Creating 23KHz Ultrasound: Components and Considerations

  • Thread starter Thread starter MythUser
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ultrasound
AI Thread Summary
To create 23KHz ultrasound at 70 to 100 dB, a signal generator, amplifier, and a suitable transducer or piezo-buzzer are necessary. Off-the-shelf components like tweeters capable of exceeding 22 KHz may work, but the amplifier's frequency handling should be considered, as it may only support up to 20 KHz. Sine waves from an audio signal generator are recommended for driving the output device. Safety precautions are important, as high ultrasonic levels can cause heating effects, and testing should be done carefully to avoid unintended consequences. Alternatives like bark collars may be a safer option for training dogs without risking legal issues.
MythUser
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Thanks for reading my post.

I would like to produce 23KHz ultrasound at a presure of 70 to 100 dB.

I am thinking that I will need a device to create the 23KHz signal, an amplifier, and either a transducer or a piezo-buzzer.

I'm looking for a point in the right direction.

Are there any off the shelf components that would make this easy?

What sort of signal would be best for driving the output device? (sine, saw-tooth, square, etc.)

Thanks again.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
23 KHz is just slightly above the audio range of human hearing but very obvious to cats and dogs and bats. Maybe you have a barking dog you want to annoy?

Anyway, you could possibly look at some different sorts of tweeters. The better ones probably go well past 22 KHz. Never tried, but a decent audio amplifier feeding into just a tweeter might produce significant output.

Ideally, you might like to borrow a sound level meter that works up there, too. Very high levels of ultrasonic acoustic waves can cause heating of flesh/bone interfaces. Never tried that either. :)

Just sinewaves from an audio signal generator or function generator would be OK.
 
vk6kro said:
23 KHz is just slightly above the audio range of human hearing but very obvious to cats and dogs and bats.

Just so. But I believe that only young humans who have never had an inner ear infection and who live in a pre-industrial society can hear anything over 19KHz.

vk6kro said:
Maybe you have a barking dog you want to annoy?

I wish to train the dog more so than annoy or harm anyone or anything. I would like to teach the dog that one to three barks in a row are fine but continuous barking is not allowed.

vk6kro said:
Anyway, you could possibly look at some different sorts of tweeters. The better ones probably go well past 22 KHz. Never tried, but a decent audio amplifier feeding into just a tweeter might produce significant output.

If I knew this project were going to be successful then I would not mind buying another receiver/amp just for the project. I have tweeters that say they produce up to 22KHz now but the amp will only handle 20KHz. I doubt the claims of some of the audio vendors already.

vk6kro said:
Ideally, you might like to borrow a sound level meter that works up there, too. Very high levels of ultrasonic acoustic waves can cause heating of flesh/bone interfaces. Never tried that either. :)

Just sinewaves from an audio signal generator or function generator would be OK.

Thanks for the safety tip. In plastics manufacturing, ultrasound is oft used to weld parts. In that case, the range is direct contact whereas I will be using this at a range of 25 meters. And they use much higher frequencies. It is true, however, that adding any a acoustic wave, from sub to ultra sonic, to a system will add heat to that system. I will be mindful of this whatever I do.

Thanks for the reply, Vk6kro.
 
If I knew this project were going to be successful then I would not mind buying another receiver/amp just for the project. I have tweeters that say they produce up to 22KHz now but the amp will only handle 20KHz. I doubt the claims of some of the audio vendors already.

If your amplifier is rated to 20 KHz that is probably just the 3dB point and you could still get a lot of power out at 23 KHz.

The easy way to find out is to do it with your dog in the room and see when he goes cross-eyed. :-)

Or, you could put an oscilloscope across the tweeter and see what sort of voltage you get. About 11.2 volts peak to peak would be 2 watts for an 8 ohm tweeter, which should be plenty.
Otherwise you could set all the dogs in the neighborhood barking.
 
MythUser said:
I will be mindful of this whatever I do.

I sure hope so. If you are doing this anywhere other humans or animals can be affected, you could be setting yourself up for a lawsuit. 25 meters implies that you will be affecting others...

Have you considered a simple bark collar? They haver settings like you described (couple barks okay, more gives a mild training shock), and would not put you in a position of liability with other people and animals.
 
Very basic question. Consider a 3-terminal device with terminals say A,B,C. Kirchhoff Current Law (KCL) and Kirchhoff Voltage Law (KVL) establish two relationships between the 3 currents entering the terminals and the 3 terminal's voltage pairs respectively. So we have 2 equations in 6 unknowns. To proceed further we need two more (independent) equations in order to solve the circuit the 3-terminal device is connected to (basically one treats such a device as an unbalanced two-port...
suppose you have two capacitors with a 0.1 Farad value and 12 VDC rating. label these as A and B. label the terminals of each as 1 and 2. you also have a voltmeter with a 40 volt linear range for DC. you also have a 9 volt DC power supply fed by mains. you charge each capacitor to 9 volts with terminal 1 being - (negative) and terminal 2 being + (positive). you connect the voltmeter to terminal A2 and to terminal B1. does it read any voltage? can - of one capacitor discharge + of the...
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...
Back
Top