More precise calculation for Acoustic End Correction needed

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the need for a more precise calculation of end correction for open-ended pipes, particularly for high fundamental frequencies. The commonly used formula of adding 0.6 times the radius (0.3 times the diameter) is questioned for its accuracy, especially in relation to variations in frequency and acoustic impedance. The participant shares their specific experiment involving a cylindrical pipe with an outer diameter of 0.5 inches and an inner diameter of 0.425 inches, aiming for a frequency of 17.424 kHz. They highlight a more accurate value of 0.6133 derived from additional calculations, suggesting that this value may be more reliable than the general 0.6 constant.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of acoustic impedance and its impact on sound propagation.
  • Familiarity with the principles of end correction in acoustics.
  • Knowledge of cylindrical pipe geometry and its dimensions.
  • Basic grasp of frequency calculations in acoustics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the derivation of the 0.6133 end correction value for high-frequency applications.
  • Explore the relationship between frequency and acoustic impedance in open-ended pipes.
  • Investigate the time-domain reflection function r(t) and its implications for acoustic measurements.
  • Learn about the effects of pipe diameter variations on acoustic performance at high frequencies.
USEFUL FOR

Acoustic engineers, physicists, and anyone involved in designing or analyzing high-frequency sound systems, particularly those working with cylindrical pipes.

GenSoft3d
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I am looking for a more precise calculation for determining an accurate end correction for an open-ended pipe of a relatively high fundamental frequency and am hoping someone might be able to steer me in the right direction.

Researching online I have found the general calculation of adding 0.6 times the radius (or 0.3*d) to either end but I would like to know where this "constant" is derived from as I am skeptical of it's ability to render accurate results based on the possible variations relating to a given frequency and it's resulting acoustic impedance, etc...

I was able to find a simple formula where the volume of a half-sphere derived from the diameter of the pipe is converted to a cylinder of equal volume w/ a given length which then determines the supposed end correction value, however this value is considerably less than the general 0.6*r mentioned above.

To give an idea of my experiment; I am working with a cylindrical pipe that has an outer diameter of .5", an inner diameter of .425" and am trying to determine a length that will produce the desired frequency of 17.424 kHz.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Thanks a lot for those links AlephZero... that was very helpful.

That definitely answers my question as to how the 0.6*r value is determined. However I noticed that the value presented in the info provided at the second link is 0.6133 (see Table 1, pg.12) as opposed to the more general 0.6 value more commonly found in my research.

Should I assume that the 0.6133 value is more accurate? It appears that the value is the result of additional calculations that were intended to accommodate the estimation of a time-domain reflection function r(t) for higher frequencies where the expression for the modulus |R(w)| become negative when w increases. I wonder if there is an established threshold (e.g., specific frequency) where this cross-over to negative expression occurs?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
24
Views
3K