An abundant cheap dense liquid?

[gloo]

I was looking at the density of liquids and wanted to find a really dense but abundant liquid. I know that Mercury is quite dense, but is fairly abundant?

I was also thinking about ferrofluids :

1. How dense is it?
2. Can it be made in increasing densities and up to what density possibly?

 

[BvU]

How about molten lead ? Or is the temperature a problem ? (you didn't mention that, though)

 

[berkeman]

I was looking at the density of liquids and wanted to find a really dense but abundant liquid.

Can you say what the application is?

 

[rootone]

How about molten lead ? Or is the temperature a problem ? (you didn't mention that, though)

Or molten Uranium for that matter, (depleted will do, it makes radioactivity less problematic).
It actually a fairly abundant element and very dense, but getting access to it legally would doubtless be a problem though.

 

[Vanadium 50]

but is fairly abundant?

How abundant is fairly abundant? I could order some today and have it tomorrow. (Well, I could if tomorrow weren't Saturday)

 

[gloo]

How about molten lead ? Or is the temperature a problem ? (you didn't mention that, though)

no I need it in regular temperature of ...like room temperature

 

[gloo]

Can you say what the application is?

I wanted to know if I could make a bottom end of a large container much more dense than just what was occurring through regular liquid depth. Like layering from more dense to less dense (the way oil and water is)

 

[gloo]

How abundant is fairly abundant? I could order some today and have it tomorrow. (Well, I could if tomorrow weren't Saturday)

like you can load a large container ship of it . And not something acidic and dangerous like bromine

 

[gloo]

So nobody knows how dense a ferrofluid can get? Or is that some open ended type question?

 

[Vanadium 50]

o nobody knows how dense a ferrofluid can get? Or is that some open ended type question?

It's like asking "how dense can a red fluid be?".

like you can load a large container ship of it

A container ship can't even sail with all its containers filled with water.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Oh, and ferrofluids are substantially more expensive than mercury. Filling a Container to its maximum weight (not maximum volume) is over $4 million. It would take the world GDP for a year to fill a (very large) container ship.

 

[gloo]

Oh, and ferrofluids are substantially more expensive than mercury. Filling a Container to its maximum weight (not maximum volume) is over $4 million. It would take the world GDP for a year to fill a (very large) container ship.

So how easy is it to make a ferrofluid that is say 10g/cm³ ? Is this even possible? I am not talking about trying to fill container ships with it. It was just some off the cuff remark because I didn't know how else to talk of relative abundance.

 

[Vanadium 50]

So how easy is it to make a ferrofluid that is say 10g/cm3 ?

Since iron has a density of 7.8, pretty doggone hard.

 

[gloo]

Ok...good point -- how about 4? I kind thought since Mercury is 14 and liquid... Completely forgot about Iron density

 

[Baluncore]

Maybe you should consider a dense fluid such as Barium sulphate = Barite dust in water.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barium#Barium_sulfate_and_barite

Also investigate other high density drilling muds such as Bentonite.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drilling_fluid#Composition_of_drilling_mud

 

[gloo]

Maybe you should consider a dense fluid such as Barium sulphate = Barite dust in water.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barium#Barium_sulfate_and_barite

Also investigate other high density drilling muds such as Bentonite.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drilling_fluid#Composition_of_drilling_mud

So I read the Barium Sulfate is not soluble in water -- does that mean after a time, it would settle to the bottom? Thus you need to constantly keep mixing it?

What about bentonite? I can't even find the density on this liquid compound?.

 

[gloo]

It's like asking "how dense can a red fluid be?".
A container ship can't even sail with all its containers filled with water.

So what is the maximum density that you know a ferrofluid can be made to?

 

[gloo]

Maybe you should consider a dense fluid such as Barium sulphate = Barite dust in water.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barium#Barium_sulfate_and_barite

Also investigate other high density drilling muds such as Bentonite.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drilling_fluid#Composition_of_drilling_mud

Ah ok -- barium sulfide is soluable but not barium sulfate. Sorry.

