Mass conservation in a conical tank

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a problem involving mass conservation in an open conical tank being filled with water. The user applied the mass conservation law for a control volume, equating the change in volume of the cone to the difference between inflow and outflow rates. However, the user's solution differs from the professor's, which includes an additional term accounting for the change in height over time multiplied by the inflow area. The user seeks clarification on the discrepancy and what might have been overlooked in their calculations. The conversation highlights the complexities of applying mass conservation principles in fluid dynamics scenarios.
sandmike_83
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Good Morning to all

I saw this problem in one of the courses that I am taking this semester. It is very simple, it consists of an open conical tank being filled in the upper part with an stream (which is assumed to be cylindrical) of water (flow Qi through an area Ai). At the bottom of the tank there is an opening (Ae) through which the water leaves the tank, following the torricelli equation: Qe=Ae*SQRT(2*g*h)

h being the water level in the tank measured from the lower part.

I was solving the problem using mass conservation law for control volume using fixed and deformable boundaries (to exercise a bit the control volume approach), and for both cases I got the same solution:
(Derivative of the volume of the cone with time)=(flow in)-(flow out)
d( (1/3)*Pi*(r^2)*h)/dt=Qe-Qout

However, if you see the pdf attached the professor's solution is a bit different, and there is an extra term (dh/dt)*Ai.

What is your opinion about it? What did I do wrong?

Thanks in advance

PS. I didn't post this topic under homework because I didn't got this problem as homework, I just saw it in the course notes and I wanted to do the derivation on my own to see If I got the same result.
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
If the hole is small, the difference is insignificant. He just subtracted the volume of the cone projected below the hole opening.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top