The objective of this experiment was to compare the theoretical and experimental values of center of pressure on a submerged rectangular surface and how the center of pressure varies with depth of submergence. This was done by recorded the needed amount of force to balance the resultant hydrostatic force at increasing water depths. It was found that the theoretical and experimental values varied further from each other the deeper the surface was submerged. It was also found that the YR-Yc value (both theoretical and experimental) decreased, meaning the center of pressure and centroid approached each other, with increased water depth. Results and Discussion:
The first thing that was done was the base of the tank was confirmed to be level. …show more content…
Brass weights were added until the hanger became level. The total mass needed was recorded. A 5g mass was the smallest available increment of weight to use, so all the total mass recordings have an uncertainty of ±5g. With the weights on, the water depth (measured from the bottom of tank to the water level) was measured. The water level was measured with a ruler, so the measurements also have an uncertainty of ±1mm. More water was then added to increase the water depth and the process was repeated. Results can be found in Table 1-C in the Appendix.
With the raw data collected, the resultant force on the submerged plane (FR) and depth to the centroid of the submerged plane (yc) were found. Next the R1 (theoretical yR-yc value) and R2 (experimental yR-yc value) values were calculated for each trial. The uncertainty for each R value was also found. The results are displayed in Table 1. Sample calculations for solving FR, yc, R1, R2, and their uncertainties are shown in the Appendix.
Table …show more content…
As the water got deeper (L2 increased), both the FR and Yc increased. Oppositely, the R values decreased with the increased water depth. This means that the center of the pressure approached the centroid with an increase in submergence. The uncertainty for both R1 and R2 decreased with the decrease in their respective R values and increase in water depth. These trends can be noticed on the graph shown in Figure 1. It should be noted that uncertainty bars for both R1 and R2 are graphed, but the bars for R1 are small enough were they cannot be seen behind the point marker. Unlike the uncertainty, the percent difference between R1 and R2 increased substantially with the increase in water
The first thing that was done was the base of the tank was confirmed to be level. …show more content…
Brass weights were added until the hanger became level. The total mass needed was recorded. A 5g mass was the smallest available increment of weight to use, so all the total mass recordings have an uncertainty of ±5g. With the weights on, the water depth (measured from the bottom of tank to the water level) was measured. The water level was measured with a ruler, so the measurements also have an uncertainty of ±1mm. More water was then added to increase the water depth and the process was repeated. Results can be found in Table 1-C in the Appendix.
With the raw data collected, the resultant force on the submerged plane (FR) and depth to the centroid of the submerged plane (yc) were found. Next the R1 (theoretical yR-yc value) and R2 (experimental yR-yc value) values were calculated for each trial. The uncertainty for each R value was also found. The results are displayed in Table 1. Sample calculations for solving FR, yc, R1, R2, and their uncertainties are shown in the Appendix.
Table …show more content…
As the water got deeper (L2 increased), both the FR and Yc increased. Oppositely, the R values decreased with the increased water depth. This means that the center of the pressure approached the centroid with an increase in submergence. The uncertainty for both R1 and R2 decreased with the decrease in their respective R values and increase in water depth. These trends can be noticed on the graph shown in Figure 1. It should be noted that uncertainty bars for both R1 and R2 are graphed, but the bars for R1 are small enough were they cannot be seen behind the point marker. Unlike the uncertainty, the percent difference between R1 and R2 increased substantially with the increase in water