Solving Buoyancy Problem: Find Depth of Cylindrical Rod

  • Thread starter Thread starter Shinaab
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Buoyancy
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on solving a buoyancy problem involving a cylindrical rod with varying densities. The rod has a 6 cm section with a density of 900 kg/m³ and a 4 cm section with a density of 2000 kg/m³. The participants derive the submerged volume using Archimedes' principle, ultimately concluding that the mean density of the rod is 1340 kg/m³, which is greater than the density of water, indicating that the rod will sink. The correct approach involves calculating the mass of each section of the rod and equating the weight of the rod to the weight of the displaced water.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Archimedes' principle
  • Knowledge of density calculations
  • Familiarity with volume and mass equations
  • Basic physics concepts related to buoyancy
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Archimedes' principle in detail
  • Learn about density and its applications in fluid mechanics
  • Explore buoyancy calculations for objects with varying densities
  • Practice problems involving submerged volumes and equilibrium conditions
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, particularly those focusing on fluid mechanics and buoyancy, as well as educators looking for practical examples of density and equilibrium in real-world scenarios.

Shinaab
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I'm struggling a bit on a homework problem where a cylindrical rod of radius r is floating in equilibrium in water. The bottom 4 cm of the rod has a density of 2000 kg/m^3 while the other 6 cm of the rod has a density of 900 kg/m^3. The question asks what the depth of the bottom of the rod is.

Would I be correct in using the following equation to solve for the amount V of water displaced by the rod?

(900 kg/m^3)(9.8 m/s^2)(0.06 m) - (2000 kg/m^3)(9.8 m/s^2)(0.04 m) + (1000 kg/m^3)(V) = 0

Am I on the right path here? If not, can someone point me in the right direction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your formula is wrong.
To find the volume of water displaced, you must determine the mass of the rod. The mass of a rod is the product of the density times the volume. The volume is the cross section times the length. In your case you have "two" rods attached at an extremity.
Once you have the mass of the "double" rod, you can compute the volume of water. You do not need to know the value of g, because the weight is proportional to the mass of the water as well for the rod one.
 
Do I have this right?

Thanks for your response. It got me thinking a bit. Here's what I did.

Let's say ma = the mass of part "a" of the rod where the length is 6 cm and the density is 900 kg/m^3 and mb = the mass of part "b" of the rod where the length is 4 cm and the density is 2000 kg/m^3.

ma = (900 kg/m^3)(0.06(pi)(r^2) m^3) = 54(pi)(r^2) kg
mb = (2000 kg/m^3)(0.04(pi)(r^2) m^3) = 80(pi)(r^2 kg

Let wr = the weight of the entire rod.

wr = [54(pi)(r^2)(g) kg] + [80(pi)(r^2)(g)] kg = 134(pi)(r^2)(g) kg

Let ww = the weight of the water displaced by the rod, pw = the density of water, and Vs = the volume of the rod that is submerged.

ww = (pw)(Vs)(g)

Using Archimedes' principle, setting wr = ww:

134(pi)(r^2)(g) kg = (pw)(Vs)(g)

Solving for Vs to find the volume of the rod submerged:

Vs = 134(pi)(r^2)/pw

The volume of water displaced is (pi)(r^2), r being the radius of the rod, times the height h of the rod that is submerged. So:

(pi)(r^2)(h) = 134(pi)(r^2)/pw

Solving for h results in 13.4 cm. This would mean that the rod would sink and not float.

I'm pretty sure I messed up somewhere along the way, probably in translating the problem into mathematics, mostly because it came to me too easily. So, what am I missing here (if anything)?
 
Last edited:
Yes, you are right. I find the same result. In fact, the mean density of the rod is

{{6*900+4*2000}\over 6 + 4}=1340
That is, more than the water: it sinks.
Bravo!
 
Thank you very much for the help!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
690
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
Replies
26
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K