Calculating Buoyant Force of Ice to Find Mass - No Hints

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the mass of an object (a polar bear) that is partially supported by a slab of ice, with specific attention to buoyant forces and the effects of added weight on the ice's submersion. The subject area includes principles of buoyancy and specific gravity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between buoyant force and weight, questioning the validity of using buoyant force differences to determine the object's weight. There are discussions on the calculations involving the buoyant force before and after adding weight, and the implications of specific gravity on the problem.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, sharing calculations and questioning the assumptions made in the original problem statement. Some participants express uncertainty about the textbook answer, while others suggest alternative approaches to the calculations.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of specific gravity and its relevance to the calculations, as well as the specific wording of the problem from the textbook, which may influence interpretations. Participants are also considering the implications of the mass being partially submerged and how that affects buoyant force calculations.

cscott
Messages
778
Reaction score
1
70% of a mass is supported by a slab of ice and the ice sinks down so that only half of what was previously exposed now is exposed. What is the mass assuming that the ice has a volume of 10 m^3 and the mass has a specific gravity of 1.0?

Why can't I use the buoyant force of the ice before and after the extra weight is added and subtract to get the weight of the object itself? I get 539.5 kg while the textbook says 790 kg. Only hints please!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cscott said:
Why can't I use the buoyant force of the ice before and after the extra weight is added and subtract to get the weight of the object itself?
Sounds good to me. Show what you did exactly.
 
Alright, well since [itex]F_B = w[/itex] when an object is floating, the buoyant force is [itex]F_B = \rho_{ice} Vg = (0.917 \times 10^3)(10)(9.8) = 9.0 \times 10^4N[/itex].

[tex]\frac{0.917 \times 10^3}{1.00 \times 10^3} + \frac{1}{2}(1 - 0.917) = 0.9585[/tex]
for the fraction of the ice submerged once the unkown mass is put on.

With this, the buoyant force is [itex]F_b = (1.00 \times 10^3)(0.9585 \cdot 10)(9.8) = 9.4 \times 10^4N[/itex]

[tex]W_{object} = 9.4 \times 10^4 - 9.0 \times 10^4 = 4.0 \times 10^3N[/tex]

[tex]\frac{4.0 \times 10^4 \cdot 1.3}{9.8} = 530 kg[/tex]

I rounded the numbers this time.
 
Last edited:
Your method looks OK to me (assuming we are interpreting the problem correctly--why do they specify the specific gravity of the mass?) but I would divide by 0.7 instead of multiply by 1.3.
 
Doc Al said:
Your method looks OK to me (assuming we are interpreting the problem correctly--why do they specify the specific gravity of the mass?) but I would divide by 0.7 instead of multiply by 1.3.

The fact that they gave the specific gravity had me starting to work with volume but I could never get any sensible answers. If it makes any difference, this is how the question is worded in the book:

A polar bear paritally supports herself by pulling part of her body out of the water onto a rectangular slab of ice. The ice sinks down so that only half of what was once exposed now is exposed, and the bear has 70 percent of her volume (and weight) out of the water. Estimate the bear's mass, assuming that the total volume of the ice is 10 m^3, and the bear's specific gravity is 1.0.
 
Since the specific gravity is one, it makes no difference--the buoyant force on the bear equals the weight of her submerged portion. (Were it something else, it would matter.)
 
Ah, ok. I guess the textbook answer is just wrong...?

Thanks for your help BTW.
 
cscott said:
I guess the textbook answer is just wrong...?
Yep, seems wrong to me.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K