Archimedes Principle - Mass floating on ice

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves determining the minimum volume of a slab of ice required to support a 50.0 kg woman without her feet getting wet, utilizing Archimedes' principle in the context of buoyancy and density of materials.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the values for the density of water and ice, questioning the sources and consistency of these values. There are attempts to reconcile differences in calculated volumes based on varying density inputs.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different density values and their impact on the calculated volume. Some guidance has been offered regarding the significance of small differences in density leading to larger discrepancies in results.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of varying density values for ice, with participants noting that the choice of density can significantly affect the outcome. The original poster expresses uncertainty about the method used and the values provided by external sources.

Mike Dacre
Messages
19
Reaction score
10

Homework Statement


Question: What minimum volume must a slab of ice in a freshwater lake have for a 50.0kg woman to be able to stand on it without getting her feet wet?

Homework Equations


Archimedes principle.
[PLAIN]https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/qRkIpr7Mg9TFQYXwa2Xoj5jv3vcBNP7hPUxT5Xk1inIv-Qdk_KhZWF-Pha5AJ_Aq9_e7ZQPUGeUrMdRCb7vTUgQKtYY4sGutyIYtGiLW6bspSIuL6-sdiCDjIHaN7viYGQ

[PLAIN]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/csDszB-wBCqIGI4g9bRCmLfDFgEbQcXTKjieRXO3BVOUmGCYJoq7CdCpd844FOemjb_MrhnaHitt0Dk0mBssD6-QSdQ2S51f3WpZ6tyamq5xrxfjmc64gZNMTqNR0NGq7g

The Attempt at a Solution


[PLAIN]https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/qRkIpr7Mg9TFQYXwa2Xoj5jv3vcBNP7hPUxT5Xk1inIv-Qdk_KhZWF-Pha5AJ_Aq9_e7ZQPUGeUrMdRCb7vTUgQKtYY4sGutyIYtGiLW6bspSIuL6-sdiCDjIHaN7viYGQ

[PLAIN]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/csDszB-wBCqIGI4g9bRCmLfDFgEbQcXTKjieRXO3BVOUmGCYJoq7CdCpd844FOemjb_MrhnaHitt0Dk0mBssD6-QSdQ2S51f3WpZ6tyamq5xrxfjmc64gZNMTqNR0NGq7g

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/kH5QjwyHmXZcrpHD2JM1sggbdDI43yXiUxr7e17NopEUM4dRfYHKsU19hO6lTbb9Pui_TCMytxYtHLXHTK_8Wj_EegNUFy3263FZEDVXh-h7eQMoWycZ0S09_kYp5Mhnig

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/sDINzVNO1G2GzJlJnTrYY80Q1E9a9crTVdNyR1hm0jX8ru3R4WB7sWrZDla_CVpij173_N1r6yI-gaFr7DnQqwABqi1r-AeN9FotFK11RrRbhivhHm9GUqeTqZC79P_I_g

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_x3gT0FzL5kRBHNLUVXT24OZAh_9KJZAmBfRqQuYbxUMl92CvDL9Pkx7or1qoCZHyl8bz-4PdUA5Zc0PC61I1siMKjuDGoqgQtApYxSfyfiJO28kzZv8wDaMytKlKuz_IA

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/joYLqXziuC1oujBIhA6YwQF6y8R8YIWBo10XaC8kaFNKSnFq44Bwh4hpQYUIZCAeFrMz-IZY5r_KYrLYSejPhz-_urptxyIWSiEIo4qRhbjOFm8SBc3Ui4WazZO_AtAAtQ

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/19SQ3f8VkxjzitZKKnrCuilqBRVW4NsYhopELqqT2BRcxhcBwstvHpXf8ME0Fbg58_7pshIuW51QFxzPRwUH5xCLBWEeel1X-Xn-bG86FZIm3zq0RwhOXHgHzEZWgtAtJg

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/xiV61mYNtopcHzoTYWVaiLDUnuWlUOwlnuxAa9JGvK5zJt9brfkrL4FKCPzR4b8a4R5Ta54dk3vbDFRM6jggqErfnkKbDxBIlRfa0R4T9IOnpdv5AHYJPGrWT5cwwo6oNg

My answer: 0.601 m^3. masteringphysics.com answer: 0.625 m3

What am I getting wrong? I am so sure I am right, am I missing something really obvious?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Mike Dacre said:
What am I getting wrong?

Where did you get the values for the density of water and ice? Did masteringphysics.com use the same values?
 
Those are from wikipedia and pubchem, masteringphysics.com didn't provide any values to use with the question. I tried with a number of different values including 1000 kg/m3 for water and 917 kg/m3 for ice, which comes to 0.602 instead of 0.601... still a good deal less the 0.625.
 
On the net I see two values commonly, 917 and 931. At a guess, the latter corresponds to a pure crystalline form, Ih, while the former is for naturally occurring ice. But I could be wrong.
To get the given answer you need 920, very close to 917. The key point is that the difference in the densities is a small difference between two large numbers, so a small error in one of the numbers leads to a relatively large error in the result.
 
Ah you are right. Well, at least the problem wasn't with the method, I can accept a silly mistake like that.

It is just interesting that they chose the density of ice at - 10 ºC, rather than at 0 ºC or at -180 ºC, which is the other commonly cited density.

Thanks for the help
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
12K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
21K