Rate of Energy Transferred, Aluminum Pot

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the rate of energy transfer through the bottom of an aluminum pot using the formula P=KA(TH-TC)/L. The pot has a radius of 8cm and a thickness of 1cm, with the stove temperature at 120 degrees Celsius and the pot's initial temperature at 20 degrees Celsius. Participants confirm that the equation is correct but debate the accuracy of the area and thermal conductivity values used, with some expressing concern over the reliability of the constants sourced by the original poster. Ultimately, the closest calculated answer is approximately 44230W, which aligns with option d. The conversation highlights the importance of using accurate constants for thermal calculations.
DracoMalfoy
Messages
88
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


The bottom of a circular, aluminum pot has a radius of 8cm and a thickness of 1cm. The temperature of the stove top is 120 degrees celsius and the temperature of the pot initially is 20 degrees celsius. What is the rate at which energy is transferred through the bottom of the pot?

a. 300W

b. 2589W

c. 2.67X10^5W

d. 4.79X10^4W

e. 7.89W

Homework Equations



P=KA(TH-TC)/L

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
Thermal Conductivity(K) of Aluminum: 220 k (J/s⋅m⋅ºC)
A(Cross sectional area the energy goes through): .08m??
(Th-Tc): (120-20degreeC)
L(Distance energy travels): .01m?

Im not sure if this is the right equation to use, or if A or L is correct. I am not getting the answer this way.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
DracoMalfoy said:
if this is the right equation to use, or if A or L is correct
Right equation, right L, but the 8cm is a radius, not an area.
 
haruspex said:
Right equation, right L, but the 8cm is a radius, not an area.
i understand. i got the answer. d i think
 
DracoMalfoy said:
i understand. i got the answer. d i think
Yes, that's the nearest to what I get ... 44230W ... but worryingly different.
 
haruspex said:
Yes, that's the nearest to what I get ... 44230W ... but worryingly different.
I've noticed that the OP has several posts where the source of relevant constants is a tad dubious and differ from other more reliable sources by a fairly substantial percent. I'm not sure if these sources are mandated by the course or randomly chosen by the OP, but either way it's a bit disconcerting.
 
gneill said:
I've noticed that the OP has several posts where the source of relevant constants is a tad dubious and differ from other more reliable sources by a fairly substantial percent. I'm not sure if these sources are mandated by the course or randomly chosen by the OP, but either way it's a bit disconcerting.
I wondered about the conductivity figure, but if anything it seems a little high.
 
The book claims the answer is that all the magnitudes are the same because "the gravitational force on the penguin is the same". I'm having trouble understanding this. I thought the buoyant force was equal to the weight of the fluid displaced. Weight depends on mass which depends on density. Therefore, due to the differing densities the buoyant force will be different in each case? Is this incorrect?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
9K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
14K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
14K
Replies
3
Views
4K