Calculating resultant amplitude, given 2 ampli's and phase diff


by RKOwens4
Tags: ampli, amplitude, diff, phase, resultant
RKOwens4
RKOwens4 is offline
#1
Jul22-11, 09:30 AM
P: 33
1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

Two waves of the same frequency have amplitudes 1.02 and 2.27. They interfere at a point where their phase difference is 59.5. What is the resultant amplitude?


2. Relevant equations

Resultant Amp = (Amp1 + Amp2)cos(theta/2)

3. The attempt at a solution

Okay this seemed like a simple plug and chug problem. I ended up getting an answer of 2.86, but this is marked wrong. I then did the "practice another version" thing on webassign and worked another version of the same exact problem (just with different values of the two amps and a different theta), but used the exact same formula and guess what... it was correct! I've spent the last 15 minutes trying to figure out why the formula works for one version of the problem but not the one that matters. Can anyone help?
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
NASA's space station Robonaut finally getting legs
Free the seed: OSSI nurtures growing plants without patent barriers
Going nuts? Turkey looks to pistachios to heat new eco-city
ehild
ehild is offline
#2
Jul22-11, 10:16 AM
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 9,818
Quote Quote by RKOwens4 View Post

Resultant Amp = (Amp1 + Amp2)cos(theta/2)
Are you sure that this formula is true?

ehild
gneill
gneill is online now
#3
Jul22-11, 10:44 AM
Mentor
P: 11,421
Quote Quote by ehild View Post
Are you sure that this formula is true?

ehild
It looks like it holds true when the frequencies of the two signals are identical.

RKOwens4
RKOwens4 is offline
#4
Jul22-11, 12:50 PM
P: 33

Calculating resultant amplitude, given 2 ampli's and phase diff


Can someone help, please? I don't expect anyone to just solve the problem and give me the answer like they do on cramster, but statements like the two above (with all due respect) don't really help me one single iota. No, I'm not sure if that equation works 100% of the time (obviously, it doesn't). But, what formula should I try instead?
gneill
gneill is online now
#5
Jul22-11, 12:57 PM
Mentor
P: 11,421
Quote Quote by RKOwens4 View Post
Can someone help, please? I don't expect anyone to just solve the problem and give me the answer like they do on cramster, but statements like the two above (with all due respect) don't really help me one single iota. No, I'm not sure if that equation works 100% of the time (obviously, it doesn't). But, what formula should I try instead?
The formula is correct. If your result, 2.856, or rounded to two sig figs, 2.86 is marked incorrect, then either:

1. There are some units that should have been specified
2. There is a typo in the question (no way to fix that!)
3. The marking program is incorrectly programmed for this question (call your instructor)
ehild
ehild is offline
#6
Jul22-11, 03:08 PM
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 9,818
Try the following formula for the resultant amplitude :

A=sqrt[A11+A22-2A1A2cos(θ)].

ehild
gneill
gneill is online now
#7
Jul22-11, 03:37 PM
Mentor
P: 11,421
Attached Thumbnails
Fig1.gif  
ehild
ehild is offline
#8
Jul22-11, 03:43 PM
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 9,818
The interfering waves are A1sin(wt-kx) and A2sin(wt-kx+θ). Their resultant is a single wave with amplitude A. Denoting wt-kx by α, we have the sum

A1sin(α)+A2sin(α+θ)=Asin(α+φ)*.

sin(α+θ)=sin(α)cos(θ)+cos(α)sin(θ), and sin(α+φ)=sin(α)cos(φ)+cos(α)sin(φ).

