This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

# 1. 2. 3. 4.

To To To To

determine the hydrostatic thrust on a plane surface partly immersed in water. determine the position of the line of action of the thrust. compare the position determined by experiment with the theoretical position . verify the formula for calculating hydrostatic thrust.

When the quadrant is immersed in water it is possible to analyze the forces acting on the surfaces of the quadrant as follows: The hydrostatic force at any point on the curved surface is normal to the surface and therefore resolves through the pivot point because this is located at the origin of the radii. Hydrostatic forces on the upper and lower curved surfaces therefore have no net effect – no torque to affect the equilibrium of the assembly because all of these forces pass through the pivot. The forces on the sides of the quadrant are horizontal and cancel out (equal and opposite).

Figure 1 Diagram of F1-12 Apparatus

1

L = distance between fulcrum and balancing weight in meters. By calculating the Thrust and the centre of pressure on the end face of the quadrant we can compare the experimental results with those obtained from theoretical ideal calculations Partially submerged quadrant (fig.81m/s2). h’’ = distance of the line of trust below the fulcrum in meters. H = distance from fulcrum to bottom of quadrant in meters.Once the moment caused by the weight of the quadrant is nullified by adjusting the counterweight so that balancing arm is perfectly collinear with the level indicator a balancing weight of known mass is added and water meticulously added until the balancing arm has once again returned to its previous precisely noted position aided by the hydrostatic force of water creating a moment which counter acts the torque of the weight on the balancing arm and thus holds the system in equilibrium The magnitude of the hydrostatic force can be calculated from the value of the balance weight and the depth of the water as follows: mgL = Fh’’ Where: m = mass of weight in kilograms.Theoretical 2 . D = height of quadrant in meters. g = gravitational acceleration (9. h’’ is the distance between the fulcrum and the centre of pressure in meters. h’ = depth of the centre of pressure in meters. The forces present are F (the hydrostatic thrust) and mg (the balancing weight) Hydrostatic Force . B) Where: L = distance between fulcrum and balancing weight in meters. d = depth of immersion in meters. F = Hydrostatic Thrust in Newton.

therefore the moments are equal i.Hydrostatic force can be defined as: F = ρgAh Where: F = The Hydrostatic force in Newton ρ = density of water in kg/m3 A = Area defined as: B*d in m2 h = depth of the centroid defined as: d/2. B = width of the end face of the quadrant in meters d = depth of immersion in meters. L = distance between fulcrum and balancing weight in meters. the moment created is proportional to the length of the arm defined as: L The moment is thus defined as M = WL = mgL The two forces have put the system back into its previous state of equilibrium. ρ = density of water in kg/m3. m = mass of weight in kilograms. Fh’’ = mgL Thus: h’’= mgl/F But: F = (1/2) (ρgBd2) Therefore. by substitution: h’’ = 2mL/ ρBd2 (Formula 2) Where: h’’ = distance of the line of trust below the fulcrum in meters. 3 . in metres Thus: F = (1/2) (ρgBd2) Newton (Formula 1) Experimental position of the line of force action below the pivot (h’’) The moment described previously in the section that causes the system to reach equilibrium again along the levelling indicator can be described as: M = Fh’’ A weight is placed on the balancing arm.e.

in metres. Ic = the moment of inertia of the object about an axis passing through its centre of mass in this case: Bh’’ A = Area defined as: B*d in m2. by substitution: Ix = Bh’’ + Ah² But: h = d/2 Therefore h’ = d2/4 h’’= d3/12 Substitute values: Ix = Bd3/12 + Bd(d/2)2 = Bd3/12 + Bd3/4 4 . Thus: Ah = Bd2/2 By substitution: h’ = 2Ix/Bd2 Utilizing the parallel axis theorem yields the following formula: Ix = Ic + Ah² Where: Ix = the area moment of inertia of the immersed plane relative to its centroid. in metres. Therefore. h = depth of the centroid defined as: d/2. A = Area defined as: B*d in m2.Theoretical position of the line of force action below the pivot (h’’) The theoretical formula for the depth of pressure (h’) is: h’ = Ix/Ah Where: h’ = depth of the centre of pressure in meters. h = depth of the centroid defined as: d/2. Ix = the area moment of inertia of the immersed plane relative to its centroid.

