Speed of Sound - General Formula

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the derivation of the speed of sound formula, specifically a² = (bulk modulus / density), and its relation to mechanical waves. Participants emphasize that the derivation involves applying Newton's laws to analyze the forces acting on a small piece of the medium. The conversation highlights the importance of elastic constants and density in the equation, with references to textbooks for detailed derivations. Specific methods for deriving the speed of sound in different materials, such as solids and ideal gases, are mentioned, including resources like Kittel's "Introduction to Solid State Physics." Overall, the thread seeks clarity on the derivation process for sound waves in various media.
Curl
Messages
756
Reaction score
0
Can anyone show that the speed of sound, or rather, speed of low-energy mechanical waves follows the relationship:

a2 = ( bulk modulus / density )
This holds for sound waves, and is also similar to the waves on strings formula.

Can anyone show how this is derived? I read a book and they said "by apply Newton's laws". But how?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Curl! :smile:

When sound travels, nothing in the material actually moves anywhere, it only oscillates on the spot …

the equation for this oscillation depends on the stiffness (springy-ness) of the material …

there's some details at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_sound#Basic_concept" :wink:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You can derive the equation for mechanical waves in the medium by using Newton's second law. You look at a small piece of the medium and calculate the net force due to the perturbation (the wave).
The net force will depend on the distribution of elastic forces, so you will have the elastic constant(s) in the equation. The mass of the small piece of medium depends on density.
The actual derivation can be found in many textbooks. The actual form depends on the medium (fluid or solid, isotropic or anisotropic, etc) but the idea is along these lines.
 
Yeah no joke, what I am asking is to see the actual derivation.

Landau and Lifgarbagez use a very different method to derive the speed of sound in an ideal gas. I don't have any books that do it for solid materials, otherwise I wouldn't be asking this.
 
Curl said:
Yeah no joke, what I am asking is to see the actual derivation.

Landau and Lifgarbagez use a very different method to derive the speed of sound in an ideal gas. I don't have any books that do it for solid materials, otherwise I wouldn't be asking this.
The derivation for a cubic crystal can be found for example in Kittel - Introduction to solid state Physics (Chapter 3).
I have a couple of slides that show the main steps. I ca send them if you would like. For a crystal you need to be a little familiar the stress and strain tensors to understand the derivation.

For isotropic solid you can find some sketches of the derivation (in the 1 D case) for example here: http://mysite.du.edu/~jcalvert/waves/mechwave.htm
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top