy potential. Ultimately, using average height can streamline the process without significantly affecting accuracy.
sparkle123
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
When calculating the energy in a tidal reservoir, when do we use the average height of the water (half the max tidal height) instead of the maximum tidal height in
E=mgh?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Imagine you have a resevoir that is 100m high. In it you have only two particles. One at 25m and the other at 75m.

The total potential energy of these two particles is the same as having two particles at 50m.

The only value that changes in the calculation is h (the height of the particle above the ground).

So for every pair of particles, if you add up the h value and the total equals the height of the resevoir, it is the equivalent of having two particles at half the height of the resevoir (which is the average height of all the particles within it).

So if you take your resevoir, you have two choices. You can either calculate the value of PE for each particle at each separate height or you can assume every particle to be at the average height and use the overall mass of all the particles. Which is easier?
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top