The Best Way To Drop An Egg So It Won't Crack, According To Engineers
Engineers used compression tests to see what it took to crack an egg in either a horizontal or ... More vertical position.
A new paper could change the way students tackle the classic egg-drop science challenge. Conventional wisdom suggests an egg is stronger when dropped on a pointed end. A team of researchers put that idea to the test and found something surprising: Eggs are less likely to crack if dropped on their sides.
The egg-drop challenge is a rite of passage for many young scientists and engineers. A teacher typically arranges the experiment so that all students drop an egg from the same height, like off the top of a ladder. The students have to devise clever ways to prevent the egg from breaking. That could mean building a cushioned structure, employing bubble wrap or trying out a slowing method like a parachute.
Whether you're aiming for shock absorption or another protection method, the orientation of the egg could make a big difference. A team of engineers, including multiple researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, published a study on egg strength and toughness in the journal Communications Physics.
First-year students in MIT's Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering participate in an egg-drop competition. But MIT engineers began to question the vertical norm for egg orientation.
First author Antony Sutanto taking measurements of eggs before performing dynamic egg drop tests.
The researchers put eggs through their paces in two different tests. One was a static compression test that applied increasing force to the eggs. The other was a drop test.
The compression test delivered some intriguing results. The same amount of force could crack the egg, no matter the orientation. 'However, we noticed a key difference in how much the egg compressed before it broke,' said doctoral candidate Joseph Bonavia in an MIT release on Thursday. 'The horizontal egg compressed more under the same amount of force, meaning it was more compliant.'
The egg's ability to absorb more energy in the horizontal position had implications for the drop tests. It seemed to suggest eggs on their sides might perform better under the dynamic circumstances of a drop.
The researchers' drop test was more rigorous and repeatable than a typical egg-drop challenge. The team used solenoids and 3D-printed supports to ensure consistency in the drops, which took place from varying heights. In total, 180 eggs went through the drop tests.
Half of the eggs dropped vertically from a height of 8 millimeters cracked, but less than 10% of horizontal eggs cracked when dropped from the same height. 'This confirmed what we saw in the static tests,' said MIT undergraduate researcher Avishai Jeselsohn. 'Even though both orientations experienced similar peak forces, the horizontal eggs absorbed energy better and were more resistant to breaking.'
So, how did we get so focused on the vertical strength of eggs? 'The authors conclude that the reason behind the common misassumption that an egg dropped vertically is less likely to crack is a confusion between the physical properties stiffness, strength and toughness,' Communications Physics publisher Springer Nature said in a statement.
The tendency for cooks to crack eggs on their sides when preparing a meal might also have reinforced the idea that eggs are stronger on their noses—but that's a different type of force than an egg experiences from a drop.
High egg prices have been a sore point for consumers due to bird-flu-related shortages. Prices have improved, but eggs are still a precious commodity. A horizontal egg-drop attempt might be your best chance at the egg surviving long enough to make it into the frying pan.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mysteriously Magnetic Moon Rocks Might Have an Explosive Origin Story
Unlike Earth, the Moon doesn't have much of a magnetic field – and yet, a strange pile of rocks on the far side seems mysteriously magnetized. A new study suggests that a major cataclysm, over and done in under an hour, left a lasting imprint. A team led by researchers from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has found that a massive impact may have generated a huge amount of plasma that temporarily strengthened the Moon's tiny, ancient magnetic field. According to lead author Isaac Narrett, a planetary scientist at MIT, this theory could explain the presence of highly magnetic rocks detected on the Moon's far side in a region near the south pole. "There are large parts of lunar magnetism that are still unexplained," he says. "But the majority of the strong magnetic fields that are measured by orbiting spacecraft can be explained by this process – especially on the far side of the Moon." In 1959, the Soviet Luna 1 spacecraft conducted the first magnetic measurements of the Moon and found that unlike Earth, it did not have a strong, intrinsic magnetic field. Later research showed that the Moon had weak fields largely confined to the lunar crust, which seem to be created by interaction with charged solar particles. However, the analysis of samples brought back by astronauts on the Apollo missions showed that some rocks formed in magnetic fields that were much stronger. This led to the general consensus that while the Moon does not have an intrinsic magnetic field today, it once did. In a previous study, MIT planetary scientists simulated how a giant impact could have amplified solar-generated magnetic fields on the Moon. However, their results