MHB Mathematical Modeling Problem for 500-gal Aquarium Impurities

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a mathematical modeling problem for a 500-gallon aquarium using a recirculating filter system that removes impurities. The key focus is on deriving a differential equation to represent the rate of change of impurities in the aquarium based on the conservation principle. The model results in an initial value problem that leads to an exponential decay formula for impurities over time. To achieve a reduction of impurities to 1% of their original concentration in three hours, the filtering constant 'a' is calculated to be approximately 0.147. This modeling approach effectively demonstrates the relationship between filtration rate, aquarium volume, and impurity concentration over time.
MarkFL
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
13,284
Reaction score
12
Here is the question:

Mathematical modeling problem?

A 500-gal aquarium is cleansed by the recirculating filter system. Water containing impurities is pumped out at a rate of 15 gal/min, filtered, and returned to the aquarium at the same rate. Assume that passing through the filter reduces the concentration of impurities by a fractional amount a. In other words, if the impurity concentration upon entering the filter is c(t), the exit concentration is ac(t), where 0 < a < 1.
a. Apply the basic conservation principle (rate of change = rate in - rate out) to obtain a differential equation for the amount of impurities present in the aquarium at time t. Assume that filtering occurs instantaneously. If the outflow concentration at any time is c(t), assume that the inflow concentration at that same instant is ac(t).
b. What value of filtering constant a will reduce impurity levels to 1% of their original values in a period of 3 hr?

I have posted a link there to this thread so the OP can view my work.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hello Kristine,

Let's let $A(t)$ represent the total amount of impurities in the aquarium at time $t$, measured in minutes. Let's also work this problem with parameters rather than numbers, so that we will derive a general formula into which we can plug the given data. Let the parameters be as follows:

$V$ is the volume in gallons of the aquarium.

$R$ is the rate, in gallons per minute, that water is filtered.

Now, if $c(t)$ is the concentration of impurities in the tank at time $t$, which is a measure of mass per gallons, then the rate at which impurities are leaving the tank and going into the filtration system is the product of the concentration and the rate of flow, which will have units of mass per minute:

$$\text{rate out}=Rc(t)$$

And likewise, the rate in of impurities coming in is given by:

$$\text{rate in}=Rac(t)$$

Now, we want to find an expression relating $A(t)$ and $c(t)$, and using the same principle that concentration is amount per volume, we may state:

$$c(t)=\frac{A(t)}{V}$$

And so, using the given basic conservation principle, we may model the amount of impurities in the tank at time $t$ with the following initial value problem (IVP):

$$\frac{dA}{dt}=\frac{R}{V}(a-1)A$$ where $$A(0)=A_0$$

The ordinary differential equation (ODE) associated with the IVP is separable, and we may write it as:

$$\frac{1}{A}\,dA=\frac{R}{V}(a-1)\,dt$$

Let's exchange the dummy variables of integration so that we may use the given boundaries as our limits of integration:

$$\int_{A_0}^{A(t)}\frac{1}{u}\,du=\frac{R}{V}(a-1)\int_{0}^{t}\,dv$$

Applying the rules of integration and the anti-derivative form of the fundamental theorem of calculus (FTOC), we obtain:

$$\left[\ln(u) \right]_{A_0}^{A(t)}=\frac{R}{V}(a-1)\left[v \right]_{0}^{t}$$

Doing the evaluations indicated, there results:

$$\ln\left(\frac{A(t)}{A_0} \right)=\frac{R}{V}(a-1)t$$

Converting from logarithmic to exponential form, we obtain:

$$\frac{A(t)}{A_0}=e^{\frac{R}{V}(a-1)t}$$

Multiplying through by $A_0$, we obtain the solution satisfying the IVP:

$$A(t)=A_0e^{\frac{R}{V}(a-1)t}$$

In order to determine the value of $a$ that will result in the amount of impurities being 1% of the initial amount, we will let $$A(t)=\frac{A_0}{100}$$, and $t=180$ (since 180 minutes is 3 hours), and the solve the resulting equation for $t$. This will be easier if we use the logarithmic form of the solution:

$$\ln\left(\frac{A(t)}{A_0} \right)=\frac{R}{V}(a-1)t$$

Solving for $a$, we find:

$$a=\frac{V}{Rt}\ln\left(\frac{A(t)}{A_0} \right)+1$$

We will also plug in the given data for the parameters:

$$R=15,\,V=500$$

And we obtain:

$$a=\frac{500}{15\cdot180}\ln\left(\frac{\dfrac{A_0}{100}}{A_0} \right)+1$$

Simplification yields:

$$a=1-\frac{10}{27}\ln\left(10 \right)\approx0.147190706298502$$
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top