Stand With Ukraine

Tuesday, August 25, 2026

Physics problem: long stick floating on a liquid surface

The following problem, as many others, is coming from my usual source of inspiration, i.e. from Savchenko et al (1981) book. I am currently working through the section on surface tension phenomena. I decided to share this problem here mostly because of the beautiful answer, which is independent of surface tension coefficient of the liquid and of the stick's size, the result is just a number. Another reason for this post is that the problem is completely removed from newer editions of the book.

I did not pay much attention to the plot in the problem statement which is supposed to be used to get information necessary for the solution. I only realized that after Google AI turned my attention to the profile of the surface of the liquid prior to touching long sides of the stick.

Here is the translation of the problem statement:

A very long and thin stick with a square cross-section floats on the surface of a liquid, as shown in the figure. How much higher is the stick's density than the liquid's density (expressed as a ratio)?

We denote the length of the stick as $l$ and the side of its rectangular cross-section as $a$.

Let's consider forces acting on the stick along the vertical axis. Surface tension, buoyancy force and gravity, respectively, will compensate each other as follows:

\begin{align*} 2\sigma (l+a) + \rho_0 l a^2 g - \rho l a^2 g = 0 \end{align*}

where $\sigma$ is the surface tension coefficient, $\rho$ and $\rho_0$ are densities of the stick and of the liquid respectively.

The stick being very long and thin, means $l \gg a$ and we get the above equation simplified to:

\begin{align} 2\sigma + \rho_0 a^2 g - \rho a^2 g = 0 \end{align}

Now we consider the part of the liquid surface between the point where it touches the stick and the undisturbed horizontal plane. Let's denote this part of the liquid surface as $AB$ (see the figure). Now we approximate the form of $AB$ as a segment of a circle of radius $r$ (we will later take it to be $r=a/2$ as can be seen from the figure in the problem statement).

Let's consider horizontal forces acting on $AB$: $F_{px}$ - pressure force pushing the liquid towards the stick and $F_{\tau}$ surface tension preventing the liquid from touching the stick.

\begin{align*} F_x = F_{\tau} - F_{px} = 0 \end{align*}

$F_{\tau} = \sigma l$ - is the surface tension force applied at point $B$.

$F_p$ - is the total pressure force acting along the $AB$ parallel to the radius at each given point of $AB$. Its horizontal component is the following integral:

\begin{align*} F_{px} & = \int\limits_{0}^{\pi/2} dF_p(\alpha) \cos\alpha \\ & = \int\limits_{0}^{\pi/2} \rho_0 g l r(1-\sin\alpha) \cos\alpha \cdot r d \alpha = \\ & = \int\limits_{0}^{1} \rho_0 g l r^{2}(1-z) d z = \\ & = \frac{1}{2} \rho_0 g l r^{2} \end{align*}

Now the force balance equation gives us:

\begin{align*} & \sigma l - \frac{1}{2} \rho_0 g l r^{2} = 0 & \Rightarrow \\ & \sigma = \frac{\rho_0 g r^2}{2} & \end{align*}

Now, since $r = a/2$, we get

\begin{align*} \sigma = \frac{\rho_0 g a^2}{8} \end{align*}

Now we can use this expression for $\sigma$ in the equation obtained from the balance of the forces acting on the stick.

\begin{align*} & 2\sigma + \rho_0 a^2 g - \rho a^2 g = 0 & \Rightarrow \\ & \frac{\rho_0 g a^2}{4} + \rho_0 a^2 g - \rho a^2 g = 0 & \Rightarrow \\ & \frac{5}{4} \rho_0 - \rho = 0 & \Rightarrow \\ & \boxed{\frac{\rho}{\rho_0} = \frac{5}{4}} & \end{align*}

Finally the density of the stick is 1.25 times higher than the density of the liquid, and it still floats.

Thursday, June 18, 2026

Zero-flow ocean boundary condition at the land-ocean interface

Recently, I was reading NEMO (Nucleus for European Modelling of the Ocean) manual, trying to fill in some blanks, as part of my professional development time. In the early pages, as it often happens to me, I got curious about the ocean-land boundary condition imposed on the ocean near its bottom, where water is limited by the land. In the manual it was given without derivation as:

$$ w = -(\vec{U}_h, \nabla_h H(x, y)) $$

where $\vec{U}_h$ - is the horizontal component of the ocean velocity, and $w$ - is the vertical component of the ocean velocity, $H(x, y)$ - is the ocean depth (aka bathymetry) at a point with coordinates $(x, y)$.

Below is the derivation, I've managed to come up with for this formula.

For each point on the surface $z=-H(x, y)$ we have a radius vector pointing from the origin of the coordinate system to any given point on $H(x, y)$ let's denote the radius vector as $\vec{r} = \vec{r}\left(x, y, z\right)$.

Let's also note that the total (3D) velocity of the ocean is $\vec{v} = \vec{U}_h + w \vec{k}$.

Where $\vec{k}$ is the unit vector (i.e $\left(\vec{k}, \vec{k}\right) = \left|\vec{k}\right|^2 = 1$) parallel to the vertical $z$-axis. Note that here our vertical axis is pointing upward, to be consistent with NEMO documentation.

Now the zero-flow condition through the ocean-land interface means that the projection of the total ocean velocity on the normal to the interface surface is 0:

$$ (\vec{v}, \vec{n}) = 0 $$

To find the expression for $\vec{n}$ we can use a vector product of $\partial_x \vec{r}$ and $\partial_y \vec{r}$, as these are tangent to $H(x,y)$ along the $x$ and $y$ axis respectively. Therefore,

$$ \vec{n}=[\partial_x \vec{r}, \partial_y \vec{r}] $$

we can expand the vector product as follows, using a determinant of the matrix below:

\begin{split} & \vec{n} & \; = \;&\begin{vmatrix} \vec{i} & \vec{j} & \vec{k} \\ 1 & 0 & -\partial_x H(x, y) \\ 0 & 1 & -\partial_y H(x, y) \end{vmatrix} = \vec{i}\, \partial_x H(x, y) + \vec{j}\,\partial_y H(x, y) + \vec{k} =\\ \\ & & \; = \; & \nabla H (x, y) + \vec{k}\\ \end{split}

Now when we plug the expressions above for $\vec{v}$ and $\vec{n}$ into the scalar product $(\vec{v}, \vec{n})$ we get:

\begin{align*} (\vec{v}, \vec{n}) & = \left(\vec{U}_h + w \vec{k}, \nabla H (x, y) + \vec{k} \right) \\ & = \left(\vec{U}_h, \nabla H (x, y)\right) + \left(\vec{U}_h, \vec{k}\right) + \left(w \vec{k}, \nabla H (x, y)\right) + w \\ & = \left(\vec{U}_h, \nabla H (x, y)\right) + w = 0 \\ \end{align*}

Above we used $\left(\vec{U}_h, \vec{k}\right)=0$ and $\left(w \vec{k}, \nabla H (x, y)\right) = 0$, since the scalar products of perpendicular vectors is 0.

Therefore, finally we can write the desired boundary condition as follows:

$$ \boxed{ w = -\left(\vec{U}_h, \nabla H (x, y)\right) }. $$