Strength In Relation To Bone Structure.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the strength of bones, specifically how their hollow structure contributes to overall strength despite having less mass. It highlights that hollow tubes, like bones, can be stronger per weight than solid tubes, although solid bars are stronger for a given diameter. The complexity of 'strength' is acknowledged, with various types such as hardness and tensile strength mentioned. The conversation suggests that the unique properties of materials like glass can lead to unexpected strength outcomes. Overall, the hollow design of bones enhances their strength efficiently, balancing weight and structural integrity.
Robbie
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I realize this is related to biology, but I think the question would be better suited to those who study or have studied physics. The question is this:

I learned recently that the cavity in bones, actually increases the overall strength of the bone, even though it has less mass than if it were filled. I was wondering why this is so.

Apparently, if you have two glass rods of equal diameter, one of which has a cavity (like a bone), and the other is completely solid throughout, then the rod with the cavity is the stronger of the two. This can be demonstrated by securing them and gradually increasing the weight on the middle of their lengths. The tube with the cavity is stronger by far, according to my biology teacher.

Why does the cavity increase the strength?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First off, 'strength' is a complicated notion. You should already be familiar with people using words such as 'hardness', 'tensile strength', 'shear strength', and 'specific stiffness'.

Moreover, glass is strange stuff that can be made to do some very unexpected things.

However, hollow tubes are stronger *per weight* than solid tubes, but for a given diameter, a solid bar will be stronger than a tube.

You can verify this yourself by experimenting with paper. Or, as a thought experiment, consider how a bunch of nested tubes compare to a solid one.

P.S. Don't sweat the double-post, but if it happens again, we'll have to whip you with a (hollow) wet noodle.
 
comparing a flat solar panel of area 2π r² and a hemisphere of the same area, the hemispherical solar panel would only occupy the area π r² of while the flat panel would occupy an entire 2π r² of land. wouldn't the hemispherical version have the same area of panel exposed to the sun, occupy less land space and can therefore increase the number of panels one land can have fitted? this would increase the power output proportionally as well. when I searched it up I wasn't satisfied with...

Similar threads

Back
Top