Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Change in mass of a soda can

  1. Aug 10, 2015 #1
    My son did an interesting experiment with a can of soda.

    • Weigh the can before opening.
    • Open the can and weigh it again.
    • Wait a while (for the soda to go flat) and weigh it again

    I don't understand the result he got but here's what he saw:
    1. Immediately after opening the soda, the weight of the can (and soda) went up. (0.2g)
    2. Once the soda went flat, the weight went had gone down (after one hour) (0.2g)
    I put the results down to experiemental error, so I repeated his experiment and get the same results.

    Any ideas what effect we're observing?

    I'm surprised that the CO2 lost from a can going flat would have sufficient mass to cause any effect, and I definitely don't know why it would go UP in mass.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 10, 2015 #2

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    CO2 has a higher density than air, so even replacing it with air should not increase the mass.
    Two data points are not that significant, however.

    At room temperature and pressure, about 1.5 g of CO2 can dissolve in a kilogram of water, 0.2g in a can of soda are not unrealistic. There could have been some evaporation of water as well.

    Multiple measurements with controlled conditions (e. g. soda can stays closed - maybe some condensation outside that increases the mass over time?) could help to find the experimental uncertainty for measurements in general.
     
  4. Aug 10, 2015 #3
    The second observation makes sense. The first one is counter intuitive. Likely just error, even though repeated a second time. What kind of scale are you using?
     
  5. Aug 11, 2015 #4
    It may be the reaction force produced by all these bubbles leaving the can. Not actually an increase in mass but an increased force on the scale.
    A bubble moving up (accelerated for at least part of the path) through the liquid will exert a downward force on the liquid.
    Or just the reaction to the buoyant force on the bubbles (which did not exist before opening the can).
     
  6. Aug 11, 2015 #5

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    0.2g are ~130 cm3 of CO2 gas. Unlikely to have that many bubbles, no matter what they do.
    Their buoyancy does not change the force of the soda can on the ground.
     
  7. Aug 12, 2015 #6
    Yes, but wouldn't the CO2 be ejected at around a root mean square velocity of 400m/s from the open area ( temperature of the soda is unknown, but assuming somewhere in the vicinity of room temp ). In which case a thrust of 0.2 g would necessitate a "bubble" formation of 1.3 cm 2/sec.

    Perhaps, if little bits of Menthos were dropped into the soda to initiate bubble formation,but not to cause a large whoosh ejecting all the liquid also, a larger thrust could be obtained and observed.
     
  8. Aug 12, 2015 #7

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    Those bubbles don't reach the speed of sound.
     
  9. Aug 12, 2015 #8
    Have your son do this experiment many times (20?) to reduce random error. Also, make sure the precision of your scale is adequate (I imagine it probably is).
     
  10. Aug 12, 2015 #9
    There was no reference to the bubbles obtaining the speed of sound.
    The molecules themselves have a velocity that has to be in the directed vertical direction.

    If they did not move upward the vapour pressure of CO2 above the liquid would remain constant and bubble formation would cease.

    .
     
  11. Aug 12, 2015 #10

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    They have ~400m/s of random motion in all directions, with a slight asymmetry of a few centimeters per second due to the overall motion of the gas.
     
  12. Aug 12, 2015 #11

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Someone should calculate the velocity of CO2 flow required to generate 0.2 g-f thrust out a 1 sq cm hole, then see if it comes close to the rate of offgassing...
     
  13. Aug 12, 2015 #12

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    1.6 kg/m3 * v2 * 1cm2 = 2mN
    v=3.4m/s2 or offgassing of 340 cm3 per second (that's the volume of the can). Quite unrealistic.
     
  14. Aug 12, 2015 #13

    Bystander

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    ... and now as an expanding hemisphere of gas? Maybe not so bad.
     
  15. Aug 12, 2015 #14

    SammyS

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    I expect that the increase in apparent weight that occurs as the can is first opened is due to a decrease in buoyant force. the volume of the can will decrease due to a decrease in pressure inside the can. This effect apparently overwhelms the mass of the small amount of CO2 initially released.
     
  16. Aug 12, 2015 #15

    Bystander

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    The total buoyancy correction (assuming 12 oz. can) would be 300-350 mg from air to vacuum wts.; little tough to come up with 0.2 g.
     
  17. Aug 13, 2015 #16

    CWatters

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Gets my vote. By the time soda has gone flat it's warmed up and the condensation evaporated again.

    Repeat experiment with a can that is at room temp?
     
  18. Aug 13, 2015 #17

    SammyS

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    After actually looking up the density of air, I have to agree with you.

    Approx 1.2 grams/liter .
     
  19. Aug 17, 2015 #18
    It was a US-Extreme US Balance scale. Would be nice to try the experiment again with something more accurate.

    But I will definitely retry with a can that's already at room temp., as I did notice condensation.
     
  20. Aug 17, 2015 #19

    sophiecentaur

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    You could eliminate the reaction force idea by using a deflector (coolie hat) on top of the can.
    Condensation gets my vote. Do the experiment in very low and high humidity conditions and see if the result is different.
     
  21. Aug 17, 2015 #20
    The only possibility here, if this experiment is truly reproduceable, is the upward "force" of the escaping CO2 gas with the reaction of downward force on the can. To wit, if one takes a CO2 cartridge and punches a hole in one end the cartridge will accelerate in the opposite direction. Such acceleration will produce a force if one tries to resist it. The amount of force would be described in Toricelli's Law (v^2 = 2gh) where v is the linear velocity of the gas. One has to convert using the density of CO2 in the cylinder.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Change in mass of a soda can
  1. Pressure in soda can (Replies: 41)

  2. Change in mass (Replies: 5)

Loading...