Calculating Total Surface Area of a Pool with Varying Depths

AI Thread Summary
To calculate the total surface area of a pool with varying depths, the bottom area is determined by multiplying the length (27.6 meters) by the width (16.4 meters), resulting in 452.64 square meters. The deep end area is calculated as a rectangle with dimensions 16.4 meters by 3.2 meters, yielding 52.48 square meters, while the shallow end area is 16.4 meters by 1 meter, totaling 16.4 square meters. The sides of the pool are trapezoids, with each side's area calculated using the average of the two depths (1 meter and 3.2 meters) multiplied by the pool length, resulting in 57.96 square meters per side. Adding all these areas together gives a total surface area of 637.76 square meters. This method effectively combines geometric principles to solve for the surface area of the pool.
Linus
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
G'day all I'm new here this is my first post. I just found this forum in hope that you all can help me and I've hopfully come to the right place.

i'm pretty bad at maths (actually shocking at it) and this may be a dumb question but any help would be appreciated. I'm doing total surface area. here's the question

Calculate the total surface area of the inside of the pool?

length of the pool is 27.6 metres
width of the pool is 16.4 metres

The pool has a water depth 1 metre at the shallow end and a depth of 3.2 metres at the deep end .

how do i calculate the total surface area?

Please show working out and explain how you did it. Thanks
 

Attachments

  • pool.JPG
    pool.JPG
    10.4 KB · Views: 493
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Erm, don't take what I say as being right (can be very crap at Maths), but I think that to calculate the length of the side that's unknown in the diagram, you use pythagoras h^2=a^2 + b^2 . h is the side you're looking for and use a=2.4 and b =27.6 (I got the 2.4 from breaking up the side that we're looking at into a rectangle and a triangle and taking he 1 m depth away from the depth at the deeper end of 3.4m). Then once you've worked out that length then you calculate the area of each of the sides, breaking up the side nearest us and the one on the opposite side into a rectangle and a triangle (as before), and calculating their areas that way. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong (and if I am, blame the wine!).
 
Oh and as for being dumb- no way! If you want dumb you should see half the posts I make (and I'm at uni doing bloody Maths. I figure if the uni people have any sense they should have me out on my ear by the end of this semester!).
 
Oh, and it is 3.4m depth and not 3.2m, right? If it is 3.2 just use 2.2 instead of the 2.4 I mentioned above.
 
If Claire84 will forgive me:

"length of the pool is 27.6 metres
width of the pool is 16.4 metres

The pool has a water depth 1 metre at the shallow end and a depth of 3.2 metres at the deep end ."

Okay, the bottom of the pool is a rectangle with length 27.6 metres and width 16.4 metres. Its area is (27.6)(16.4)= 452.64 square metres.

The "deep" end is a rectangle with width 16.4 metres and height 3.2 metres. Its area is (16.4)(3.2)= 52.48 square metres.

The "shallow" end is a rectangle with width 16.4 metres and height 1 metre. Its area is (16.4)(1)= 16.4 square metres.

The sides are trapezoids with "height" (actually the length of the pool) 27.6 metres and two bases of lengths 1 metre and 3.2 metres. The "average" base is (1+ 3.2)/2= 2.1 metres so the area of each side is (27.6)*(2.1)= 57.96 square metres.

Since there are 2 sides, the total area is 452.64+ 52.48 + 16.4 +57.96 +57.96= 637.76 square metres.
 
Thanks for all of your help, i'll now survive another term.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top