Setting up and solving for ODE

  • Thread starter Thread starter hotcommodity
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ode
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a differential equation related to a saltwater solution in a bucket, where salt is added at a constant rate while water is drained and replaced to maintain a constant volume. Participants are tasked with determining the amount of salt in the bucket after one minute.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the setup of the differential equation, questioning the rates of salt entering and leaving the bucket. There are attempts to separate variables and integrate, with some participants expressing uncertainty about constants and the correctness of their integration steps.

Discussion Status

The discussion has seen various attempts to derive the solution, with some participants providing guidance on integration techniques and questioning assumptions about the rates involved. There is acknowledgment of potential errors in the setup and integration process, but no explicit consensus on a final solution has been reached.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of correctly interpreting the rates of salt and solution, and there are discussions about the implications of adding pure water to the system. Some participants also mention the need for careful handling of constants during integration.

hotcommodity
Messages
434
Reaction score
0
[SOLVED] Setting up and solving for ODE

Homework Statement



A 5 gallon bucket is full of pure water. Suppose we begin dumping salt into the bucket at a rate of .25 lbs per minute. Also, we open the spigot so that .5 gallons per minute leaves the bucket, and we add pure water to keep the bucket full. If the salt water solution is always well mixed, what is the amount of salt in the bucket after 1 minute?


Homework Equations



If I call the rate of salt flowing in \frac{dI}{dt} then \frac{dI}{dt}= \frac{.25 lb salt}{min}

If I call the rate of solution flowing out \frac{dO}{dt} then \frac{dO}{dt}= \frac{0.5 gal solution}{min}

The concentraion as the amount of salt at any time t divided by the amount of pure water is \frac{S(t)}{5gal}. Multiplying dO/dt by the concentration gives \frac{dO}{dt} = \frac{0.1S}{min}.


The Attempt at a Solution



I figure \frac{dS}{dt} = \frac{dI}{dt} - \frac{dO}{dt}

and thus \frac{dS}{dt} = .25 - 0.1(S)

I won't type out the rest until I know that I'm on track. Is this correct reasoning?

Any help is appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you are on the right track, yes.
 
Mathdope said:
I think you are on the right track, yes.

Ok then. I have:

\frac{dS}{dt} = .25 - 0.1(S) = 0.1( 2.5 - S)

I separate variables (really only S) and integrate:

\int \frac{dS}{2.5 - S} = \int 0.1 dt

ln|2.5 - S| = 0.1t + C_1

2.5 - S = \pm e^{0.1t}e^{C_1}

2.5 - S = C_2e^{0.1t}

S(t) = 2.5 + C_3e^{0.1t}

If there is 0 salt at t = 0, then C3 = 2.5, and I have

S(t) = 2.5 + 2.5e^{0.1t}

However, this is incorrect.
 
hotcommodity said:
If there is 0 salt at t = 0, then C3 = 2.5, and I have

S(t) = 2.5 + 2.5e^{0.1t}

However, this is incorrect.
C3 would be -2.5 not 2.5
 
But at 1 min, that would give me a negative answer.
 
It's possible that the problem lies in the fact that you're derivative measuring rate in is in terms of salt (with no water), while the derivative measuring rate out is in terms of the salt solution (with the water).

If they are adding pure water to keep the bucket full, you may need to recheck what you put for dI/dt.

Edit: No , now that I look again, it does look like both rates are measuring that of the salt only. Hmmm. I'll keep looking.
 
OK thanks, I appreciate the help.

Edit: If it helps at all the answer is 0.238 lbs.
 
Last edited:
Try factoring out a -0.1 instead of a 0.1 when you are setting up the differential equation. It shouldn't matter (!) but it will give you a negative exponential instead of a positive. I have to go eat but I'll be back in a half hour or so to see if that helps. Maybe someone else will see the problem too.

Edit: see below. It does matter. That's your problem right there, as "explained" below.
 
Last edited:
hotcommodity said:
Ok then. I have:

\frac{dS}{dt} = .25 - 0.1(S) = 0.1( 2.5 - S)

I separate variables (really only S) and integrate:

\int \frac{dS}{2.5 - S} = \int 0.1 dt

ln|2.5 - S| = 0.1t + C_1
It is not the case that d/dS(ln|2.5 - S|)=1/[2.5 - S], so your antiderivative is a bit off (not much). Can you see why?
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Mathdope said:
It is not the case that d/dS(ln|2.5 - S|)=1/[2.5 - S], so you're antiderivative is a bit off (not much). Can you see why?

I believe I should have used u-substitution while integrating. If I had done so, I would have:

- ln|2.5 - S| = 0.1t + C_1

-|2.5 - S| = e^{0.1t}e^{C_1}

-(2.5 - S) = \pm e^{0.1t}e^{C_1}

S - 2.5 = C_2e^{0.1t}

S(t) = C_2e^{0.1t} + 2.5

When S(t) is 0, C2 must be -2.5.

S(t) = 2.5 - 2.5e^{0.1t}

This is pretty much what I had before, I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong.
 
  • #11
hotcommodity said:
I believe I should have used u-substitution while integrating. If I had done so, I would have:

- ln|2.5 - S| = 0.1t + C_1

-|2.5 - S| = e^{0.1t}e^{C_1}

This is pretty much what I had before, I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong.
Your mistake is going from the first line to second on the left hand side. In other words
- ln|2.5 - S| doesn't become -|2.5 - S| when exponentiating. Try it once more.
 
  • #12
Ok I got it, I needed to place the negative on the other side of the equation. So I have:

S(t) = 2.5 - 2.5e^{-0.1t}

And I get the correct answer. Thank you very much for your help :)
 
  • #13
Aye that's it. You're welcome. You can now mark the thread solved.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
6K
Replies
6
Views
2K