..What you describe is fluid motion, not wave motion..
HI FYI,
A fluid (explosion) at work:This mpg demonstrates how a compressible fluid reacts as it travels through a structure with partitions:
b
Attachments
Whether there are reflections from side walls depend in velocity vector of the wave front and it's relation with the wall. How much reflection will create clearly measurable effects depend in the dimensions of the duct compared to the wave length.
Are you certain that that isn't just a simplified representation of what is actually happening?
How is it that a tapered pipe of the same length will resonate at a lower frequency?
A tapered pipe is the inverse of a conical horn, so instead of having a high to low pressure transformation from throat to terminus it has a low to high transformation that increases vent mass loading with increasing taper ratio (where 'vent' = the terminus's elastic boundary condition) same as a simple MLTL mass loads its vent, only much more so.
GM
HI FYI,
A fluid (explosion) at work:This mpg demonstrates how a compressible fluid reacts as it travels through a structure with partitions:
b
Sure enough looks like that is reflecting but might be out of context here.
Villastrangiato's account has been disabled at his own request.
Just as well, Romy 'wannabes' aren't a good 'fit' here.
GM
But,
If a wave in unable to reflect off a sidewall due to a limit on the distance, how can a wave resonate over a total distance that is made up of bends?
There is a paradox here...
No paradox, a sound 'bubble' has 'x' amount of particle density, so when compressed as it would be in an acoustically small pipe for the WL it's just an air mass 'slug' slithering back n' forth during compression/rarefaction same as in a vent at resonance.
GM
No paradox, a sound 'bubble' has 'x' amount of particle density, so when compressed as it would be in an acoustically small pipe for the WL it's just an air mass 'slug' slithering back n' forth during compression/rarefaction same as in a vent at resonance.
GM
You seem to be giving sound energy an extremely coherent quality, similar to a cohesive viscous liquid.
More accurately: "how does the low frequency sound wave go around an 180* bend if it does not reflect off the sidewalls of the pipe"
Precisely stated "it can't", but that is a gross over simplification. If you mapped out the precise locations of pressure contours as the wave wrappped arround it would not be so simple as to be defined as a reflection versus a diffraction - both are going on in various amounts at all time and frequencies.
Would it be fair to say that a tone of low frequency will reflect from a surface that is in close proximity to the source? Take a concrete wall for example and place a woofer 10 inches from it. I expect due to the short distance that no reflection will take place?
It's an angle of incidence and (mis)matching impedance situation, so a LF tone won't be so much reflected as flowed out like a liquid and why room gain modes can be visualized as underwater wave motion in a tank.
GM
"couple of clueless, arrogant pseudo-scientists (Earl Geddes and Martin King)"
Cool, can I join? Won't anyone please hate me?
Cool, can I join? Won't anyone please hate me?
I guess you did not have a big enough presence to be singled out, but I bet your were close. Better luck next time.
It is unfortunate that he seems to have a lot of anger and frustration with people who will not automatically fall in line with his way of thinking. He definitely does not listen or read references other then his own. I wonder how he will get along with some of the folks at AA, they are not always shy.
it would not be so simple as to be defined as a reflection versus a diffraction - both are going on in various amounts at all time and frequencies.
I don't doubt that there is a lot going on - reflection, refraction, different frequencies, the whole schlamazel but I like to make it simple - one frequency, say 20hz and one bend, 180*. Let's leave all the other fodder out of it and concentrate on this one situation, ok?
Explain how a 20hz sound wave does a 180* turn without reflecting.
I guess you did not have a big enough presence to be singled out, but I bet your were close. Better luck next time.
It is unfortunate that he seems to have a lot of anger and frustration with people who will not automatically fall in line with his way of thinking. He definitely does not listen or read references other then his own. I wonder how he will get along with some of the folks at AA, they are not always shy.
Who's in for a lotery on how long he lasts at AA? They drove me away and I'm pretty thick skined. I'll take three days, this being a weekend.
And Scott, I'll hate you too😀 (That's customer service for you!)
You seem to be giving sound energy an extremely coherent quality, similar to a cohesive viscous liquid.
It is for the purpose of describing typical acoustic resonances where the WL is long WRT its container and why MJK's 'simple' 1D wave equation is adequate to accurately sim resonant cavities.
GM
It is for the purpose of describing typical acoustic resonances where the WL is long WRT its container and why MJK's 'simple' 1D wave equation is adequate to accurately sim resonant cavities.
GM
Sorry but I'm seeing a lot of rhetoric and it's wearing me down (typically used in this fashion for that express purpose by politicians wishing to avoid directly confronting a problem).
I'll take a break from all of this.
So it is possible that the way I describe it is the way it could be, correct?
Dismissing the idea that the wave reflects off the sidewall of the pipe is inconsistent with the examples that I have proposed.
When I have thoughts like this, I find some time spent with the ripple tank applet helps to clarify them. You can see the waves reflecting (or not).
http://www.falstad.com/ripple/
Seriously, MJL? Physics is always about modelling - if a model is formulated, tested against real results, and shown to be acceptably close, the model is useful.
Would you say that you were hearing a lot of rhetoric if, when asked to explain gravity, a physicist told you that it was "pretty complicated, but comes down to mass bending the 3-dimensional structure of space"?
Would you say that you were hearing a lot of rhetoric if, when asked to explain gravity, a physicist told you that it was "pretty complicated, but comes down to mass bending the 3-dimensional structure of space"?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Loudspeakers
- Multi-Way
- Real Expert or Just Self Proclaimed