blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 29, 2024, 07:36:29 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2272618 Posts in 66755 Topics by 16946 Members
Latest Member: KobeTaylor
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Community Forums
| |-+  The Lounge
| | |-+  More mafs.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Go Down Print
Author Topic: More mafs.  (Read 2105 times)
doubleup
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7057


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: April 02, 2015, 05:45:48 PM »

http://www.efunda.com/formulae/fluids/draining_tank.cfm#calc

Cliffs: Boshi is right and the rate for a given hole size depends on how deep the water in the bucket is.


We're assuming a constant flow rate regardless of depth.

Thats a point - the depth of the water reduces faster with the larger hole.  So I don't think its a linear relationship between hole size and speed of evacuation.

Logged
RED-DOG
International Lover World Wide Playboy
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 46958



View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: April 02, 2015, 05:49:08 PM »

http://www.efunda.com/formulae/fluids/draining_tank.cfm#calc

Cliffs: Boshi is right and the rate for a given hole size depends on how deep the water in the bucket is.


We're assuming a constant flow rate regardless of depth.

Thats a point - the depth of the water reduces faster with the larger hole.  So I don't think its a linear relationship between hole size and speed of evacuation.




Ah, I'm with you now. So in the real world, with a constant pressure David's 5.64mm hole would need to be slightly larger to allow for a slower flow rate?
Logged

The older I get, the better I was.
Pages: 1 [2] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.12 seconds with 21 queries.