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

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the behavior of the quality factor (##Q##) of an oscillating system, particularly how it relates to the resonant frequency (##\omega_{r}##) and the resonance width (##\Delta \omega##). Participants explore the implications of increasing the resonant frequency on the sharpness of the resonance curve, considering both theoretical and mathematical aspects of damped harmonic oscillators.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant defines the quality factor (##Q##) as the ratio of resonant frequency to resonance width, suggesting that a higher resonant frequency leads to a sharper resonance curve.
  • Another participant questions the assumption that the resonance width (##\Delta \omega##) remains unchanged with varying resonant frequency.
  • A participant provides a specific example involving a damped, driven harmonic oscillator, stating that the resonance width is determined by the damping coefficient (##\gamma##), which does not depend on the resonant frequency.
  • Another participant emphasizes the need to closely examine the definition of the damping coefficient, suggesting that its scaling may be implicit in the analysis.
  • One participant reiterates the definition of the damping coefficient as a proportionality factor related to the friction force and velocity, linking it to frequency considerations.
  • A later reply echoes the previous point about the damping coefficient, reinforcing its relationship to the system's frequency.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the resonance width remains constant as the resonant frequency increases. There is no consensus on the implications of this relationship, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific mathematical expressions and definitions related to damping and resonance, but the discussion does not resolve the implications of these definitions on the overall behavior of the system.

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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
9K
  • · Replies 92 ·
4
Replies
92
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K