I Resonance gets sharper just by increasing the resonance freq, why?

AI Thread Summary
The Q factor of an oscillating system, defined as the ratio of resonant frequency to resonance width, indicates the sharpness of the resonance curve. A higher resonant frequency can lead to a sharper resonance curve while maintaining the same resonance width, which raises questions about the constancy of Δω. In the context of a damped harmonic oscillator, Δω is represented by the damping coefficient γ, which does not depend on the resonant frequency. The damping coefficient is crucial as it relates the friction force to the velocity of the oscillator. Understanding the relationship between these factors is essential for analyzing the behavior of oscillating systems.
Aaron121
Messages
15
Reaction score
1
The ##Q## factor of an oscillating system is defined as ##\omega_{r}/\Delta \omega##, where ##\omega_{r}## is the resonant frequency, and ##\Delta \omega## the resonance width. As I understand, ##Q## measures how sharp the resonance curve is.

Why is it that the resonance curve gets sharper (higher ##Q##) just by virtue of having a higher resonant frequency, while keeping the same width ##\Delta \omega## ?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Who says ##\Delta \omega## does not change ?
 
@BvU For example, for a damped, driven harmonic oscillator with a natural frequency ##\omega_{0}##, the cutoff frequencies are at ##\sqrt{\omega_{0}^2+\frac{\gamma ^2}{4}}\pm \frac{\gamma}{2}##, where ##\gamma## is the damping coefficient. The equation of motion of the oscillator is given by ##\ddot{x}(t)+\gamma \dot{x}(t)+\omega_{0}^2 x(t)=F(t)/m##, (see page ##10## of this document). ##\Delta \omega##, in this case, is simply ##\gamma##, which doesn't depend on the resonant frequency ##\omega _{r}=\omega _{0}##.
 
You need to look closely at the damping coefficient and see how it is actually defined. I think you will find it refers to number of oscillations to reach 1/e or whatever. The scaling is implicit.
 
##\gamma## is the proportionality factor between the friction force ##\textbf{f}_{r}## and the velocity ##\dot{\textbf{x}}(t)##, i.e., ##\textbf{f}_{r}=-\gamma \dot{\textbf{x}}(t)##. The friction force is a viscous one.
 
Aaron121 said:
##\gamma## is the proportionality factor between the friction force ##\textbf{f}_{r}## and the velocity ##\dot{\textbf{x}}(t)##, i.e., ##\textbf{f}_{r}=-\gamma \dot{\textbf{x}}(t)##. The friction force is a viscous one.
That has the rate of change of x in it - aka proportional to FREQUENCY boom boom.
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top