Slightly harder physics question
Slightly harder physics question
Author
Discussion

motco

Original Poster:

17,665 posts

277 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
A barge laden with pig iron is in a lock on a canal. The lock gates and sluices are closed so there is no in or outflow of water. The water level is exactly a metre from the top of the edge of the lock. The bargee decides to heave the pig iron over the side into the water. Does the water level in the lock change and, if so, is it up or down?

speedchick

5,290 posts

253 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
Remembering what I can from school, because the iron is on the barge and so has already displaced the water with it's weight, dropping the iron over the side of the barge will not alter the water level at all. Because the gates are closed, its only a matter of moving from the barge to the water, nothing new is intoduced and so should stay as was.

Eric Mc

125,883 posts

296 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
I wouldn't think it would change.

nervous

24,050 posts

261 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
it wont change, other than the water lost from the splash.

Kiwi XTR2

2,693 posts

263 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
The barge was displacing the water-weight-equivalent of the iron thrown overboard. While it was in mid-air the barge rose and the water-level dropped. Once the iron hit the water and sank (assuming no splashing over the sides) the water level rose by the displaced volume of the iron and the barge rose a little bit in relation to the lock but remained at a constant level in relation to the free surface.

Short answer = Water level dropped

gasblaster

27,591 posts

310 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
Assuming the bottom of the canal is solid so the object cannot sink into it, it will displace the same amount of water as it did whilst carried in the boat, so the water level will stay the same.

puggit

49,832 posts

279 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
Depends if the mechanism used to lift the iron was on the barge or on land

bga

8,134 posts

282 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
imo the water level would decrease. The volume displaced by the iron in the boat is going to be greater than on it's own (otherwise it wouldn't float). By chucking it in the water, there will be an overall reduction in displacement as the displacement volume of the iron in the water will be less than the reduction in displacement of the barge.

probably wrong though

jamieboy

5,931 posts

260 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
I have no clue.

Something in my head says that in the barge it was displacing water due to it's weight, now it's in the water it's displacing due to it's volume.

However, I have no clue whether that a) is true, or b) makes any difference.

Code Monkey

3,318 posts

288 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
Kiwi XTR2 said:
The barge was displacing the water-weight-equivalent of the iron thrown overboard. While it was in mid-air the barge rose and the water-level dropped. Once the iron hit the water and sank (assuming no splashing over the sides) the water level rose by the displaced volume of the iron and the barge rose a little bit in relation to the lock but remained at a constant level in relation to the free surface.

Short answer = Water level dropped


this is how i thought it would work, if the barge held tanks of water on board which it could empty then the equal displacement before and after emptying would hold true otherwise the water level would change depending on the lead or any other load on the barge being heavier or lighter than the water its actual mass displaces.

neil.b

6,546 posts

278 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
The absolute water level should remain the same due to no change in displacement. However, wouldn't the barge rise in the water through shedding the weight? Not that that would help with the lock problem of course...

On the other hand, if off-loading the weight doesn't change the height of the barge in the water then its boyancy must be modifying the net displacement, so shedding the weight would make the water rise....



School seems so long ago now.

gasblaster

27,591 posts

310 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
Actually, depending on the SHAPE of the pig iron, the water level could fall quite dramatically.

Make it dart shaped.

It will puncture the bottom of the canal and let all the water out!


On the other hand, if it is a 'cunning trick question' and the pig iron is in fact a four legged pig-like grunty pig thing, it might clamber out of the canal and the water level would again fall, but not by as much.

bad_roo

5,196 posts

268 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
The iron will rust.

Kiwi XTR2

2,693 posts

263 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
neil.b said:
School seems so long ago now.


Must have been a VERY long time ago for the laws of physics to have changed that much


GreenV8S

31,027 posts

315 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
When the iron is floating (i.e. on the barge) it will displace exactly its own weight in water. When it is resting on the bottom it will displace it's own volume in water. This means the water level will go down. It is exactly analagous to jacking the barge up out of the water i.e. putting weight on the bottom of the canal instead of supporting it by bouyancy; the barge will rise relative to the water, and the water level will go down relative to the ground.

Mr Whippy

32,453 posts

272 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
Hmmm.

Surely 1 tonne of steel will required 1 tonne of bouyancy, which is generated by displacing one tonne of water (1 cubic metre of water ish)

If you throw that one tonne of steel from the boat, the boat will displace one cubic metre less of water, which was used to keep it floating, BUT, the steel being of higher density than water (if it has no pockets of air inside) will now displace less volume than the boat had to do to support it.

The boat will rise out of the water as the steel is thrown, making the level drop, then as the steel enters the water, the level of water will rise again, but not as much as it dropped when the boat rose.

Dave

gasblaster

27,591 posts

310 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
GreenV8S said:
When the iron is floating (i.e. on the barge) it will displace exactly its own weight in water. When it is resting on the bottom it will displace it's own volume in water. This means the water level will go down. It is exactly analagous to jacking the barge up out of the water i.e. putting weight on the bottom of the canal instead of supporting it by bouyancy; the barge will rise relative to the water, and the water level will go down relative to the ground.


you know, I think you might have a point!

neil.b

6,546 posts

278 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
Kiwi XTR2 said:
neil.b said:
School seems so long ago now.


Must have been a VERY long time ago for the laws of physics to have changed that much





neil.b

6,546 posts

278 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
GreenV8S said:
When the iron is floating (i.e. on the barge) it will displace exactly its own weight in water. When it is resting on the bottom it will displace it's own volume in water. This means the water level will go down. It is exactly analagous to jacking the barge up out of the water i.e. putting weight on the bottom of the canal instead of supporting it by bouyancy; the barge will rise relative to the water, and the water level will go down relative to the ground.


That was kind of my point, except you put it across more intelligently.

And I got the outcome wrong...doh...


wolves_wanderer

12,959 posts

268 months

Tuesday 21st February 2006
quotequote all
Yeah, but would a plane take off on a conveyor belt?