Can the Frequency of Oscillations Measure Fluid Density in a Loaded Test Tube?

AI Thread Summary
Using the frequency of oscillation of a loaded test tube to measure fluid density is feasible due to the principles of simple harmonic motion. The test tube experiences two forces: gravitational force, which remains constant, and buoyant force, which varies with the volume of fluid displaced. As the cross-sectional area of the test tube is uniform, the volume displaced changes linearly with the depth of immersion, confirming simple harmonic motion. Damping effects from the fluid are acknowledged but do not alter the fundamental frequency of oscillation. This approach provides a valid method for determining fluid density based on oscillation frequency.
garytse86
Messages
311
Reaction score
0
I am stuck in this question:

A loaded test tube of mass m is floating in a fluid. The test tube has a cross-sectional area A and fluid has density p.

Comment on the feasibility of using the frequecy of oscillation of the tube to measure the density of the fluid.

I would say this is feasible because although there is damping due to resistance of the fluid, the frequency is the same because the motion is simple harmonic, is this correct?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How do you know the motion is simple harmonic? :-)
 
well this is under the section oscillations and waves, so should I state the assumption is that the motion is simple harmonic?
 
You don't have to assume. You can show it!

Basically, two forces act on the test tube, the gravitational force which doesnt' change and the buoyant force which depends on the volume of the water displaced by the test tube. Since the test tube has a uniform cross section the volume of water displaced varies linearly with the depth of the test tube's immersion into the water. Therefore, the motion will be simple harmonic!
 
Last edited:
oh right, thanks very much!
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top