 

[Vanadium 50]

This is getting tiresome:

Will this work?
No.
What about this?
No.
What about this?
Lather, rinse and repeat.

If you don't tell us what you are trying to do, the odds of us hitting on an acceptable solution are very, very small.

 

[gloo]

This is getting tiresome:

Will this work?
No.
What about this?
No.
What about this?
Lather, rinse and repeat.

If you don't tell us what you are trying to do, the odds of us hitting on an acceptable solution are very, very small.

Why are you getting so impatient ? I have asked my questions in a pretty straightforward method. I am not an engineer or some physics student who can formulate any question of the top of my head without having some ambiguities. Asking about how dense a ferrofluid can be made is not that obvious a question??! I read on a yahoo answer that it can get to 3.4g per cm cube. Then it says you can achieve 20g per cube in the presence of a magnetic field which then confused me so I wanted to clarify because that was higher than Steel. Maybe there was something that could have been mixed into achieve something much higher than the 3.4g/cm³ . You never directly answered the question - you never gave me a range of what is reasonable for ferrofluid -- so I asked again. The yahoo answer I thought would not be as clear as an answer given by true engineers here who could give input.

Somebody asked me what the application is and I answered them --

" I wanted to know if I could make a bottom end of a large container much more dense than just what was occurring through regular liquid depth. Like layering from more dense to less dense (the way oil and water is"

why would I want a layering of dense liquids?? I was thinking of an application that when displaced into the layers, the bottom layer would have a much greater upward force so as to push the bottom of an object that had a smaller surface area then at the top; thus a greater displacement volume in the entire liquid.

 

[Baluncore]

Why are you getting so impatient ?

Because you are wasting our valuable time. We are not puppets to be jerked around in the dark by an amateur.

What volume is "the bottom end of the large container" ? Is it a thimble or a Great Lake ?
Get real. What is the budget ?

 

[gloo]

Because you are wasting our valuable time. We are not puppets to be jerked around in the dark by an amateur.

What volume is "the bottom end of the large container" ? Is it a thimble or a Great Lake ?
Get real. What is the budget ?

How did I jerk you anyone around in the dark? They asked a question and I answered it the best I could. If this forum is only meant for engineers and physics professors than I don't get why it exists? I get a lot of snide comments from some advisors but I never retaliate and just look the other way because I respect their intellectual time. I don't come here to troll or waste anybody's time and I am a respectful person who does not jerk anyone around. If you don't want to help or feel it is a waste of time then don't answer and let someone do it.

 

[berkeman]

why would I want a layering of dense liquids?? I was thinking of an application that when displaced into the layers, the bottom layer would have a much greater upward force so as to push the bottom of an object that had a smaller surface area then at the top; thus a greater displacement volume in the entire liquid.

Can you say what the application is? It is starting to sound like you are trying to design a PMM, which we do not discuss at the PF.

 

[Nik_2213]

Cool it, guys ! He's not an 'Engineer', so he's warily feeling his way through unfamiliar tech and terminology towards constraining the problem. Iteration, innit ??

So far, if I've read it correctly, he needs a bucket of 'dense liquid' at ambient temperature and pressure. Sounds like a 'separation by density' process, or one of those 'crazy layered cocktails' beloved of 'General Science' courses. And, reading between the lines, due regard for environment, so no persistent toxins like Chloroform (CHCl3) or 'Carbon Tet' (CCl4)...

Liquid mercury is the obvious winner by density and, IIRC, vapour release may be *mitigated* by a slick of silicone oil. Still, it is far too easily mishandled, so safety assessments, procedures and monitoring may mire the project in administration. Oh, and blood tests, too...

Barium-based drilling fluids have their own issues. Yes, hospitals may use 'Barium Meals' as gut tracers, but such does pass. IIRC, disposal remains an issue...

Ferrofluids have the happy knack of being 'switchable'. Altering mark/space ratio on their energising electromagnet may allow proportional control.

