Motion of an object submerged in water.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the motion of a cylindrical object submerged in water, specifically focusing on the forces acting on it, including buoyancy and weight. Participants explore the conditions under which the object moves and the application of Newton's second law in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the motion of the cylinder can be described simply by the equilibrium condition Fup = Fdown, suggesting that this would imply no motion.
  • Another participant clarifies that the correct approach involves Newton's second law, stating that the net force is given by Fup - Fdown = ma.
  • A question is raised regarding the choice of the force order in the equation, prompting a discussion about reference frames and the definition of positive and negative directions.
  • A later reply confirms the reasoning behind the reference frame choice, indicating that "up" is considered positive and "down" negative.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the application of Newton's second law but engage in a discussion about the interpretation of force directions and the implications for motion. No consensus is reached on the initial question regarding the conditions for motion.

Contextual Notes

The discussion does not resolve the assumptions regarding the specific conditions under which the buoyancy force is applied, nor does it clarify the implications of the given equation for buoyancy on the motion of the cylinder.

aero&astro
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
ignoring drag, how could you describe the motion of a cylindrical object in water, if the upwards buoyancy force is given by a certain equation? (B = [1020+0.25z]Volumexgravity)

I'm not sure if its just Fup = Fdown where Fdown is the weight and Fup is the buoyancy. However it can't be that or else the cylinder wouldn't have motion it would be stationary, wouldn't it?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
hi aero&astro! :smile:

(try using the X2 icon just above the Reply box :wink:)
aero&astro said:
I'm not sure if its just Fup = Fdown where Fdown is the weight and Fup is the buoyancy. However it can't be that or else the cylinder wouldn't have motion it would be stationary, wouldn't it?

no, Fup = Fdown would be the equilibrium equation

you need (as usual) good ol' Newton's second law …

Fup - Fdown = ma :wink:
 
why is it Fup - Fdown and not Fdown - Fup?
 
Because tiny-tim assumed a reference frame where "up" points to positive values, and "down" points to negative values.
 
Yup! :biggrin:
 
thanks a lot guys, this really helped.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
11K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
9K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
12K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
11K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
9K