I Solution to the 1D wave equation for a finite length plane wave tube

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on solving the 1D wave equation for a finite plane-wave tube with arbitrary impedances at both ends. The initial analysis highlights that existing solutions primarily address semi-infinite tubes, where the impedance is determined solely by the termination at one end. The participants express confusion about how to extend these concepts to finite tubes, noting that reflections and phase changes occur at both ends, complicating the analysis. The conversation also draws parallels to electrical transmission lines, suggesting that similar mathematical approaches could be applied. Ultimately, the goal is to find a general solution for the pressure waveform and impedance throughout the finite tube.
jeremiahrose99
Messages
4
Reaction score
1
TL;DR Summary
I'm trying to understand the acoustics of a finite plane-wave tube terminated by arbitrary impedances at both ends.
Hi there! This is my first post here - glad to be involved with what seems like a great community!

I'm trying to understand the acoustics of a finite plane-wave tube terminated by arbitrary impedances at both ends. So far all of the treatments I've managed seem only to address a different problem: that of a semi-infinite tube with an impedance at one end.
The 1D wave equation for pressure inside the tube is:
$$\frac{d^2p}{dx^2}=\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{d^2p}{dt^2}$$
The general solution for the semi-infinite tube is given (by all the textbooks I've read) as the sum of one incident and one reflected wave:
$$p(x,t) = Ae^{j (\omega t-k x)} + Be^{j (\omega t+k x)}$$
Where A and B are complex amplitudes containing both the amplitude and phase information for each sinusoid. Using the definition of specific acoustic impedance and some calculus, the textbooks arrive at a model for the (complex) impedance at any point: $$Z_s(x) = \frac{p(x,t)}{-u(x,t)} = \rho_0 c \frac{A e^{j k x} + B e^{-j k x}}{A e^{j k x} - B e^{-j k x}}$$
Then, if I define the termination of the pipe to be of impedance Z0 at x=0, I can eliminate A and B from the above equation and with some manipulation arrive at:
$$\frac{Z_s(x)}{\rho_0 c} = \frac{\frac{Z_0}{\rho_0 c} + i \tan{k x}}{1 + i \frac{Z_0}{\rho_0 c}\tan{k x}}$$
This equation says that the impedance for the entire tube is completely and uniquely determined by the termination impedance at one end. This seems to exclude the possibility of a second arbitrary impedance further along the tube, which says to me that these results cannot apply to a finite tube with two arbitrary impedances (one at each end).

What, then, is the solution to the 1D wave equation for a finite tube and how to I find it? Is it possible to obtain similar models to above for the impedance in such a tube?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jeremiahrose99 said:
The general solution for the semi-infinite tube is given (by all the textbooks I've read) as the sum of one incident and one reflected wave:
$$p(x,t) = Ae^{j (\omega t-k x)} + Be^{j (\omega t+k x)}$$
Do you understand the physical picture in this region of the tube? Do you see why these two terms are here for this specific scenario?

jeremiahrose99 said:
the impedance for the entire tube is completely and uniquely determined by the termination impedance at one end
Are you sure of this statement? I also see the material properties of density and speed of sound.
 
jeremiahrose99 said:
Summary:: I'm trying to understand the acoustics of a finite plane-wave tube terminated by arbitrary impedances at both ends.

Hi there! This is my first post here - glad to be involved with what seems like a great community!

I'm trying to understand the acoustics of a finite plane-wave tube terminated by arbitrary impedances at both ends. So far all of the treatments I've managed seem only to address a different problem: that of a semi-infinite tube with an impedance at one end.
The 1D wave equation for pressure inside the tube is:
$$\frac{d^2p}{dx^2}=\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{d^2p}{dt^2}$$
The general solution for the semi-infinite tube is given (by all the textbooks I've read) as the sum of one incident and one reflected wave:
$$p(x,t) = Ae^{j (\omega t-k x)} + Be^{j (\omega t+k x)}$$
Where A and B are complex amplitudes containing both the amplitude and phase information for each sinusoid. Using the definition of specific acoustic impedance and some calculus, the textbooks arrive at a model for the (complex) impedance at any point: $$Z_s(x) = \frac{p(x,t)}{-u(x,t)} = \rho_0 c \frac{A e^{j k x} + B e^{-j k x}}{A e^{j k x} - B e^{-j k x}}$$
Then, if I define the termination of the pipe to be of impedance Z0 at x=0, I can eliminate A and B from the above equation and with some manipulation arrive at:
$$\frac{Z_s(x)}{\rho_0 c} = \frac{\frac{Z_0}{\rho_0 c} + i \tan{k x}}{1 + i \frac{Z_0}{\rho_0 c}\tan{k x}}$$
This equation says that the impedance for the entire tube is completely and uniquely determined by the termination impedance at one end.
I am not an expert but I don't understand this. You have one boundary condition and you say that this determines both A and B. So you have one equation for two unknowns, and you clearly cannot determine both of them. So there has to be more input that just that single boundary condition.
 
