MHB 정은's question at Yahoo Answers regarding depth of water in trough when half full

  • Thread starter Thread starter MarkFL
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Depth Water
MarkFL
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
13,284
Reaction score
12
Here is the question:

Integration using trapezium rule?

The diagram shows the cross section of a water-trough. One side is vertical and the other side slopes. Calculate the depth of water in the trough when it is exactly half-full. (Hint: this means the areas of two trapezia must be equal.)

https://plus.google.com/u/0/118370402069852386878/posts/Ei4LooTa5ze

Above link is shows the diagram of this question.

The answer to this question= 27.19cm

Please explain to me how to get this answer.

I have posted a link there to this topic so the OP can see my work.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hello 정은,

This problem does not require integration, or the trapezium rule to approximate a definite integral. While it could be used, it is simpler to just use the given hint.

To compute the areas of the trapezia in the cross-section of the trough above and below the water line, we need to know the width $w$ of the trough at the water line as a function of the depth of the water, which we are calling $d$. All linear measures are in cm.

We know this width increases linearly, and we know two points of the form $(d,w)$:

$(0,70)$ and $(50,100)$

and so the slope of the linear function is:

$$m=\frac{\Delta w}{\Delta h}=\frac{100-70}{50-0}=\frac{3}{5}$$

Thus, using the slope, and the first point in the point-slope formula, we get:

$$w-70=\frac{3}{5}(d-0)$$

$$w=\frac{3}{5}d+70$$

Now, using the formula for the area of a trapezium:

$$A=\frac{h}{2}(B+b)$$

We find the area $A_1$ of the trapezium below the water line is:

$$A_1=\frac{d}{2}\left(\frac{3}{5}d+70+70 \right)=\frac{d}{2}\left(\frac{3}{5}d+140 \right)$$

We find the area $A_2$ of the trapezium above the water line is:

$$A_2=\frac{50-d}{2}\left(100+\frac{3}{5}d+70 \right)=\frac{50-d}{2}\left(\frac{3}{5}d+170 \right)$$

Equating the two areas, we have:

$$\frac{d}{2}\left(\frac{3}{5}d+140 \right)=\frac{50-d}{2}\left(\frac{3}{5}d+170 \right)$$

Multiplying through by $10$ we get:

$$d(3d+700)=(50-d)(3d+850)$$

Distributing and arranging in standard quadratic form, we obtain:

$$3d^2+700d-21250=0$$

Application of the quadratic formula, and discarding the negative root, there results:

$$d=\frac{25}{3}\left(\sqrt{298}-14 \right)\approx27.1889708469339$$
 
Suppose we wish to generalize a bit, and let the width of the trapezoidal cross-section of a trough at the base and top be $w_1$ and $w_2$ respectively, where $w_1<w_2$. The depth of the trough we can call $h$, and we will, as before, let $d$ be the depth when the trough is $$k$$ full, where $0\le k\le1$.

To find the width $w$ of the trough at $d$, we note we have the points:

$$\left(0,w_1 \right),\,\left(h,w_2 \right)$$

and so the slope of the linear width function is:

$$m=\frac{w_2-w_1}{h}$$

and the point-slope formula gives us:

$$w=\frac{w_2-w_1}{h}d+w_1$$

Now, in order for the trough to be $$k$$ full, we require:

$$\frac{d}{2}\left(\frac{w_2-w_1}{h}d+2w_1 \right)=\frac{kh}{2}\left(w_1+w_2 \right)$$

Multiplying through by $2h$, and arranging in standard quadratic form in $d$, we obtain:

$$\left(w_2-w_1 \right)d^2+2hw_1d-kh^2\left(w_1+w_2 \right)=0$$

Applying the quadratic formula, and discarding the negative root, we find:

$$d=\frac{h\left(\sqrt{w_1^2+k\left(w_2^2-w_1^2 \right)}-w_1 \right)}{w_2-w_1}$$
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top