Intro Fluid Dynamics homework question

AI Thread Summary
To determine the force needed to lift a 20mm diameter ring from water at 20 degrees Celsius, the discussion centers on the relevance of surface tension, compressibility, and shearing stress. The equations provided in the textbook, including those for shearing stress and kinematic viscosity, initially appear unhelpful due to missing variables like mass and height. Participants suggest relating the problem to the Du Noüy ring method and emphasize the importance of surface tension in calculating the force. One contributor successfully derived the answer using energy considerations related to surface tension, while another sought clarification on energy equations. The book referenced is "Introduction to Fluid Mechanics" by Y. Nakayama, highlighting the challenges of self-study in fluid dynamics.
sc0tt
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
How much force is necessary to lift a ring, diameter 20mm, made of fine wire, and placed on the surface of water at 20 degrees celsius?
All the equations from the chapter:
Shearing stress = F/A = Viscosity*(velocity parallel/h)
Kinematic Viscosity = viscosity/density
Change in pressure = 4(surface tension/diameter)
Capillarity height = 4Tcos(theta)/(g*diameter*density)
Bulk modulus = -V*(change in pressure/change in V)
compressibility = 1/Bulk modulus
PV=RT
PV^n=constant

I'm learning fluid dynamics on my own for possible research so I don't have any professor or guidance, just a book. This makes solving problems much more difficult. With this problem specifically, I'm lost because I feel like the mass of the ring must be known as part of the problem, but no other information is given. This leads me to believe it has something to do with surface tension, compressibility, or shearing stress (this equation contains force).
My initial reaction was to solve the first equation for force and substitute the second equality in for shear stress. This leaves:
F=A*(viscosity*velocity parallel/h)
but there is no velocity parallel or required height.
The other equations don't seem to be of any help.
The answer the book gives is 9.15*10^-3 N
Thanks for any help,
Scott
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sounds interesting, what book are you reading?

I'm quite lost myself when it comes to fluid dynamics, but I'd relate this problem to surface tension. More specifically, the Du Noüy ring: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Du_Noüy_ring_method.

I got the right answer, but using a bit ad hoc methods (well, maybe not, but had you not supplied the answer, I would probably not be writing this reply). I thought of the thing as creating two surfaces (inner, outer) when you begin to lift the ring. I wrote an equation for the energy, and thus obtained the force.

EDIT: And yeah, I ignored the weight of the ring thing, as I suppose if you do these things experimentally, you add a counterbalance to get rid of it + I suppose it's supposed to be very, very light.
 
Last edited:
The book is "Introduction to Fluid Mechanics" by Y. Nakayama. so are you saying you don't use any of the equations the book gives? If possible could you please list out the energy equations, my physics is better but i don't see a solution using energy either. Gravitational is mgh, energy from surface tension would be... ?
Thanks
 
Well, that's how I would do it, but again, having little experience with fluid dynamics, there might be other, better, solutions.

Energy from surface tension would be the tension times the area, i.e. gamma * 2 * 2*pi*r*h. Differentiate w.r.t. h, and you've got the force, I suppose.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top