What is the Best Lab Apparatus for Measuring Volume of Irregular Objects?

  • Thread starter Thread starter saplingg
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Measure Volume
AI Thread Summary
For measuring the volume of irregular objects without using water displacement, optical measurement methods are suggested. A 3-D digitizing device can effectively capture the object's outline, utilizing a wand with encoders for precision. While optical methods may work for convex objects using laser grids, they are not universally applicable. The discussion highlights the potential of 3D digitizers, which are readily available online. Overall, these advanced techniques provide viable alternatives for accurate volume measurement of compressible objects.
saplingg
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Could anyone recommend a piece of lab apparatus which will measure the volume of an irregular object? I cannot use displacement of water as the object will compress under pressure and I suspect submerging the object in water will give a different displacement from the actual volume at 1 atm.

Ideally I would use something that could measure volume optically... Anybody know of an apparatus which does that?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you know its density, you could just weigh it.

Otherwise, you could use a 3-D digitizing device to digitize its outline. I've seen them in the past, but will have to do a quick search to see if I can find one. It's like a wand mounted on an articulated arm with rotary and linear encoders to pick up where the tip of the wand is.

I don't think you'll be able to do it optically in the general case. If your object is always convex, then you could probably do it optically with a laser grid projected on the object, and a TV camera picking up the image as you rotate it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks alot! that's just what i needed.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top