Hmm. Would a 'fluidised bed' serve ? Wet or dry, that's mature tech.

A tangential notion: 'Poured ballast' ? On a small scale --Model boats ?-- the traditional recipe was lead shot in a careful mix of sizes to provide void filling. IIRC, non-toxic Tungsten beads now fill that niche, available from specialist 'Hunting, Shooting & Fishing' suppliers...

 

[gloo]

Cool it, guys ! He's not an 'Engineer', so he's warily feeling his way through unfamiliar tech and terminology towards constraining the problem. Iteration, innit ??

So far, if I've read it correctly, he needs a bucket of 'dense liquid' at ambient temperature and pressure. Sounds like a 'separation by density' process, or one of those 'crazy layered cocktails' beloved of 'General Science' courses. And, reading between the lines, due regard for environment, so no persistent toxins like Chloroform (CHCl3) or 'Carbon Tet' (CCl4)...

Liquid mercury is the obvious winner by density and, IIRC, vapour release may be *mitigated* by a slick of silicone oil. Still, it is far too easily mishandled, so safety assessments, procedures and monitoring may mire the project in administration. Oh, and blood tests, too...

Barium-based drilling fluids have their own issues. Yes, hospitals may use 'Barium Meals' as gut tracers, but such does pass. IIRC, disposal remains an issue...

Ferrofluids have the happy knack of being 'switchable'. Altering mark/space ratio on their energising electromagnet may allow proportional control.

Hmm. Would a 'fluidised bed' serve ? Wet or dry, that's mature tech.

A tangential notion: 'Poured ballast' ? On a small scale --Model boats ?-- the traditional recipe was lead shot in a careful mix of sizes to provide void filling. IIRC, non-toxic Tungsten beads now fill that niche, available from specialist 'Hunting, Shooting & Fishing' suppliers...

Thanks Nik -- I appreciate your time and consideration of my thoughts. As for my application I don't really have one yet that is going to be used. I was watching Crimson Tides (Denzil Washington, Gene Hackman) and the subs motor died and it took on water in part of its ballast. The sub was sinking deeper and the crew was fearful of the higher pressure crushing them. I was wondering if some configuration could be made to use the higher pressure at the bottom of an object to push up and extend out a larger volume and thus lower the density and lift the object or let it be neutral buoyant. For instance, if 1 cubic meter of empty space gets pushed up but the top part that is larger will extend out an 2 empty cubic meter of air/vacuum. Then I realized the top part would be a lot higher and closer to the surface for this relationship to work. Then for some reason I thought a denser fluid at the bottom could have done this...then it morphed into...maybe a way to lift a ship?! I don't know my mind just gets filled with these kind of thoughts all the time. Maybe I am a Edison wannabe hack. But I am thinking gadgets, innovation, etc all the time and although I have no formal engineer degree , I did okish in high school physics. I think there are worse things to day dream about...like Donald Trump winning an election.

Yes, mercury is the obvious choice that would make sense but it seems that there is very little and would take a long time to mine or recycle mercury in a large quantity (i.e 10 cubic meters per application)

 

[gloo]

Cool it, guys ! He's not an 'Engineer', so he's warily feeling his way through unfamiliar tech and terminology towards constraining the problem. Iteration, innit ??

So far, if I've read it correctly, he needs a bucket of 'dense liquid' at ambient temperature and pressure. Sounds like a 'separation by density' process, or one of those 'crazy layered cocktails' beloved of 'General Science' courses. And, reading between the lines, due regard for environment, so no persistent toxins like Chloroform (CHCl3) or 'Carbon Tet' (CCl4)...

Liquid mercury is the obvious winner by density and, IIRC, vapour release may be *mitigated* by a slick of silicone oil. Still, it is far too easily mishandled, so safety assessments, procedures and monitoring may mire the project in administration. Oh, and blood tests, too...

Barium-based drilling fluids have their own issues. Yes, hospitals may use 'Barium Meals' as gut tracers, but such does pass. IIRC, disposal remains an issue...