= 4Bd3/12 = Bd3/3 But: h’ = 2Ix/Bd2 Therefore. by substitution: h’’ = H + (2d/3 – d) = H + (2d/3 – 3d/3) = H + (-d/3) Therefore: h’’ = H – d/3 (Formula 3) Hydrostatic Force – Actual By utilizing Formula 3 we can postulate a new formula by substituting another variable for h’’ into the sum of moments equation i. by substitution: F (H – d/3) = mgL Thus: F = (mgL)/(H – d/3) (Formula 4) 5 . B we can derive from it the following: h’’ = H + h’ – d But: h’ = 2d/3 Therefore.e. by substitution: h’ = (2Bd3/3) ÷ Bd2 . Fh’’ = mgL But: h’’ = H – d/3 Therefore. = 2d/3 By examining fig.

are combined to give a very accurate description of the dynamic interactions that take place within the apparatus.When the quadrant is immersed in water it is possible to analyze the forces acting on the surfaces of the quadrant as follows: The hydrostatic force at any point on the curved surface is normal to the surface and therefore resolves through the pivot point because this is located at the origin of the radii. This was done in three sets to give and accurate and verifiable report of our findings. The Hydrostatic test apparatus is put on a hydrostatic work bench and levelled using a built in spirit level by adjusting the individual feet of the apparatus to eliminate inaccurate readings of force i. 6 . Hydrostatic forces on the upper and lower curved surfaces therefore have no net effect – no torque to affect the equilibrium of the assembly because all of these forces pass through the pivot. The depth of immersion is noted on the scale that is supplied on the sides as well as the magnitude of the weight that is added on the balancing arm.e. The forces on the sides of the quadrant are horizontal and cancel out (equal and opposite). this data along with the aforementioned and proved formulas. The gravitational force of the water acting against the quadrant when the only desired force to have an effect is the hydrostatic force of water Once the moment caused by the weight of the quadrant is nullified by adjusting the counterweight so that balancing arm is perfectly collinear with the level indicator a balancing weight of known mass is added and water meticulously added until the balancing arm has once again returned to its previous precisely noted position aided by the hydrostatic force of water creating a moment which counter acts the torque of the weight on the balancing arm and thus holds the system in equilibrium.

Equipment used in the fluid mechanics lab • • • • • Hydraulic test bench Hydrostatic Pressure Apparatus 50 gram weight disks Water Measuring cylinder or jug Hydraulic Test Bench Hydrostatic Pressure Apparatus L – 275 mm H – 200mm D – 100 mm Pressure 7 F – Hydrostatic Force h – Depth of Centroid h’ – Depth of Centre of .

075)(0.066/3) = 0.2) – (0.5)(1000)(9.200m D – . Theoretical position of the line of force action below the pivot (h’’) (Formula 3) h’’ = H – d/3 = (0.075)(0.1 kg 0.1684 meters 3.81)(0. Hydrostatic Force – Theoretical (Formula 1) F = (1/2) (ρgBd2) Newton = (0.1780 meters 8 .066)2 = 0.6025 Newton 2.075 m force below pivot d – depth of immersion Mass (m) 0.275)/(1000)(0.275 m H – . Experimental position of the line of force action below the pivot (h’’) (Formula 2) h’’ = 2mL/ ρBd2 = (2)(0.066)2 = 1.100 m B – .2 kg F – Hydrostatic Force h – Depth of Centroid h’ – Depth of Centre of Pressure h’’ Distance of the line of action of Data Set 1 1.1)(.15 kg 0.095 m Assume density of water ρ = 1000 kg/m3 L – .081 m 3 0.B – 75 mm of force below pivot d – depth of immersion h’’ - Distance of the line of action Data Set Water Level (d) 1 0.066 m 2 0.

5)(1000)(9. Hydrostatic Force – Theoretical (Formula 1) F = (1/2) (ρgBd2) Newton = (0.2 – 0.81)(.275) ÷ (.066/3) = 1.095/3) = 0. Hydrostatic Force – Actual (Formula 4) F = (mgL)/(H – d/3) = (0.275) ÷ (. Hydrostatic Force – Theoretical (Formula 1) F = (1/2) (ρgBd2) Newton = (0.15)(9. Experimental position of the line of force action below the pivot (h’’) (Formula 2) h’’ = 2mL/ ρBd2 = (2)(0.075)(0. Theoretical position of the line of force action below the pivot (h’’) (Formula 3) h’’ = H – d/3 = (0.81)(.275) ÷ (.081)2 = 2.081/3) = 0.5)(1000)(9.075)(0.4.081/3) = 2.1730 meters 4.081)2 = 0.075)(0.2) – (0.1677 meters 3.1)(9.2 – 0.15)(.095)2 = 3.3391 Newton Data Set 3 1.075)(0.81)(0.5156 Newton Data Set 2 1. Hydrostatic Force – Actual (Formula 4) F = (mgL)/(H – d/3) = (0.275)/(1000)(0.81)(0. Experimental position of the line of force action below the pivot (h’’) (Formula 2) h’’ = 2mL/ ρBd2 = (2)(0.1625 meters 3. Hydrostatic Force – Actual (Formula 4) F = (mgL)/(H – d/3) = (0.81)(.2) – (0.3201 Newton 2.095)2 = 0.2 – 0. Theoretical position of the line of force action below the pivot (h’’) (Formula 3) h’’ = H – d/3 = (0.275)/(1000)(0.2)(9.4136 Newton 2.2)(.1683 meters 4.095/3) 9 .

