Resultant Force Due to Hydrostatic Pressure

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the resultant force on a downward-facing isosceles triangular gate submerged in water, hinged at the top. The challenge arises from the varying hydrostatic pressure with depth and the decreasing surface area of the gate. To find the force exerted to keep the gate closed, participants suggest slicing the gate into horizontal sections, calculating the force on each slice, and integrating. The conversation clarifies that since only depth varies, a single integral can be used rather than double integration. Understanding this concept is crucial for solving similar problems effectively.
MJay82
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
I've got a question concerning the resultant force due to hydrostatic pressure. I understand how to calculate an object with uniform dimensions as depth (and pressure) increase. But I got thrown a serious curve ball on a Statics test.

The situation was such:

A downward facing isosceles triangular gate with base b and height a is hinged on the top at point O, which is a distance h below the surface of water. Calculate the force exerted on the back side of the gate to keep it closed.

I feel confident in finding the point that the resultant pressure force is applied at, but I got really confused because surface area of the gate is decreasing with depth while pressure is increasing with depth.

I see this equation here,
dp = \gammadh
Can I use this to find the magnitude of the resultant pressure force? I've got a final tomorrow and I feel that if only I could understand this one concept, I could work out the rest of my problems fairly easily. Thanks for any help.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Hi MJay82! :smile:

Standard method: slice the gate into horizontal slices from depth h to h+dh, find the force on each slice, and integrate. :wink:

(and there's a hinge, so this is a rotational problem, so in this case you'd need the moment of the force on each slice, about the hinge)
 
Ok - that's what I thought would be going on, thanks for the speedy reply!
I should have mentioned that I did understand the moment part. Using the scalar moment calculation (force x perpendicular distance), finding the force necessary to keep the gate closed is a cinch.

Let's see if I can maybe more clearly articulate what is baffling me, because although your answer let's me know that I'm at least thinking correctly, I can't conceptualize the changes.

You've got a pressure which is varying with depth - increasing as depth increases. And you've got an area which is also varying with depth, but is decreasing as depth increases.

I'm not familiar with double integration yet - is this a problem that would call for such, or since area and pressure are both varying with respect to depth, is it just a matter of relating both area and pressure in terms of one variable?
 
MJay82 said:
I'm not familiar with double integration yet - is this a problem that would call for such, or since area and pressure are both varying with respect to depth, is it just a matter of relating both area and pressure in terms of one variable?

Forget about variables, just ask yourself how many d's are there? :wink:

In this case, there's only dh …

so you'll be summing over all the slices, which becomes a single integral ∫ … dh. :smile:

Just insert the moment of the force on the whole slice.

(If the pressure was also varying horizontally, then you'd need to slice-and-dice, and you'd have to sum over little squares of height dh and width dx … two d's, so a double integral. :wink:)
 
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
Back
Top