indicated that this would not generate a field strong enough to explain the highly magnetic measurements of surface rocks. In the new study, Narrett and associates took a different approach and assumed the Moon once had a dynamo that produced a weak lunar magnetic field. Given the size of the Moon's core, they estimated that such a field would have been about one-50th the strength of Earth's field today. They then simulated a large impact and the cloud of plasma that would result as the force of the impact vaporized material on the surface. They also ran simulations on how the resulting plasma would flow and interact with the Moon's existing magnetic field. This entire process would have been incredibly fast, lasting around 40 minutes from when the field was amplified to when it decayed back to baseline. This is consistent with the fact that one of the Moon's largest impact basins, Mare Imbrium, is located exactly opposite the far side southern polar region. According to their simulations, an impact powerful enough to create the Imbrium basin would have sent a pressure wave through the Moon that converged on the other side. The researchers suspect that this shock coincided with the plasma cloud amplifying the Moon's magnetic field. Rocks can contain records of the magnetic fields they formed under, thanks to the orientation of the electrons inside them. In this case, the shock waves could have temporarily disrupted electrons in the rocks at the point of convergence, and as they settled back down they could have taken a snapshot of the short-lived, strong magnetic field. "It's as if you throw a 52-card deck in the air, in a magnetic field, and each card has a compass needle," says study co-author and planetary scientist Benjamin Weiss at MIT. "When the cards settle back to the ground, they do so in a new orientation. That's essentially the magnetization process." According to the researchers, these findings have effectively settled the debate between the competing schools of thought. Instead of the Moon's magnetic field being the result of a dynamo or a massive impact, their results show that a combination of a dynamo and a large impact with a resulting shockwave could be responsible for the Moon's highly magnetized rocks, especially on the far side. This theory could be tested in the coming years as astronauts travel to the lunar south pole and collect rock samples, as part of the Artemis Program. The paper detailing their findings was published in Science Advances. Fiery Orange Gems From The Moon Reveal Secrets of Its Violent Past A Giant Hole Just Opened in The Sun – And It's Blasting Earth With Solar Wind The Universe's Largest Map Has Arrived, And You Can Stargaze Like Never Before
Associated Press
an hour ago
- Associated Press
2 Chinese scientists will stay in jail while accused of bringing biological material to US
DETROIT (AP) — Two Chinese scientists accused of smuggling or shipping biological material into the United States for use at the University of Michigan will remain in custody after waiving their right to a hearing Friday in federal court. Yunqing Jian and Chengxuan Han said in separate court appearances in Detroit that they would not challenge the government's request to keep them locked up while their cases move forward. 'This is a constantly evolving situation involving a large number of factors,' Han's attorney, Sara Garber, told a judge. She didn't elaborate and later declined to comment. Han was arrested Sunday at Detroit Metropolitan Airport after arriving on a flight from China, where she is pursuing an advanced degree at Huazhong University of Science and Technology in Wuhan. She planned to spend a year completing a project at the University of Michigan lab, and is accused of shipping biological material months ago to laboratory staff. It was intercepted by authorities. The FBI, in a court filing, said the material is related to worms and lacked a government permit. Experts told The Associated Press it didn't appear to be dangerous. Jian's case is different. She is charged with conspiring with her boyfriend, another scientist from China, to bring a toxic fungus into the U.S. Fusarium graminearum can attack wheat, barley, maize and rice. The boyfriend, Zunyong Liu, was turned away at the Detroit airport last July and sent back to China after authorities found red plant material in his backpack. Jian, who worked at the university lab, was arrested June 2. Messages between Jian and Liu in 2024 suggest that Jian was already tending to Fusarium graminearum at the lab before Liu was caught at the airport, the FBI said. Jian's attorneys declined to comment Friday. Federal authorities so far have not alleged that the scientists had a plan to unleash the fungus somewhere. Fusarium graminearum is already prevalent in the U.S. — particularly in the east and Upper Midwest — and scientists have been studying it for decades. Nicknamed 'vomitoxin' because it's most known for causing livestock to throw up, it can also cause diarrhea, abdominal pain, headache and fever in animals and people. Researchers often bring foreign plants, animals and even strains of fungi to the U.S. to study them, but they must file certain permits before moving anything across state or national borders. The university has not been accused of misconduct. It said it has received no money from the Chinese government related to the work of the three scientists. In a statement, it said it strongly condemns any actions that 'seek to cause harm, threaten national security or undermine the university's critical public mission.'
