The Geometry of Close Packing Spheres
CSEF · 2003 Mathematics & Software
Overview
Objectives/Goals The objective is to determine whether different types of packing arrangements (hexagonal, face centered, or body centered close packing) affect the packing density of spheres. The specific purpose is to determine whether a hexagonal close packing arrangement produces the highest packing density in three dimensions, as this is true in two dimensions. Methods/Materials Three-dimensional models of each type of packing lattice were researched and created inside a cube in Lightwave (a 3D modeling program). The packing density of each situation was calculated by dividing the total volume of spheres in each cube by the volume of the cube using the formulas for the volumes of spheres, spherical caps, and cubes. The different packing densities were recorded and compared. All of the calculations of the packing density were repeated until they were consistent with current literature on packing density. Results Body centered cubic close packing calculated a packing density of 67.88%. Face centered cubic close packing had a packing density of 52.36%. Hexagonal close packing has a density of 74.46%. Conclusions/Discussion The results of this experiment were consistent with the hypothesis and the preliminary research done. The densest packing arrangement could be recreated to ship ping-pong balls or some similar application where packing density saves money and space. When studying crystals, if it is possible to determine the packing arrangement, then the crystal can be assigned an overall density due to the packing arrangement of it's atoms.
Summary statement
The intuitive perception is correct that the closest packing of spheres in two-dimensions forms the basis for the closest packing arrangement of spheres in three-dimensions.
Help received
Richard Hurley helped work in Lightwave. Bruce Rawles helped define packing arrangements by providing sources for reference.
Competition history
- CSEF 2003
Resources
Related projects
ISEF · 2015
Disordered Packings of the Platonic Solids and the Pentagonal Trapezohedron
CSEF · 2006
Packing Ellipses into a Hexagon: Does Varying the Ratio of the Two Axes of an Ellipse Affect Packing?
CSEF · 2006
How Does Particle Density Influence "Monte Carlo" Derivations of Pi?
CSEF · 2008
Frenetic, Kinetic Coaster
CSEF · 2008
Distances a Catapult Can Propel Spheres of Differing Mass and Density
CSEF · 2019
Studying the Dynamics of Granular Materials
CSEF · 2018
The Strengths of All Five Platonic Solids
CSEF · 2010
Invisible Infinities: Determining the Fraction of Lattice Points Visible from the Origin in the Third Dimension
Closest projects by meaning, across every fair and year in the corpus.
Browse more like this
Source: California Science & Engineering Fair public projects