Ferrofluids have the happy knack of being 'switchable'. Altering mark/space ratio on their energising electromagnet may allow proportional control.

Hmm. Would a 'fluidised bed' serve ? Wet or dry, that's mature tech.

A tangential notion: 'Poured ballast' ? On a small scale --Model boats ?-- the traditional recipe was lead shot in a careful mix of sizes to provide void filling. IIRC, non-toxic Tungsten beads now fill that niche, available from specialist 'Hunting, Shooting & Fishing' suppliers...

Actually, can you expand on what you mean about Ferrofluid being switchable? I know from Google etc.. that a higher magnetic field can possibly induce a 20g/cubic centimeter density. But unless the magnet is the size of godzilla, the 20g/cubic meter can only be achieved on a flat bottom of a surface for a few centimeters in height?

 

[gloo]

Can you say what the application is? It is starting to sound like you are trying to design a PMM, which we do not discuss at the PF.

Sorry Berkeman -- I don't have any real concrete application that I am aiming for -- just one of many though experiments that float through my head as I see things (see response to Nik above).

Thanks for your time.

 

[Bystander]

use the higher pressure at the bottom of an object to push up and extend out a larger volume and thus lower the density and lift the object or let it be neutral buoyant.

PMM. No.

 

[Mark Harder]

This business about floating objects selectively is somewhat like differential centrifugation. Start with a concentrated solution of sucrose, or glycerol, or cesium chloride and add a macromolecular compound of unknown density - usually equivalent to its molecular weight - or of a mixture of macromolecules differing by molecular weights. Centrifuge at very high g. After a while, an equilibrium gradient of sucrose concentration forms, with the most concentrated and therefore most dense sucrose solution forms in the tube. The protein, DNA or whatever will concentrate at that level of the tube that matches its density/MW. There are some variations on the technique, all relying of differing densities of fluids.

 

[rbelli1]

higher pressure at the bottom of an object

Adding a dense fluid at the bottom of a sinking vessel will not do anything useful. The higher local pressure there will not increase buoyancy. It will in fact decrease buoyancy as the mass per volume displaced will increase.

If you try to lift a mass heavier than you will you float away?

BoB

 

[Gigel]

Mercury is rare, expensive, toxic and probably illegal to owe.

Baluncore has a neat idea: some sort of mud. It's not very dense, but it's denser than water. You can go one step further and put iron powder into it. The idea is to mix substances with increasing densities, so they can hold each other. But they will precipitate sooner or later.

 

[Mark Harder]

Mercury is rare, expensive, toxic and probably illegal to owe.

Baluncore has a neat idea: some sort of mud. It's not very dense, but it's denser than water. You can go one step further and put iron powder into it. The idea is to mix substances with increasing densities, so they can hold each other. But they will precipitate sooner or later.

In the oil drilling business, they inject something called drilling mud down the hole to seal it up while drilling. It needs to be dense, so a suspension of barium sulfate (insoluble in water ) is a component of the mud. I wouldn't be surprised if drilling is where most of our barium resources go.

 

[Gigel]

About 80% of BaSO4 is used for drilling, according to Wikipedia.

 

[Baluncore]

The density of drilling mud is increased so that rock chips from the mechanical drilling are buoyant in the flowing mud. As mud is pumped down the centre of the drill string, the rock chips float in the circulating mud up the hole outside the drill string. The pressure of the column of drilling mud in the hole opposes the hydrostatic fluid pressure in the rock and so reduces blow-outs. Bigger is not always better. Drillers despair when they get the mud density too high as the overly expensive mud goes down the hole to be lost in the rock formations below.

Engineering involves solving real problems in an economical way. The problem with this thread was that rather than having a specific problem to solve, the OP was considering the wider possible complexities of buoyancy in differential density fluids. Neither toxic mercury nor expensive drilling mud can be engineered to solve an unspecified problem. Indeed, most engineering effort goes into identifying the problem and the specifications required.