B Highway: Deriving speed from Doppler shift

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter DaveC426913
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Doppler shift Speed
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the speed of a motorcycle using the Doppler effect based on perceived frequency shifts. The original poster estimated a frequency drop of an octave while passing a motorcycle at 125 km/h, leading to confusion about the actual speed of the motorcycle. Participants noted that to accurately determine the motorcycle's speed, multiple frequency measurements and relative velocities are necessary, as one cannot solve for two unknowns with a single equation. They established that an octave change in frequency is unlikely at typical highway speeds, suggesting that the motorcycle's speed would be around 285 km/h to produce the perceived effect. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the complexities of applying the Doppler effect in real-world scenarios.
DaveC426913
Gold Member
Messages
23,830
Reaction score
7,814
TL;DR Summary
Can I compute the speed of a passing motorcycle from the Doppler shift of its motor?
I passed a motorcycle on the highway going the opposite direction. I know I was doing 125/km/h. I estimated that the frequency of his motor dropped by an entire octave, so that's a doubling of the wavelength.

My intuition is telling me that's extremely unlikely. I can't actually calculate how fast he was going with just that information, can I?

It seems to me, I have to know the absolute frequency of one of those tones, either shifted up or down or unshifted, yes?

I tried to mimic the tone. The up-shifted tone was about as high as I can hum without scrunching up my face. Using an online pitch analyzer I (subsequently) estimate that was about 440Hz (and the lower tone then being 220Hz).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Remember that you have to add your relative velocities, since you were both moving...
 
  • Like
Likes DaveC426913
Yah, no. I'm not sure how to do this. For starters, I need to figure out what the un-shifted freq is (since that's what the equation starts with). It's logarithmically halfway between 220 and 440. which looks like it's about ... 311?
1689984098856.png


This is what happens if I plug it into a Doppler shift calculator:
1689984182693.png


1689984213886.png


If my numbers were right, I should get a consistent source velocity between the two, just with an inverted sign, correct?

So I have to ask myself where I made the (biggest) error. Either it wasn't a full octave shift I heard, or it wasn't 440Hz when it was oncoming.

Lets assume I was right about the octave and wrong about the up-shifted frequency.

My question then becomes: what would the relative velocity have to be to produce a doubling of wavelength from up-shifted to down-shifted Doppler pitches?
 
Last edited:
DaveC426913 said:
I need to figure out what the un-shifted fre
Yes, and you won't solve one equation in two unknowns. You need at least two frequency measurements at two angles, and more information is better. Then you can do a fit.
 
Actually I think one needs to calculate each velocity relative to the still air. I don't think you need absolute frequency
Let ##\alpha## be your Mach number and ##\beta ## be that of the motorcycle then $$f_{\pm}=f_0 \frac {1\pm \alpha} {1\mp \beta}$$
 
Vanadium 50 said:
Yes, and you won't solve one equation in two unknowns. You need at least two frequency measurements at two angles, and more information is better. Then you can do a fit.
Right so I fix one unknown in terms of the other:

...what would the relative velocity have to be to produce a doubling of wavelength from up-shifted to down-shifted Doppler pitches?

So I set up-shifted = 2 * down-shifted.
 
OK, so I want to set
$$\alpha = 2* \beta$$
 
I sent that prematurely. Butt keyboarding...... let me patch it up
 
Actually I think one needs to calculate each velocity relative to the still air. I don't think you need absolute frequency
Let ##\alpha## be your Mach number and ##\beta ## be that of the motorcycle then $$f_{\pm}=f_0 \frac {1\pm \alpha} {1\mp \beta}$$

where $$\Delta f =f_+-f_-$$ and you want $$\frac {\Delta f} {f_0}= \frac 1 2$$

Suppose for simplicity you are both moving the same speed ##\alpha=\beta##. I get $$\alpha =\frac 1 {\sqrt 3} $$
Might be correct.....
 
  • #10
DaveC426913 said:
Yah, no. I'm not sure how to do this. For starters, I need to figure out what the un-shifted freq is (since that's what the equation starts with). It's logarithmically halfway between 220 and 440. which is about ... 305? Let me check a pitch chart....
I don't think you need to calculate the actual engine frequency, though it takes ephemeral part in the equations.

Simplifying to a stationary observer and applying reasonable assumptions :

Coming in at half the speed of sound would be up an octave : doubling frequency. ##f_{in}=\frac c {c-v}f##

Leaving at half the speed of sound would be 2/3 frequency. ##f_{out}=\frac c {c+v} f##

so we can get to...

$$f_{in} \times \frac {c-v} {c} = f_{out} \times \frac {c+v} {c} $$ $$\Rightarrow$$ $$\frac {f_{in}} {f_{out}} = \frac {c+v} {c-v} $$
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Yah. My intuition was telling me there's no way you can get a full octave change at any plausible highway speeds.

I mean he was goin' fast, but he wasn't goin' fighter jet fast.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes Juanda and hutchphd
  • #12
DaveC426913 said:
Yah. My intuition was telling me there's no way you can get a full octave change at any plausible highway speeds.

I mean he was goin' fast, but he wasn't goin' fighter jet fast.
Well... for a stationary observer, that'd be ~410km/h, but for a moving one ? If I'm putting the offset in the right place, that's 285km/h = 177mph ; not inconceivable.
 
  • Like
Likes DaveC426913
  • #13
hmmm27 said:
Well... for a stationary observer, that'd be ~410km/h, but for a moving one ? If I'm putting the offset in the right place, that's 285km/h = 177mph ; not inconceivable.
Really!? Huh.
 
  • #14
DaveC426913 said:
Really!? Huh.
The 410's solid for a stationary observer : referring to previous equation : ##\frac {f_{in}} {f_{out}} = \frac {c+v} {c-v} \Rightarrow 2 = \frac {1230 + x} {1230 - x} \Rightarrow x=1230/3=410 ##. Pretty sure that - based on puttering around with the doppler effect a few years ago, probably here somewheres - offsetting by your 125 is that simple as long as nobody hits Mach 1 in any way, shape or form.
 
  • #15
hmmm27 said:
The 410's solid for a stationary observer : referring to previous equation : ##\frac {f_{in}} {f_{out}} = \frac {c+v} {c-v} \Rightarrow 2 = \frac {1230 + x} {1230 - x} \Rightarrow x=1230/3=410 ##. Pretty sure that - based on puttering around with the doppler effect a few years ago, probably here somewheres - offsetting by your 125 is that simple as long as nobody hits Mach 1 in any way, shape or form.
So, to be clear, 285km/h (absolute) would have produced the perceived effect.
 
  • #16
I pulled the (1d) formula out of a handy orifice [edit: it jives with Wp:Doppler Effect], but the numbers add up. Your relative velocity is the biker's speed plus yours : a (constant, subsonic) relative wind velocity doesn't affect pitch shifting, so subtracting your groundspeed should give the biker's groundspeed.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Likes DaveC426913
  • #17
hutchphd said:
you want $$\frac {\Delta f} {f_0}= \frac 1 2$$

Suppose for simplicity you are both moving the same speed ##\alpha=\beta##. I get $$\alpha =\frac 1 {\sqrt 3} $$
If both are at the same speed there is no frequency shift between them.
 
  • #18
Same speed. Opposite velocity. Jeez.
 
  • #19
hutchphd said:
Same speed. Opposite velocity. Jeez.
Sorry I misread the OP.
 
  • #20
hmmm27 said:
I pulled the (1d) formula out of a handy orifice
I saw what you did there... :oldbiggrin:
 
Back
Top