Dr_Nate said:
Do you understand the physical picture in this region of the tube? Do you see why these two terms are here for this specific scenario?

Thanks for the reply Dr Nate. Yes I'm pretty sure I understand it - it's just the sum of the incident and the reflected wave. There can be no others because there are no reflections coming from the infinite end. But for a finite tube, I imagine there would be new reflections of different phases happening all the time, so I don't know what the solution would be for that...

Dr_Nate said:
Are you sure of this statement? I also see the material properties of density and speed of sound.

I just meant that there are no other variables within my control (I can change the termination impedance, but I can't change the speed of sound), and that there is no room in the equation for a second terminating impedance, meaning the result doesn't work for a finite tube. Does that make sense?
 
jeremiahrose99 said:
Thanks for the reply Dr Nate. Yes I'm pretty sure I understand it - it's just the sum of the incident and the reflected wave. There can be no others because there are no reflections coming from the infinite end. But for a finite tube, I imagine there would be new reflections of different phases happening all the time, so I don't know what the solution would be for that...
It looks like you understand what I was asking.
jeremiahrose99 said:
I just meant that there are no other variables within my control (I can change the termination impedance, but I can't change the speed of sound), and that there is no room in the equation for a second terminating impedance, meaning the result doesn't work for a finite tube. Does that make sense?
What about ##k##? How does your impedance change with position?
 
Thanks for your replies Dr Nate. Yes, the impedance of the semi-infinite tube alaso varies with position and wavenumber. However, the question I asked is about a different case, a finite tube, with impedances at both ends. Can you help me with that?
 
jeremiahrose99 said:
Thanks for your replies Dr Nate. Yes, the impedance of the semi-infinite tube alaso varies with position and wavenumber. However, the question I asked is about a different case, a finite tube, with impedances at both ends. Can you help me with that?
So this is pretty much the same as an electrical transmission line, right? The same equations apply, so the same solutions apply. Are you wanting to drive the CW (or pulsed?) input waveform into the transmission line via the source impedance at one end? And then solve for the waveform distribution versus time?

That is very do-able. It's easier in the pulsed input case, but still do-able in the CW input case.
 
berkeman said:
So this is pretty much the same as an electrical transmission line, right? The same equations apply, so the same solutions apply. Are you wanting to drive the CW (or pulsed?) input waveform into the transmission line via the source impedance at one end? And then solve for the waveform distribution versus time?

That is very do-able. It's easier in the pulsed input case, but still do-able in the CW input case.

Yes! I haven't fully gotten my head around electric-acoustical impedance analogies yet, but I do know that a finite acoustic pipe can be modeled as a finite electrical transmission line.

Looking for a continuous (steady-state?) solution. I was hoping for a general solution for arbitrary impedances at each end, but perhaps something more specific would be easier so I will describe the exact setup for you:

I have a pipe with a driver at one end, open at the other end. The open end has a complex radiation (load) impedance Zmr. The driven end has an input impedance Zm0 (due to Zmr, reflection interference, and friction in the pipe) and a source impedance Zmd (due to the mechanical resistance, inertia and compliance of the driver). The driving "voltage" in your analogy is the mechanical force acting on the driver (there are at least three different definitions of acoustic impedance: I am using the "mechanical" impedance definition which is basically force divided by velocity).

Trying to get solutions for the time/space evolution of the pressure waveform in the pipe, analytical approximations for resonant frequencies in the pipe, and a model for the impedance at different points in the pipe.
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
Back
Top