0

How can buoyant force be derived from most basic laws of fluids ?
I can think of easy one. Consider such scheme of body floating deep in water :

enter image description here

Where $dA$ is elementary downward directed surface unit of a body, $dh$ - elementary change of depth.

Then infinitesimal pressure change by definition is : $$ dp = \rho g\, dh $$

Pressure is force per unit area, substituting this into formula gives, $$ \frac {dF}{dA} = \rho g\, dh $$

Moving elementary surface into right side of equation gives,

$$ dF = \rho g\, dA\, dh $$

Further we notice that $dA \cdot dh$ is nothing but elementary volume, so we can rewrite equation as :

$$ dF = \rho g \,dV $$

Now we need to integrate both sides of equation,

$$ \int dF = \int \rho g \,dV$$

Which further integrating elementary volume against floating in water body part $V_f$, gives :

$$ F = \rho g \int^{V_f}_0 dV = \rho g V_f $$

which is exactly buoyant force.

Any other buoyant force derivations from basic principles ?

  • 1
    So what’s your question specifically? – Bob D Mar 29 '20 at 20:14
  • Question is - Are there any other buoyant force derivations from basic principles or is this the only one possible ? – Agnius Vasiliauskas Mar 29 '20 at 20:16
  • 1
    Any derivation must use the basic equation of hydrostatic equilibrium, which shows how the gradient of pressure is related to force per unit volume of the fluid due to some external field (such as gravity). Viewed mathematically, buoyancy is then just an application of the Gauss theorem of vector calculus, whereby a surface integral (force on a surface due to fluid pressure) is related to a volume integral (force on the domain surrounded by the surface due to the external field). – Tomáš Brauner Mar 29 '20 at 20:56
  • Do keep in mind that Archimedes' principle holds true even when the gravitational field $g$ and the density of the fluid $\rho$ are not uniform. – Ajay Mohan Mar 29 '20 at 21:33
  • @AjayMohan It's not a problem. You can account for it in integral $\int \rho(V) g(V) ,dV$ expression – Agnius Vasiliauskas Mar 29 '20 at 22:06
  • @TomášBrauner Can you expand your comment as full-scale answer ? – Agnius Vasiliauskas Mar 29 '20 at 22:08
  • Not clear what you are asking. What kind of "other" basic derivation do you want to know about? What assumptions would it make? What theory would it be based on? How would it differ from the derivation you have provided? – sammy gerbil Mar 30 '20 at 00:40
  • @sammygerbil How would it differ from the derivation you have provided? That's the exact question I'm asking ! – Agnius Vasiliauskas Mar 30 '20 at 07:11

1 Answers1

6

We will need the following two facts:

  • In hydrostatic equilibrium, the distribution of pressure $P$ in a fluid is governed by the relation $$ \tag{$\ast$} \vec\nabla P=\rho\vec g, $$ where $\rho$ is the fluid density and $\vec g$ is the force per unit mass of the fluid due to any external field. (It does not have to be gravity, and it does not have to be homogeneous.)
  • The Gauss theorem of vector calculus in the form $$ \tag{$\ast\ast$} \int_{\partial V}\phi\,d\vec S=\int_V(\vec\nabla\phi)\,dV, $$ where $\phi$ is a scalar field, $V$ is a chosen domain in space and $\partial V$ its boundary, oriented so that the area element $d\vec S$ points out of $V$.

Let us now think of $V$ as some object immersed in the fluid and calculate the total force due to the pressure of the fluid on the object, $$ \vec F=-\int_{\partial V}P\,d\vec S=-\int_V(\vec\nabla P)\,dV=-\int_V\rho\vec g\,dV. $$ The last expression is exactly minus the total force by which the external field $\vec g$ would act on the body of fluid filling the volume $V$. This is the Archimedes principle.

All this said, I should add that one can use pretty much the same argument to actually derive $(\ast)$. This reflects the fact that one does not really need any mathematics to understand the Archimedes principle: by arguing that the force on the immersed object is the same as the force on the body of fluid filling the volume $V$ and invoking the condition of hydrostatic equilibrium, one arrives at the same conclusion immediately. Note that even the mathematical derivation shown here implicitly assumes that one can replace the object with the fluid filling the same volume $V$ without disturbing the surrounding fluid. This is hidden in the assumption that the field $P$ can be extended to the inside of $V$, and also there $(\ast)$ still holds.

One can of course derive $(\ast)$ in a similar way as you did, by choosing $V$ as an infinitesimal cube. The above maths can then be thought of as a mathematical derivation of the Archimedes principle for domains of arbitrary shape. Finally, those who prefer physics intuition to mathematical manipulations can think of the above as a "physical proof" of the Gauss theorem $(\ast\ast)$. You choose which interpretation you prefer!

Tomáš Brauner
  • 1,992
  • 13
  • 15
  • 1
    Isn't this essentially the same as the derivation given in the question? Pressure gradient, force, area, volume are all in the question. – sammy gerbil Mar 30 '20 at 14:14
  • @sammygerbil Yes, of course. It's just a somewhat mathematically refined version of what is given in the question. Any derivation must contain the same physics ingredients. – Tomáš Brauner Mar 30 '20 at 18:14