How Plaque Reduces Artery Radius: Calculating with Poiseuille's Law

  • Thread starter Thread starter cyberdx16
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pressure Volume
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the reduction in artery radius due to plaque formation using Poiseuille's Law. A scenario is presented where the flow rate in an artery has decreased to 30% of its normal value, with a corresponding 30% increase in pressure difference. Participants clarify the correct application of the formula, with one contributor calculating that the radius is reduced by 14.4%. The conversation highlights the implications of significant occlusion, noting that an 80% blockage is particularly concerning for exercise tolerance and oxygen demands. Accurate calculations are essential for understanding the impact of arterial blockages on health.
cyberdx16
Messages
16
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


When physicians diagnose arterial blockages, they quote the reduction in flow rate. If the flow rate in an artery has been reduced to 30% of its normal value due to plaque formation, and the average pressure difference has increased by 30%, by what factor has the plaque reduced the radius of the artery?


Homework Equations



Poiseuille's Law.

The Attempt at a Solution



what i used was R=(.7/1.3)^.25 and get that only 85.6% of the radius of the artery is available, and has been reduced by 14.4%
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you want to use .3 in the numerator, ie

flow is now 30 percent of original, not been reduced by 30%
 
Last edited:
wouldn't the presure rate be increased by .3 so from its original, which is 1 and add .3 for the increase. But yeah i just tried .3 and it didnt work
 
Its both .3 and 1.3, (.3/1.3)^.25 is that what you tried?
 
yeah you are right denverdoc! thx
 
NP. FYI when occlusion reaches 80 percent and above, bad news. This guy has lost some exercise tolerance but still in decent shape re meeting oxygen demands.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top