Does the Bernoulli Effect Apply to the Jet Reaction Force in a Leaking Bucket?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the application of the Bernoulli Effect and jet reaction forces in the context of a leaking bucket. Participants clarify that a hole at the bottom of the bucket does not create thrust because the water simply accelerates downward due to gravity, rather than generating a jet effect. In contrast, a hole on the side of the bucket can produce a small thrust as water exits, creating an imbalance of forces. The conversation emphasizes the distinction between gravitational effects and thrust generation in fluid dynamics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of fluid dynamics principles, particularly the Bernoulli Effect.
  • Familiarity with Newton's laws of motion and their application to variable-mass systems.
  • Basic knowledge of pressure dynamics in fluids.
  • Mathematical proficiency to interpret equations of motion involving mass flow.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Bernoulli Equation and its applications in fluid dynamics.
  • Learn about variable-mass systems and their equations of motion.
  • Explore the principles of thrust generation in rockets and jet propulsion.
  • Investigate the effects of pressure differentials in fluid systems.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, engineering, and fluid dynamics, particularly those interested in the mechanics of fluid flow and thrust generation in various systems.

sergiokapone
Messages
306
Reaction score
17
If in the bottom of the bucket with water we made a hole, then water flows out of it. Bucket with water is the system with ##m(t)##, thus we have to use equation:
##m(t)\frac{dv}{dt} = F + u\frac{dm}{dt}##.
Where ##u\frac{dm}{dt}## -- is jet reaction force.
But, I think the jet reaction force should not appear in this case. What is the solution of this paradox?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi, Sergio. If I understand the question correctly, there are two answers. A hole in the actually bottom would not provide thrust because the water would just be accelerating toward the ground as opposed to away from the bucket. That would lessen the effect of gravity upon the bucket because of weight loss, but that's not really a jet effect. If, on the other hand, the hole is in the side of the bucket near the bottom, there would be a tiny one because it would be pushing off from the water still in the container. I honestly think that I'm not correct in my interpretation of what you're asking though. Can you perhaps rephrase it?
 
I don't understand the question.
 
Danger said:
A hole in the actually bottom would not provide thrust because the water would just be accelerating toward the ground as opposed to away from the bucket. That would lessen the effect of gravity upon the bucket because of weight loss, but that's not really a jet effect.

I do not completely understand this. How I can write the equation of motion in the case the bucket, which is on the floor?
 
sergiokapone said:
How I can write the equation of motion in the case the bucket, which is on the floor?
No help here... I don't know any math. I can say that there will be no motion at all if the thing is on the floor. (Unless you count immeasurably small structural vibrations on the molecular scale.) In fact, the water will just stop flowing completely if the surfaces of the bucket rim and the floor are smooth enough to form a seal.
 
Last edited:
It is strange to me, the in the case of the rocket the outgoing propellant create jet forse, but in the case of bucket - whater is not.
 
In the case of a rocket or air-breathing jet, or water jet or any other kind, the reaction mass is accelerated away from the container by either being expanded or being compressed and then released, or having the reaction chamber reduce in size to eject it (like in a syringe or balloon). In the bucket instance, gravity is simply pulling the water away from it. Earth is providing the force, not something in the bucket.
 
sergiokapone said:
It is strange to me, the in the case of the rocket the outgoing propellant create jet forse, but in the case of bucket - whater is not.

This is how a rocket produces thrust:

240px-R%C3%BCckstoss1600.png


Where is the green force in the case of your bucket?
 
Danger said:
Earth is providing the force, not something in the bucket.

Ok, I understand that.

But now the quastion in the math. Why should I use equation of the motion ##m(t)\frac{dv}{dt}=F## instead ##m(t)\frac{dv}{dt}=F + u\frac{dm}{dt}##? Is the ##u## -equal zero in this case? But, obviously it is not.
 
  • #10
sergiokapone said:
But now the quastion in the math.
Define your symbols. What is F, v, m, u ?
 
  • #11
sergiokapone said:
Ok, I understand that.

Is the ##u## -equal zero in this case? But, obviously it is not.
As mentioned, I don't know any math at all beyond simple geometry. What is "u"? If it's physical displacement on an x, y, or z axis, it is zero.
 
  • #12
##u## - is the propellant relative velocity (relative to rocket or some other thing, bucket, for example e.t.c.)
 
