Calculus 2: Finding Work with Integrals

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a calculus problem related to finding work using integrals, specifically in the context of lifting water from a tank. The problem involves determining the appropriate limits of integration and the setup of the integral based on the physical scenario described.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the limits of integration, with some suggesting they may be from 0 to 1, while others question the setup and the meaning of variables used in the integral. There is also a focus on the varying amount of water and how that impacts the work calculation.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on how to approach the problem, particularly in terms of setting up the integral and understanding the physical context. There is an ongoing exploration of different interpretations of the problem, particularly regarding the shape of the tank and the units of measurement involved.

Contextual Notes

There is confusion regarding the use of different units for water density, as some participants note that the problem is presented in meters while the density is given in pounds per cubic foot. This discrepancy raises questions about the assumptions being made in the problem setup.

iRaid
Messages
558
Reaction score
8

Homework Statement


Not sure if this goes here or physics, but this is for my calculus 2 class so I decided here would be best.
2nk0u3d.png

#22

Homework Equations


W=∫Fdx


The Attempt at a Solution


I think the limits of integration are from 0 to 1 since the water is right under the spout, but not sure.

Would the integral be:
\int_0^1 \pi(3^{2})(62.5x)dx
 
Physics news on Phys.org
iRaid said:

Homework Statement


Not sure if this goes here or physics, but this is for my calculus 2 class so I decided here would be best.
2nk0u3d.png

#22

Homework Equations


W=∫Fdx

The Attempt at a Solution


I think the limits of integration are from 0 to 1 since the water is right under the spout, but not sure.

Would the integral be:
\int_0^1 \pi(3^{2})(62.5x)dx

You haven't told us which problem you are working, although with the ##\pi## in there, I guess it's the second one. You also haven't told us what ##x## represents. Or where you got the 0 and 1 limits, or how you are analyzing the problem. Show us some steps and how you are setting it up and maybe we can help you.

[Edit] Now I see you indicated problem 22.
 
As LCKurtz implied, your formula is completely wrong and you don't say how you got it. The work required to lift "j" Newtons of water a distance h meters is jh Joules. The problem here, and the reason you need to use calculus, is that the amount of water varies from "height" to "height".

For simplicity "x" be the height above the center of the spherical tank, so that x varies from -3 to 3 to cover the entire tank. Then x^2+ y^2+ z^2= 9 is the equation of the sphere and at a given height, x, the "layer of water" is the circle y^2+ z^2= 9- x^2 which has radius \sqrt{9- x^2} and area \pi(9- x^2). Imagining this "layer" to have thickness dx, its volume is \pi(9- x^2)dx and its weight is \pi(9- x^2)dx times the density of water, \delta (I will explain later why I am NOT using "62.4 pounds per cubic foot) \delta\pi(9- x^2)dx.

The distance from x to the top of the tank is 3- x so the distance that the "layer" of water has to be lifted is 3- x+ 1= 4- x. That means that the work done in lifting that "layer" of water is \delta\pi (4- x)(9- x^2)dx.

Integrate that from the bottom of the tank to the top, from x= -3 to x= 3.

(I am puzzled that you are told to "use the fact that water weighs 62 lbs/ft3" when all the lengths are given in meters.)
 
HallsofIvy said:
(I am puzzled that you are told to "use the fact that water weighs 62 lbs/ft3" when all the lengths are given in meters.)

To be fair, he's only told to use that for exercises 23 and 24, which are not shown but presumably have their linear dimensions given in feet. Presumably the fact that in SI units the density of water is 1,000\,\mathrm{kg}\,\mathrm{m}^{-3} was thought too obvious to be worth mentioning.
 
HallsofIvy said:
As LCKurtz implied, your formula is completely wrong and you don't say how you got it. The work required to lift "j" Newtons of water a distance h meters is jh Joules. The problem here, and the reason you need to use calculus, is that the amount of water varies from "height" to "height".

For simplicity "x" be the height above the center of the spherical tank, so that x varies from -3 to 3 to cover the entire tank. Then x^2+ y^2+ z^2= 9 is the equation of the sphere and at a given height, x, the "layer of water" is the circle y^2+ z^2= 9- x^2 which has radius \sqrt{9- x^2} and area \pi(9- x^2). Imagining this "layer" to have thickness dx, its volume is \pi(9- x^2)dx and its weight is \pi(9- x^2)dx times the density of water, \delta (I will explain later why I am NOT using "62.4 pounds per cubic foot) \delta\pi(9- x^2)dx.

The distance from x to the top of the tank is 3- x so the distance that the "layer" of water has to be lifted is 3- x+ 1= 4- x. That means that the work done in lifting that "layer" of water is \delta\pi (4- x)(9- x^2)dx.

Integrate that from the bottom of the tank to the top, from x= -3 to x= 3.

(I am puzzled that you are told to "use the fact that water weighs 62 lbs/ft3" when all the lengths are given in meters.)

I see what you're saying, but are you sure that this is a 3d shape, not a circle? We haven't really dealt with spheres (other than rotating about an axis).
 
iRaid said:
I see what you're saying, but are you sure that this is a 3d shape, not a circle? We haven't really dealt with spheres (other than rotating about an axis).

It's not a circle. For one thing they've said 'tank'. For another thing they've put suggestive shading in. For another they are giving densities in terms volume, like cubic meters or cubic feet instead of per square meter or square feet.
 
Dick said:
It's not a circle. For one thing they've said 'tank'. For another thing they've put suggestive shading in. For another they are giving densities in terms volume, like cubic meters or cubic feet instead of per square meter or square feet.

Ok I see what you're saying.

Thanks for the help to everyone.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
10K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K