Calculating Air Pressure of Upside-Down Cup in Bathtub

  • Thread starter Thread starter JonasS
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Calculating the buoyancy of an upside-down cup in a bathtub involves understanding the relationship between the force applied, buoyant force, and air pressure inside the cup. The total force exerted equals the buoyant force plus the pressure from the compressed air inside the cup. When the cup is sealed with plastic wrap, the air volume remains constant, increasing the buoyant force compared to when the cup is open. The pressure of the air inside the cup is uniform, while the height of the air column changes with immersion depth. Overall, the air inside the cup does contribute to the buoyant force and affects the calculations of pressure and volume.
JonasS
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
I was looking for information on calculating buoyancy of an upside-down cup in a bathtub...

If I place a plastic cup upside-down in a bathtub and press down, the water goes up into the cup a certain distance depending on the force I press down. Does this mean that the pressure of the air in the cup is equal to the force I am pressing down with? Is there a way to calculate what the pressure of that air is depending on the force?

I was doing some kitchen physics stuff with my nephew, and I just need a pointer to the proper equations or online tutorials. I found plenty of stuff for calculating buoyancy of floating cups (or floating anything) but nothing about air pressure.

Thank you very much!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
the total force that u are exerting will be equal to the buoyant force + the force exerted by the pressurised air inside the cup. the buoyant force wil be propotional to volume of CUP(not the inside hollow),ie the priphery which is submerged in the liquid and the force exerted by the air inside will be propotional to its compression.
 
The pressure gradient within the air bubble will be negligible compared with the pressure gradient of the water outside the cup so, essentially, the air pressure inside the cup will be the same as the water pressure at the air-water interface.

The force you exert will be the buoyant force minus the weight of the cup.
 
Okay, just a little confused...

I know that the buoyant force is F=dgv but I am confused as to why I would not use the air inside the cup when calculating volume.

Let's say I use plastic wrap to seal the mouth of the cup, and perform the same experiment. Wouldn't you then use the air inside the cup when calculating average density and volume?

For example, the cup is cylindrical and is 16cm high and has a radius of 3cm. The walls of the cup are .5cm thick and it is made out of glass. The total volume is V = pi * r^2 * h = (3.1416)(9)(16) = 452.3904cm^3

I seal the mouth of the cup with plastic wrap, and push down on it until the entire cup is underwater and then hold it just under the surface. I am pressing down with:
F = dgv = (1kg/m^3)(9.80m/s^2)(4.524m^3) = 44.335N

First, do those calculations look correct? Second, why would they change if I removed the plastic seal from the cup and repeated the experiment? Would the air inside the cup offer an additional force on the water?

Thank you all for your help so far!
 
Jonas,

Of course, the air inside matters. My point was that the pressure of the air inside the cup is essentially uniform.

However, the air does displace water (providing the buoyant force) and height of the air column inside the cup will depend on how deeply immersed the cup is in the water. Air is compressible but water is not. When you place plastic wrap over the opening, you assure that the volume of the air inside will be greater and so the buoyant force will be greater. Otherwise, water rises inside the cup up to the point at which water and air pressure balance.
 
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