Ring Impedance & String Connection: Is It Valid?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the validity of modeling ring impedance in relation to string connections, specifically addressing the equation b = Z1 - Z2, where b represents the ring's impedance, Z1 is the impedance of the first string, and Z2 is the impedance of the second string. Participants agree that the analysis should consider motion and wave equations rather than oversimplifying to impedance equations. It is established that the second string's impedance must be lower than the first to avoid reflections at the junction, and frictional forces acting on the ring are defined as F = b*v, where b is the coefficient of friction and v is the ring's velocity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of impedance in wave mechanics
  • Familiarity with frictional force equations
  • Knowledge of motion and wave equations
  • Basic principles of damped oscillation analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the relationship between impedance and wave reflection in string systems
  • Study the effects of friction on motion in mechanical systems
  • Explore advanced topics in damped oscillation analysis
  • Investigate the mathematical modeling of frictional forces in dynamic systems
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, mechanical engineers, and researchers focusing on wave mechanics and impedance analysis in string systems.

gasgas
Messages
7
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
Suppose there are two strings with equal tension but different impedances attached to a ring on a vertical rod. If we shake the first string, it will make the ring slide and transmit the wave to the other string. As the ring slides on the rod, there is friction acting on it which is equal to F=b*v where b is coefficient of friction and v the speed of the ring. What is the value of b if there is no wave reflection?
Relevant Equations
F=Z*V
R=(Z1-Z2)/(Z1+Z2)
If we consider the coefficient b as the rings impedance, we can consider the effective impedance on the right to be b+Z2 where Z2 is the impedance of the second string. Then because there is no reflection it follows that Z1=b+Z2 or b=Z1-Z2.
Is this a valid solution? My professor went through a more complicated derivation which we concluded was wrong so I tried this. Is it correct? Can we suppose that the ring and string are connected in series and can we equate b with impedance? They match dimensionally so i don't see why not. Any help appreciated :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
My doubt would be whether there may be a constant multiplier needed to convert b to a comparable impedance. I see no way other than to analyse the motion fully.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
I agree with @haruspex that this is a complicated problem, and I'd be inclined to analyze it fully from a motion and wave equation standpoint, instead of trying to simplify it to the impedance/reflection equation. Perhaps there is a simpler way to do it, but I'm not seeing it intuitively.

Also, it doesn't look like it's specified in the problem statement, but it seems clear to me that this can only work if the impedance of the 2nd string is lower than the first. The friction at the ring would seem to add impedance, so if the 2nd string had higher impedance than the first, I don't think there is any way to avoid reflections at the ring junction.

I also don't understand this part of the problem statement, about the frictional force depending on the velocity. That's not normally how frictional forces work, but maybe it helps with the math somehow...
gasgas said:
As the ring slides on the rod, there is friction acting on it which is equal to F=b*v where b is coefficient of friction and v the speed of the ring.
 
berkeman said:
maybe it helps with the math somehow.
It will. With b negative, it arranges that the frictional force always opposes the motion.
 
But speed dependent?
 
berkeman said:
But speed dependent?
That's the price of making the math more manageable.
Bear in mind that standard damped oscillation analysis assumes F∝v.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: berkeman

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K