  • #13
sergiokapone said:
##u## - is the relative velocity
Velocity of what and when? What are the other symbols representing?
 
  • #14
A.T. said:
Define your symbols. What is F, v, m, u ?
##u## - is the propellant relative velocity
##F## - external force, gravity force, for example
##v## - is the velocity of the rocket
##m## - is the current mass of the rocket
 
  • #15
sergiokapone said:
##u## - is the propellant relative velocity (relative to rocket or some other thing, bucket, for example e.t.c.)
Okay, but I rather suspect that the equation should apply only if there is some physical interaction between the two objects. In this case, there isn't. That would be like using it to determine the force between an aeroplane and canoe. What applies in your case is the gravity formula and how the bucket becomes lighter as water leaves it.

edit: You guys are posting too quickly for me to keep up with. :oops: I'm going to take a bathroom/TV break (it's the only room with a flatscreen) and I'll check in later.
 
Last edited:
  • #17
sergiokapone said:
Okay, that should work for you bucket too.
sergiokapone said:
But, I think the jet reaction force should not appear in this case.
Why not? If you make the hole to the side, it will create thrust an propel the bucket horizontally.
 
  • #18
A.T. said:
If you make the hole to the side, it will create thrust an propel the bucket horizontally.
This is not interesting trivial case.
What if I will create the hole in the bottom?
 
  • #19
sergiokapone said:
What if I will create the hole in the bottom?
Different direction of thrust.
 
  • #22
Hmm, a good question. My thoughts:

The reason that threre is no thrust is because there is no "top" of the bucket. If you poke a hole in the side, water still presses on the opposite side of the bucket and there is an imbalance of forces, which results in a net force on the bucket that makes it swing sideways.

However, since water isn't pressing on the top of the bucket, poking a hole on the bottom doesn't result in an imbalance of force from the water. Or, rather, there was already an imbalance of force since the water is pressing down but not up and we have simply lessened it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Danger
  • #23
Drakkith said:
The reason that threre is no thrust is because there is no "top" of the bucket.
But there is water on top of the water that is being pressed out of the bucket. The "thrust" (as defined in those equations) is not on the bucket itself, but on the water inside it. It reduces the vertical support force, that the bucket must apply to the water. This can also be attributed to the fact, that the water column above the hole is not supported by the bucket anymore.
 
  • #24
A.T. said:
the water column above the hole is not supported by the bucket anymore.
Which is exactly what I meant when I said that you are simply reducing the effect of gravity... :rolleyes:

I swear that this is like talking to a wall...

Drakkith, your last post makes it about as clear as it can be. It's what I've been trying to say, but you said it better.
 
  • #25
Drakkith,
But my quastion is how looks the equation of variable-mass motion in this case and why its looks like?
 
  • #26
I need hard mathematical provement.
 
  • #27
Danger said:
In the bucket instance, gravity is simply pulling the water away from it.
There is pressure in the bucket that presses the water out faster than just free fall from rest due to gravity pulling on it.

Danger said:
Earth is providing the force, not something in the bucket.
There is something in the bucket that provides a force: the water above the water that is being pressed out.
 
  • #28
A.T. said:
There is pressure in the bucket that presses the water out faster than just free fall from rest due to gravity pulling on it.

There is something in the bucket that provides a force: the water above the water that is being pressed out.
Both of which statements merely confirm what I've been saying; any impartation of force from the release is away from the water, not upon it and not upon the bucket. There is no physical transfer between the reservoir of water and the top of the bucket. The only force (other than the "negative" one) is upon the ground under the bucket.
 
Last edited:
  • #29
For the hole on the bottom, the water flowing out of the hole experiences an acceleration due to the pressure at the bottom of the bucket (which is related to the density and height of the water in the bucket) and from the pull of gravity, so there's more than just gravity accelerating the water.
 
Last edited:
  • #30
A.T. said:
But there is water on top of the water that is being pressed out of the bucket. The "thrust" (as defined in those equations) is not on the bucket itself, but on the water inside it. It reduces the vertical support force, that the bucket must apply to the water. This can also be attributed to the fact, that the water column above the hole is not supported by the bucket anymore.

Hmm, I see. I wasn't aware that counted as "thrust".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
13K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K