Direction of buoyant force on sunken object?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the direction and implications of buoyant force on a cube that sinks in water. Participants explore the nature of buoyancy, the relationship between buoyant force and weight, and how these concepts apply when an object is submerged or resting on the bottom of a container. The scope includes theoretical considerations and conceptual clarifications regarding buoyancy and normal force.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that when a cube sinks, the upward buoyant force is negated because the lower surface is not in contact with water, leading to a downward buoyant force and an increased normal force required to balance the weight.
  • Another participant counters that buoyant force does not point downward and remains upward, even when the object is at the bottom of the container.
  • Some participants discuss the role of a weighing machine and how it measures the normal force, suggesting that the effective weight perceived by the machine may differ based on buoyant forces.
  • There is a suggestion that if the object has a liquid-tight seal with the bottom, the forces acting on it may differ from the usual case, potentially leading to a downward force from the liquid.
  • Participants express confusion about how buoyant force interacts with the object's weight and whether it changes when the object is submerged versus resting on the bottom.
  • Some argue that the buoyant force does not disappear when the object sinks but rather that the weight of the object exceeds the buoyant force, affecting the rate of sinking.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the nature of buoyant force when an object is submerged versus resting on the bottom. Multiple competing views remain regarding the direction of buoyant force and its implications on weight measurements.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the conditions under which buoyant force acts, particularly in scenarios involving seals and the relationship between buoyancy and effective weight. The discussion also highlights the complexity of measuring forces in fluid dynamics.

Logic hunter
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
We say that buyont force act upwards (in usual cases) and that the normal force exerted by the base of a container (of liquid) on a object is less than its true weight, so a weghing machine will give smaller reading (in terms of value) than expected. But suppose a cube sinks in water. Now water cannot exert force upwards on it since its lower surface which is the only one surface that can experience upward force from liquid is no longer in contact with water. Its vertical surfaces will experience force from pressure which will cancel out but the upper horizontal surface will experience pressure force downwards hence buyoant force will be downwards and more normal force (than weight) will be required to balance weight and buyoant force so an object should weigh more. What am I missing ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Logic hunter said:
We say that buyont force act upwards (in usual cases) and that the normal force exerted by the base of a container (of liquid) on a object is less than its true weight, so a weghing machine will give smaller reading (in terms of value) than expected. But suppose a cube sinks in water. Now water cannot exert force upwards on it since its lower surface which is the only one surface that can experience upward force from liquid is no longer in contact with water. Its vertical surfaces will experience force from pressure which will cancel out but the upper horizontal surface will experience pressure force downwards hence buyoant force will be downwards and more normal force (than weight) will be required to balance weight and buyoant force so an object should weigh more. What am I missing ?

No ... forget about the bottom of the container ... it's irrelevent
Logic hunter said:
Its vertical surfaces will experience force from pressure which will cancel out but the upper horizontal surface will experience pressure force downwards hence buyoant force will be downwards and more normal force (than weight) will be required to balance weight and buyoant force so an object should weigh more. What am I missing ?
No ... if the object sinks to the bottom, then the buoyant force = zero

buoyant force never points downwardstis time for you to have a bit of a reading session :smile:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BuoyancyDave
 
Logic hunter said:
so a weghing machine will give smaller reading (in terms of value) than expected.
Not clear how the weighing machine is hooked up or what it's measuring here.

Logic hunter said:
Its vertical surfaces will experience force from pressure which will cancel out but the upper horizontal surface will experience pressure force downwards hence buyoant force will be downwards and more normal force (than weight) will be required to balance weight and buyoant force so an object should weigh more.
You are correct that if the cube somehow has a liquid-tight seal with the bottom, then the force of the liquid on the cube will be downward instead of the usual upward force. And thus the normal force required to support the cube will be greater than its weight. (You have to support both the cube and the liquid that pushes down on it.)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Logic hunter
davenn said:
if the object sinks to the bottom, then the buoyant force = zero
HI Dave:

I am a bit confused by this. I have the thought that the buoyant force is what reduces the effective weight, which is what determines the rate of falling, which also takes into account the friction of the falling object with the water. If the effective weight is negative, then the object does not sink. Is this wrong?

Regards,
Buzz
 
Buzz Bloom said:
HI Dave:

I am a bit confused by this. I have the thought that the buoyant force is what reduces the effective weight, which is what determines the rate of falling, which also takes into account the friction of the falling object with the water. If the effective weight is negative, then the object does not sink. Is this wrong?

Regards,
Buzz
and the buoyant force then has a value >0

220px-Buoyancy.svg.png
read the linked wiki article
 

Attachments

  • 220px-Buoyancy.svg.png
    220px-Buoyancy.svg.png
    4.9 KB · Views: 746
davenn said:
if the object sinks to the bottom, then the buoyant force = zero
Not sure why you think that. In the "usual case" where there is a bit of fluid under the object as it rests on the bottom, the buoyant force should be the same as usual (and upward). Things are slightly different if a tight seal is made with the bottom.
 
Doc Al said:
Not sure why you think that. In the "usual case" where there is a bit of fluid under the object as it rests on the bottom, the buoyant force should be the same as usual (and upward). Things are slightly different if a tight seal is made with the bottom.
well yeah ... ok maybe non-zero, but the upward force would be very small and since the object sank to the bottom
it can't be very relevant ?
 
davenn said:
well yeah ... ok maybe non-zero, but the upward force would be very small and since the object sank to the bottom
it can't be very relevant ?
Do you think the buoyant force depends on its distance from the bottom? The fact that it sinks just means that the weight of the object is greater than the buoyant force, not that the buoyant force is near zero or negligible.
 
