Derive Acoustic Pressure Relation from Ideal Gass Law

dimensionless
Messages
460
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Derive p(r) = \frac{A}{r}e^{j(\omega t - kr)} from pV = nRT

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


From ideal gas law I have

p(r) = \frac{nRT}{V}

R and T are constant, so I can pull them out now and replace them with A. If V is the volume of a spherical shell of thickness dr, I get

p(r) = \frac{n A}{4 \pi r^{2} dr}

This means that the only thing that changes is the net flow of mass flowing into and out of my spherical shell. Which lead to

p(r) = \frac{A cos(\omega t - k r)}{4 \pi r^{2} dr}

Putting this in exponential form I get

p(r) = \frac{A}{4 \pi r^{2} dr} e^{j(\omega t - k r)}

Because the atoms are only moving radially, I can ignore the dr part. This leads to

p(r) = \frac{A}{4 \pi r^{2}} e^{j(\omega t - k r)}

...I'm still stuck with an r^{2} in the denominator instead of just r. I think I did something wrong somewhere. I'm not sure where. Any help is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dimensionless said:
Which lead to

p(r) = \frac{A cos(\omega t - k r)}{4 \pi r^{2} dr}

Putting this in exponential form I get

p(r) = \frac{A}{4 \pi r^{2} dr} e^{j(\omega t - k r)}

Not sure I see how this is done. The Euler relations are

<br /> \cos[x]=\frac{1}{2}\left(\exp[ix]+\exp[-ix]\right)<br />

dimensionless said:
Because the atoms are only moving radially, I can ignore the dr part. This leads to

p(r) = \frac{A}{4 \pi r^{2}} e^{j(\omega t - k r)}

...I'm still stuck with an r^{2} in the denominator instead of just r. I think I did something wrong somewhere. I'm not sure where. Any help is appreciated.

Can you clarify why you ignore dr?
 
I know that the Euler relation is

<br /> <br /> \cos[x]=\frac{1}{2}\left(\exp[ix]+\exp[-ix]\right)<br /> <br />

but quite I'm sure I've seen the expression

<br /> \exp[ix] = \cos[x] + i \sin[x]<br />

used in many places but ignoring the imaginary part so that it just becomes

<br /> \exp[ix] = \cos[x] <br />

Actually, it really bothers me, but I've seen it in so many places.

I'm ignoring dr, in part because I'm seeking a particular result. As for rational, the particles are moving only as part of a sound wave, so they move parallel to dr. The pressure is force per unit area, and the area is perpendicular to dr...in other words, I need the pressure on a spherical surface rather than in a volume ( p(r) is net air pressure above the equilibrium).
 
dimensionless said:
I know that the Euler relation is

<br /> <br /> \cos[x]=\frac{1}{2}\left(\exp[ix]+\exp[-ix]\right)<br /> <br />

but quite I'm sure I've seen the expression

<br /> \exp[ix] = \cos[x] + i \sin[x]<br />

used in many places but ignoring the imaginary part so that it just becomes

<br /> \exp[ix] = \cos[x] <br />

Actually, it really bothers me, but I've seen it in so many places.

This is true, and I didn't quite think of this part, mostly because the relation actually is

<br /> \Re\left[\exp[ix]\right]=\cos[x]

That is, the real component of the exponential is the cosine term, while the imaginary, \Im, is sine.

I'm ignoring dr, in part because I'm seeking a particular result. As for rational, the particles are moving only as part of a sound wave, so they move parallel to dr. The pressure is force per unit area, and the area is perpendicular to dr...in other words, I need the pressure on a spherical surface rather than in a volume ( p(r) is net air pressure above the equilibrium).

The pressure does apply itself parallel to the radial component, not perpendicular--draw yourself a picture of a spherical wave, you'll see ;)

I think, rather than using volume, you should consider the density:

<br /> P=\frac{nkT}{V}=\frac{nkT}{m}\rho<br />

Then consider how the density \rho would change with a wave. It is possible that you will actually want to integrate, rather than just ignore the infinitesimal radial projection.
 


I think it might be simpler if I defined density n/V, so that

P=\frac{n}{V} kT= \rho kT

which leads to

\rho = \frac{n}{4 \pi r^{2} dr}

Since the number of mols varies with time, I get

\rho \cos(\omega t)= \frac{n \cos(\omega t)}{4 \pi r^{2} dr}

Conversely, I could hold the volume constant and let the number of mols (or the mass) per unit volume vary so that I get

\rho = \frac{n}{r^{2} V}

At the moment though, I'm still stuck.
 
Last edited:
I also have

\frac{1}{2}m v_{average}^{2} = \frac{3}{2}kT = \frac{3}{2}\frac{R}{n}T

this leads to

v = \sqrt{3 \frac{RT}{nm} }

and

T = \frac{n v^{2}}{3mR}

where m is the mass of a particle and v is the velocity. I also have

F = \frac{dp}{dt}

Where p=mv is the momentum. I still can't derive this equation though.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top