Replacing into eq. * :

sin(α)[A1+A2cos(θ)]+cos(α)A2sin(θ)=A[sin(α)cos(φ)+cos(α)sin(φ)]

The equation is valid for any angles, that is for any values of sin(α) and cos(α) between -1 and 1. Therefore

A1+A2cos(θ)=Acos(φ) and A2sin(θ)=Asin(φ)

Square both equation and add up:

A2=A12+A22+2A1A2cos(θ).

ehild
ehild
ehild is offline
#9
Jul22-11, 03:46 PM
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 9,818
Quote Quote by gneill View Post
It looks like it holds true when the frequencies of the two signals are identical.
Let be the phase difference θ=pi. Then the resultant amplitude is always 0, according to the formula in the original post which is certainly not true when the amplitudes are different.

ehild
ehild
ehild is offline
#10
Jul22-11, 04:15 PM
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 9,818
Quote Quote by gneill View Post
Is the resultant amplitude 2.86, according to the plot? It is close but different.

ehild
gneill
gneill is online now
#11
Jul22-11, 04:26 PM
Mentor
P: 11,421
I've been looking more closely at the OP's formula. It would appear to be a good approximation for small phase angles, say less than 50 degrees or so. I'm currently investigating a derivation that will provide an error term.
gneill
gneill is online now
#12
Jul22-11, 04:28 PM
Mentor
P: 11,421
Quote Quote by ehild View Post
Is the resultant amplitude 2.86, according to the plot? It is close but different.

ehild
The plot maxima are at amplitude 2.92 ! So yes, close to 2.86, but not spot on. Your formula delivers the goods (as it should, based upon the derivation!).
ehild
ehild is offline
#13
Jul22-11, 04:32 PM
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 9,818
I wonder why not the exact formula is used? It is derived in every books on General Physics.

ehild
gneill
gneill is online now
#14
Jul22-11, 04:40 PM
Mentor
P: 11,421
Quote Quote by ehild View Post
I wonder why not the exact formula is used? It is derived in every books on General Physics.

ehild
I suppose it's one of those shortcuts that engineers use
Makes the math simpler.

I've derived an expression for the signal sum that looks as follows:

[tex] (A + B) cos\left(\frac{\phi}{2}\right) cos(\omega t) + (A - B)sin\left(\frac{\phi}{2}\right) sin(\omega t) [/tex]

The amplitude of the left term is clearly the OP's formula. The right term represents a deviation from that formula. Apparently the OP's formula works best for similar amplitudes and small angles.
ehild
ehild is offline
#15
Jul22-11, 04:52 PM
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 9,818
Quote Quote by gneill View Post
The amplitude of the left term is clearly the OP's formula. The right term represents a deviation from that formula. Apparently the OP's formula works best for similar amplitudes and small angles.
I see now where the OP's formula came from. Thanks gneil! But it is really a rough approximation.

ehild
gneill
gneill is online now
#16
Jul22-11, 05:16 PM
Mentor
P: 11,421
Quote Quote by ehild View Post
But it is really a rough approximation.
I can't argue with you there!
ehild
ehild is offline
#17
Jul22-11, 11:05 PM
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 9,818
What if students try to use the resultant for A1=3 A2=1 and phase difference of 180? They see only a formula to plug in data. Applying the correct formula is not much more work than using the wrong one.Why do they teach the wrong one then?

ehild
gneill
gneill is online now
#18
Jul23-11, 07:24 AM
Mentor
P: 11,421
Quote Quote by ehild View Post
What if students try to use the resultant for A1=3 A2=1 and phase difference of 180? They see only a formula to plug in data. Applying the correct formula is not much more work than using the wrong one.Why do they teach the wrong one then?

ehild
To be fair, we don't know the background of where that formula comes from. For all we know it was a perfectly valid formula in a particular example (equal amplitude waves, perhaps), that was lifted out of context. We would have to as the OP where he found it.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
How to get amplitude and phase Electrical Engineering 3
Resultant Amplitude of 2 Waves Introductory Physics Homework 1
Phase of resultant wave Introductory Physics Homework 13
Three light waves combine at a point find resultant amplitude and phase angle Introductory Physics Homework 4
amplitude of a resultant wave Introductory Physics Homework 8