Doc Al said:
Things are slightly different if a tight seal is made with the bottom.
I think that you need to make a tight seal around the bottom and then release pressure underneath. For example, suppose the object is a plug and the bottom is a drain hole to a pipe. If the pipe is completely clogged then putting the plug in place doesn’t alter the net force from the fluid. It is only if the plug is put in place and then the pressure underneath is relieved e.g. by clearing the clog and allowing the pipe to empty.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur and russ_watters
  • #10
Doc Al said:
Not clear how the weighing machine is hooked up or what it's measuring here.You are correct that if the cube somehow has a liquid-tight seal with the bottom, then the force of the liquid on the cube will be downward instead of the usual upward force. And thus the normal force required to support the cube will be greater than its weight. (You have to support both the cube and the liquid that pushes down on it.)
Measuring device is the one which divides normal force downwards by g. But i have seen people describing Buyoant force as change in the weight of an object(which sinks. Weight is constant but the normal force on its base, which would be measured by the machine is the new weight), where the new weight (normal force) is less than original weight. (For eg: some questions say a sphere weighs 2.5 gram in air and 0.7 gram in H2SO4, 1.5 grams in water, find density of h2so4. Clearly, this assumes that buyont force acts upwards, hence nomral force(new weight/g) is reduced. So does this mean that all the liquid will not leave contact will bottom surface unless a tight seal is made externally.
 
  • #11
Doc Al said:
Do you think the buoyant force depends on its distance from the bottom? The fact that it sinks just means that the weight of the object is greater than the buoyant force, not that the buoyant force is near zero or negligible.
That was my thought exactly while I was reading through all the posts here...the buoyancy force doesn't "disappear" if the object sinks completely to the bottom, it just isn't greater than the downward force. Wouldn't the difference in forces have more to do with how quickly or slowly the object "can sink" instead of whether or not its buoyancy is unchanged/changed or non-existent?

Is the OP trying to ask whether or not that buoyant force is still trying to displace the object to occupy its space with water the same as it would if the object were floating on the surface or if partially submerged or if partially submerged but still touching the bottom?

Wouldn't it still be something like the weight of object - buoyancy, whether some distance just below the surface or on the bottom? I'm not understanding how sitting on the bottom would change anything, doesn't it still have the same amount of upward force because it is surrounded by material of a different density instead of it being an effect of material "under" it to "push" on the bottom(assuming the object is less dense than what it is surrounded by). Or is there some counter-intuitive factor involved that I'm not aware of?
 
Last edited:
  • #12
Dale said:
I think that you need to make a tight seal around the bottom and then release pressure underneath. For example, suppose the object is a plug and the bottom is a drain hole to a pipe. If the pipe is completely clogged then putting the plug in place doesn’t alter the net force from the fluid. It is only if the plug is put in place and then the pressure underneath is relieved e.g. by clearing the clog and allowing the pipe to empty.
Sure. The example given here was a "cube" of something. By "tight seal" I just meant that there is no liquid between bottom surface and base, which eliminates any upward pressure from the liquid.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Logic hunter
  • #13
davenn said:
and the buoyant force then has a value >0
Hi Dave:

My point regarding this case is that the buoyant force is not only greater than zero, it is also greater than the weight force trying and failing to sink the object. You seem to be defining the buoyant force as the force difference:
weight minus (what I am thinking of as) buoyancy.​

The Wikipedia article says:
In physics, buoyancy or upthrust, is an upward force exerted by a fluid that opposes the weight of an immersed object. In a column of fluid, pressure increases with depth as a result of the weight of the overlying fluid. Thus the pressure at the bottom of a column of fluid is greater than at the top of the column.​

Regards,
Buzz
 
  • #14
Doc Al said:
Sure. The example given here was a "cube" of something. By "tight seal" I just meant that there is no liquid between bottom surface and base, which eliminates any upward pressure from the liquid.
Yes, it's just that the "tight seal" being described cannot be achieved by just dropping an object into a container of water.
 
  • #15
russ_watters said:
Yes, it's just that the "tight seal" being described cannot be achieved by just dropping an object into a container of water.
Right!
 
  • #16
russ_watters said:
Yes, it's just that the "tight seal" being described cannot be achieved by just dropping an object into a container of water.
If you 'squeegee' the object into the floor of the container, just expelling most of the trapped water and not re-admitting it, you can end up with less pressure underneath than on the rest of the floor. Then the buoyant force will be less. A Rubber Sucker works on this principle and the excess air pressure outside will support a heavy load.
There are many demonstrations of the 'breaking ruler' experiment where excess pressure on top of the newspaper keeps it down against the table (briefly, because the air takes time to flow in). Same thing at work in air or in water.
Horrible story about a guy who fell overboard into water with a muddy bottom (the water- not the guy!) His legs went into the mud and struggling to lift one leg would only increase the force on the other and push it down further. He was stuck because his net buoyant force was near zero (less than his weight. That's an extreme version of the experience of getting your wellies stuck in mud and stepping out of them.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K