Amplitude decrease with geometrical spreading

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the amplitude decrease of a seismic pulse due to geometrical spreading. The original poster references the relationship between energy and amplitude, noting that energy decreases as 1/r², leading to an expected amplitude decrease of 1/r. However, a source from Louisiana State University states that amplitude decreases by a factor of √2 when the distance is doubled, which confuses the poster. The conversation explores the connection between amplitude and energy density, emphasizing that amplitude is proportional to the square root of energy density, which varies inversely with distance. Clarification is sought on whether the discrepancy in amplitude reduction factors is a misunderstanding or an error.
AlecYates
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hey,

I'm looking at amplitude decrease of a seismic pulse as a result of geometrical spreading.

Starting with I = E / (4 * pi * r2) where E = original energy from source, we know that energy falls off as 1/r2, thus amplitude falls off as 1/r.

From wikipedia: "The energy or intensity decreases (divided by 4) as the distance r is doubled;"

This makes sense to me, as when r is doubled we have the energy divided by (2r)2 = 4r2 (which is 4x r2).

From this same principle, I would expect that the amplitude is divided by 2 when the distance is doubled as we have 1/2r instead of 1/r.

However from a Louisiana State University website:

"Geomteric spreading makes the amplitude of a signal falls off in proportion to the distance traveled by the ray. So that if the path of flight is doubled the amplitude will decrease by a factor of: square root of 2."

I can't see how they got their factor of √2 instead of 2.

Is one a mistake or am I missing something?

Cheers
 
Physics news on Phys.org
AlecYates said:
Hey,

I'm looking at amplitude decrease of a seismic pulse as a result of geometrical spreading.

Starting with I = E / (4 * pi * r2) where E = original energy from source, we know that energy falls off as 1/r2, thus amplitude falls off as 1/r.

From wikipedia: "The energy or intensity decreases (divided by 4) as the distance r is doubled;"

This makes sense to me, as when r is doubled we have the energy divided by (2r)2 = 4r2 (which is 4x r2).

From this same principle, I would expect that the amplitude is divided by 2 when the distance is doubled as we have 1/2r instead of 1/r.

However from a Louisiana State University website:

"Geomteric spreading makes the amplitude of a signal falls off in proportion to the distance traveled by the ray. So that if the path of flight is doubled the amplitude will decrease by a factor of: square root of 2."

I can't see how they got their factor of √2 instead of 2.

Is one a mistake or am I missing something?

Cheers
Think of a compression/sound wave spreading out from a source equally in all directions as concentric spherical shells of energy. The energy in a given shell is constant. So the energy density is inversely proportional to the area of that sphere: i.e. energy per unit area varies as 1/r^2 where r is the radius of the shell.

The question you are asking has to do with the relationship between amplitude and energy density of a wave front. Think of the vibration of a spring: the energy contained in the spring is proportional to the square of the maximum amplitude. PE = kx^2/2 .

Since the energy contained in the wave front is proportional to the square of the amplitude and the energy density is inversely proportional to r^2, how would amplitude vary with r?

AM
 
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...
Back
Top