I Calculating Added Mass: What is the Correct Approach?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter member 428835
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mass Mistake
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the added mass of a sphere in a fluid, with a participant expressing confusion over differing results from a referenced source. They initially approach the problem using surface normal elements but encounter discrepancies in their calculations, particularly with integration limits and directional components. A key realization is the need to adjust the surface element to account for the correct direction of motion, specifically using the cosine of the angle instead of sine. The participant also questions the integration ranges used in the reference material, suggesting that only the leading hemisphere should be considered. Clarifications on these points are sought to resolve the inconsistencies in their approach.
member 428835
Hi PF!
I'm calculating the added mass of a sphere accelerating in a fluid, which I found here: http://web.mit.edu/2.016/www/handouts/Added_Mass_Derivation_050916.pdf
My thought process was slightly different from theirs, but I am not getting the same answer. My thoughts are to take the surface normal element of a sphere, in this case ##\vec{dS} = R^2 \sin \theta \, d\theta \, d\phi \hat{r}## and dot this with the direction of the sphere, say in the direction of the zenith angle, ##\hat{y}##. We know ##\hat{r} = \sin \theta \sin \phi \hat{x} + \sin \theta \sin \phi \hat{y} + r \cos \theta \hat{z}##, which implies ##\hat{r} \cdot \hat{y} = \sin \phi \sin \theta##, which means my surface element in the direction of motion would be ##R^2 \sin^2 \theta \sin \phi d\theta d\phi##. now if we integrate ##\phi## from ##[0,2\pi]## the ##\sin \phi## term takes this to zero. Even if it did give me ##2 \pi## like in the link, I still have an extra sine and lack a cosine.

Any ideas on how to amend my approach, and also why it's not working?

Thanks so much!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't have clear in my head what your diagram looks like relating the direction of motion to the coordinates. An obvious switch is to take it to be in the z direction instead. Is suspect you have effectively only considered part of the contributions so the element in direction of motion (e.g., shoild be an x term too).
Wrt integration range, you only want the leading hemisphere, so the positive range of the trig functions.
 
haruspex said:
An obvious switch is to take it to be in the z direction instead. Is suspect you have effectively only considered part of the contributions so the element in direction of motion (e.g., shoild be an x term too).
Oops, right, so what I should have had was ##\hat{r} \cdot \hat{z} = \cos \theta##. This implies the surface element toward the direction of motion is ##R^2 \sin\theta \cos \theta \, d\theta \,d \phi##.
haruspex said:
Wrt integration range, you only want the leading hemisphere, so the positive range of the trig functions.
So the force from added mass is then $$\int_0^{2 \pi} \int_0^{\pi/2} p R^2 \sin\theta \cos \theta \, d\theta \,d \phi$$ But integrate the leading hemisphere implies integrating ##\phi \in [0,\pi/2]## yet they integrate from ##[0,\pi]##. Can you explain the difference here? It also looks like they integrate the cylinder from ##[0,2\pi]## rather than ##[-\pi/2,\pi/2]##.

Thanks a ton for your reply!
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top