Medscape
an hour ago
- Medscape
Fast Five Quiz: Obstructive HCM Management
Learn more about beta-blockers for obstructive HCM. Guidelines from the US, Canada, and Europe recommend alcohol septal ablation over invasive surgery for patients with advanced age and comorbidities, due to its less invasive nature and shorter recovery time. However, alcohol septal ablation has been associated with higher risk for complete heart block requiring permanent pacing and might result in less uniform reduction in LVOT gradient, similar to myectomy. It should not be used in pediatric or younger patients or those with cardiac abnormalities that would require surgery. Learn more about alcohol septal ablation for obstructive HCM. Transaortic septal myectomy is the preferred treatment for patients with obstructive HCM who have severe, drug-refractory symptoms, according to a state-of-the-art review from the Journal of American College of Cardiology. Similarly, Canadian guidelines note that surgical myectomy is 'usually' the most effective therapy for obstruction and has a low risk for adverse outcomes, although contraindications to its use do exist. The AHA also notes that transaortic septal myectomy adds little risk to other cardiac procedures and that the relief in left ventricular outflow tract obstruction can minimize postoperative hemodynamic instability. Although dual chamber pacing and mitral valve replacement are effective treatments and can be used for management in some cases, transaortic septal myectomy is generally the preferred option. Learn more about surgical myectomy for obstructive HCM. Surgical myectomy is encouraged to be performed in high-volume HCM centers because in-hospital mortality for surgical myectomy is inversely correlated with surgical volume. Specifically, one recent review found that high-volume hospitals had an in-hospital mortality rate for surgical myectomy of 2.4% compared with 3.9% for medium volume and 5.7% for low volume centers. Another recent review notes that mortality rate for surgical myectomy has decreased 'strikingly' from the highs of up to 8% from 30 years ago but also acknowledges the need for more experienced surgeons in the US and Europe to increase its accessibility. Learn more about surgical outcomes for obstructive HCM. A recent review of HCM published by the American Journal of Cardiology lists history of sustained or repetitive ventricular tachycardia, unexplained syncope, massive left ventricular hypertrophy, or extensive late gadolinium enhancement or a family history of this complication as indications for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Similarly, the AHA/ACC joint guidelines specifically recommend an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for patients with any prior history of sudden cardiac arrest, ventricular fibrillation, or sustained ventricular tachycardia. It should also be considered in shared decision-making with a 5-year risk estimate if a patient has an ejection fraction < 50%, apical aneurysm, unexplained syncope, massive left ventricular hypertrophy, or a family history of sudden cardiac death. Though mild left ventricular hypertrophy and minimal late gadolinium enhancement on cardiac MRI can cause cardiovascular events in patients with obstructive HCM, they are typically not sole indicators for implanting a cardioverter-defibrillator. Asymptomatic status with normal exercise capacity is not an indicator as well. Learn more about implantable cardioverter defibrillators for obstructive HCM. This article was created using several editorial tools, including generative AI models, as part of the process. Human review and editing of this content were performed prior to publication. Lead image: Science Source