2052 Newton Theoretical vs.1625 Hydrostatic Force Actual Hydrostatic Force (N) 0.173 0. Practical Data Position of the line of force action below the pivot (h’’) Experimental Distance h''e (m) Theoretical Distance h''t (m) Practical vs. theoretical accuracy (%) 94.1684 0.3201 Actual vs.5772 96.5538 Margin of error (%) 5.6067 96.3391 3.1683 Theoretical Hydrostatic Force (N) 1.= 3. they are very rarely within a error margin of more that 5 % and when one considers the 10 .4607 Interpretation of data It is obvious from the start that the theoretical data and the experimental data have a definitive correlation.4136 3.9133 96.178 0. theoretical accuracy (%) 94.3933 3.4228 3.0867 3.0636 3.1677 0.9364 96.5156 2.5393 Margin of error (%) 5.4462 0.2052 1.6025 2.

The theory and the practise match. Refraction of light through water. But even with the seemingly agreeable data the question still lingers….4607%. There is no instrument in the world that is 100% correct and the engineering practise has an established system of tolerances and allowable margins of error etc. answers that seldom have constant error margins of no more than 5 % over a spectrum of measurement sets seem to compel the scrutinizer that the theory is sound.3933 % respectively. which yet again proves that just because an practical answer isn’t a perfect match to the one obtained in theoretical calculation does not necessarily mean its incorrect. When pouring in the water there may have spilled some liquid onto the quadrant and the balancing arm thus introducing variables into the equation that were not taken into account when the magnitudes of the forces were determined 3.4228. temperature and measuring instruments. this measurement stands out from the rest in that in both the measurement of hydrostatic force and the position of the line of action of the hydrostatic force.vast amount of variables that could have affected the data readings obtained in a lab the answers are more than satisfactory to prove the theory matches the practise One discrepancy that stands out above the rest is the first reading of a mass of 100 grams and a immersion depth of 66 mm. 1. depending on your perspective the line of sight is shifted higher or lower than the true line of sight and this would invariably have had an effect on the depth measurement. if the density was higher or lower it would have without a doubt have shifted the line of action of the hydrostatic force and thus the moments value would have increased or decreased depending on weather the density was more or less than the theoretical value 2. the theory and the practise differ with 5. when one looks through water at an object. The pivot although very precisely manufactured still has a amount of friction in it that was also neglected but in practise has an effect on the readings because it resist motion and may have initiated a “false” condition of equilibrium if only the weight and hydrostatic forces were considered as acting forces 4. 11 . the inherent inaccuracy of the human eye and the variance in constants like density of water. The actual density of the water we used was never definitively recorded and the theoretical density of 1000kg/m3 was accepted as the norm. When one considers all the gremlins that could have slipped in during measurement.and 5.why are the theoretical answers and the practical answers not a perfect match ? When one investigates the circumstances and the procedures followed there seems to a satisfactory appeal. The accuracy of the measuring instruments used may have become corrupt and therefore have given values that would have provided erroneous answers 5. the reason for this is mainly suspected to be human error where the student had to “get his eye in” and the subsequent measurements proved to more accurate than the latter with error margins of not more than 3. it may point out that unknown or neglected variables have had an impact on the answer.

In conclusion: 1.The following principles were theoretically learned and practically proved: The higher the water level rises. the force has o become more to supply the same torque – M=Fs. 3. The deeper an object is immersed. the higher the line of action of hydrostatic force rises. the shorter the distance between line of action and the pivot became. The higher water level rises. therefore shortening the “lever” that had to oppose the opposing moment on the balancing arm. Although it should be noted that they may give answers of greater magnitude than those obtained in practise but the constant presence of unknown variables in a system leaves the matter up to individual precision of measurement preparation . the more force increased proving that the formula: F = ρgAh does indeed hold water (pardon the pun). Supplied assignment documentation – Mr Abraham Principles Of Fluid Mechanics. Therefore – the deeper the water became. Second Edition – Mr CF Meyer 12 . the greater the force acting upon it becomes. 2. the only feasible response to keeping the system in equilibrium would be for the force to increase – if the system stays in equilibrium and the lever becomes shorter. F = ρgAh and h’’ = H – d/3 are sound theoretical formulae that provide accurate and correct answers.

San Diego State University Fluid Mechanics Tutorials – www.com • • • • H 13 .sdsu.