Force from fluctuations in atmospheric pressure

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of force generated by fluctuations in atmospheric pressure, particularly using a mercury barometer as an example. Participants explore the implications of pressure changes, potential energy extraction, and comparisons to other energy sources.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant calculates that a change in atmospheric pressure from 100,000 Pa to 102,000 Pa results in a force of 2000 N on a 1 square meter area.
  • Another participant confirms the calculation, noting that 2000 N corresponds to the weight of approximately 200 kg distributed over the area.
  • Some participants discuss the relative change in pressure, suggesting that the percentage change is more relevant than the absolute values.
  • A participant proposes the idea of using the force generated by pressure changes to extract energy, questioning the feasibility of such an approach.
  • Another participant provides a calculation of the height change of a mercury column due to pressure change, suggesting that energy calculations should be performed to assess the practicality of energy extraction.
  • There is a mention of high-end wristwatches that may utilize similar principles for energy without batteries.
  • A participant references an external link discussing atmospheric pressure changes, noting that it may relate to temperature rather than weight.
  • One participant expresses confusion about the calculations and equations involved, seeking clarification on the concept of force and potential energy.
  • A later reply raises the idea of scaling the area to 1 km², resulting in a significantly larger force of 2,000,000,000 N.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of viewpoints on the calculations and implications of atmospheric pressure changes. There is no consensus on the feasibility of energy extraction or the relevance of absolute versus relative pressure changes.

Contextual Notes

Some calculations depend on specific assumptions about the density of mercury and the height change, which may not be universally applicable. The discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps and varying interpretations of the implications of pressure changes.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in atmospheric physics, energy extraction concepts, and the mechanics of barometers may find this discussion relevant.

HarryH
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Say you have a giant mercury barometer. Let's suppose that the area exposed to atmospheric pressure is 1 square meter


Normal pressure at sea level is 101325 Pa
Lets say the variation in 24 hours in atmospheric pressure goes from a low of 100,000 Pa to a high of 102,000 Pa

Using

Pressure (Pa) = Force (N) / Area (m2)

I find that the change in pressure results in a Force of 2000N upon the mercury in the barometer.


Is this correct? :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes... the pressure changes by 2000Pa which is a change of 2000Newtons on every square metre of surface... it sounds a lot but... 2000N is the weight of roughly 200kg
200kg spread on 1 square metre is 0.02kg on 1 square cm...20 grammes on a square cm
 
Another way to look at it... a change of 100,000 to 102,000 Pa is ONLY a change of 2%...not much.
Big numbers but small changes
 
Right.

So say if instead of using mercury, it was simply an instrument that stored then released this 2000N of Force over a given time and distance.

We can calculate work and power from this.

Potentially, could small amounts of energy be extracted from this?

(ie, extracting the energy that would normally be making the mercury move up and down a vial.)
 
technician said:
Another way to look at it... a change of 100,000 to 102,000 Pa is ONLY a change of 2%...not much.
Big numbers but small changes

true, but the starting and end points of pressure are surely irrelevant? wouldn't it be the relative change in pressure that matters for the equation?
 
I can see what you are getting at ! But a word of caution!.. do some calculations to determine the energy involved. A pressure change of 2000Pa will produce a change in height of a mercury column (or any liquid column for that matter)
The height change is given by :
hρg = Pressure so 2000 = h x 13,600 x 9.81 (the density of mercury is 13,600kg/m^3)
this gives a change in height of 0.015m (1.5cm)
If you do an energy calculation to find how much energy is needed to lift 1 square metre of mercury through a height of 0.15m you get (use mgh) 2000Joules (check my maths !)
Is it worth it ? who knows, who decides.
If you compare this with the energy that can be obtained from changes in water level due to the tides (nothing to do with atmospheric pressure) I think you would go for the tides.
 
Don't some really pro wrist watches make use of this for energy, thus never need batteries or solar cells or winding?
 
http://www.atmosadam.com/howitworks.html

Just googled that. Interesting ^^^

Seems to be small changes in pressure due to atmospheric temperature though, not weight?



@technician - I don't really follow your working.
Would it be possible to think of it as a simple force of 2000N? and calculate potential energy thusly?

I am at a loss for equations.

Point taken about tidal.
However, if I took 1km2 as the area in contact with the atmosphere, this could build up a force of 2,000,000,000 Newtons.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K