Waves question.... constructive inteference

  • Thread starter Thread starter toesockshoe
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Waves
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem involving two radio antennas transmitting identical signals in phase at a frequency of 120 MHz, with a distance of 8.95 m between them. The original poster seeks to determine the positions where constructive interference occurs.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the conditions for constructive interference, questioning the necessity of whole number solutions for path differences and the implications of the antennas being in phase. Some suggest that the path difference must be a whole number of wavelengths, while others note that the phase relationship changes as the waves travel.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants offering insights into the nature of wave interference and the conditions under which the waves remain in phase. There is recognition of the complexity in determining valid values for m and n, with some participants suggesting the use of diagrams to clarify the situation.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the potential for confusion regarding the distance between the antennas and the implications of the waves being in phase initially, as well as the need to consider fractional values for m and n in the context of the problem.

toesockshoe
Messages
265
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement



Two radio antennas transmit identical signals in phase and in all directions of frequency 120 MHz . The distance between the antennas is 8.95 m . Let the origin be at one antenna, and let x be a distance from the origin toward the other antenna.

Homework Equations


Look at picture

The Attempt at a Solution



Work done in attachment.
I'm how to solve the problem. To get the maximum constructive interference, m and n would need to be whole number right? There are no whole number solutions to the equation I set up though.
 

Attachments

  • physics picture.jpg
    physics picture.jpg
    30.1 KB · Views: 499
Physics news on Phys.org
You have worked out the position of the wave crests at a particular time ... but the waves travel: over time the crests will travel past/through each other - so, at the time you picked, perhaps full constructive interference is just not happening.

The condition you want is that the path difference is a whole number of wavelengths.
This will give you only one whole number to work with.
 
Last edited:
Simon Bridge said:
You have worked out the position of the wave crests at a particular time ... but the waves travel: over time the crests will travel past/through each other - so, at the time you picked, perhaps full constructive interference is just not happening.

The condition you want is that the path difference is a whole number of wavelengths.
This will give you only one whole number to work with.
the problem says the two signals are introduced in phase. shouldn't the path difference be 0 everywhere?
 
Can I ask just what the question is?
It seems to me that you are only looking along the line of the two antennae and they will never be in phase along this direction.
 
Merlin3189 said:
Can I ask just what the question is?
It seems to me that you are only looking along the line of the two antennae and they will never be in phase along this direction.

Oh my apologies. I forgot to state the question.
Question:
Find the values of x at which constructive interference between the transmitted waves would be found.
Enter your answers in ascending order separated by a comma.

Also... why would they never be in phase? The problem says they start out in phase... so arent they always in phase?
 
I'm not sure what your equation represents, since I'm not sure what m and n are. Perhaps you could draw a diagram and mark on the point which is 2.5 x m from one antenna and 2.5 x n from the other.
 
Merlin3189 said:
I'm not sure what your equation represents, since I'm not sure what m and n are. Perhaps you could draw a diagram and mark on the point which is 2.5 x m from one antenna and 2.5 x n from the other.
m and n are whole numbers. The only point of maximum constructive interference are when both signals are integer multiples of their wavelengths away from their source (their antennas). The m and n represent any whole numbers.
 
#5 came while I was writing.
They are in phase at the antennae. But when the signal from one antenna reaches the other, it will be delayed by the time it takes to travel 8.95m and will now be out of phase. As that wave and the one from second antenna are now travel together, they can never get back into phase in that direction.
Which now shows me what the question is driving at! My original comment is in fact wrong. It is only true along that line once you get past the space between the antennae.

Your comment about m and n now makes sense to me. They do not have to be whole numbers. (You can see that easily by looking at the point where the signals must obviously be in phase.)
 
Last edited:
toesockshoe said:
The only point of maximum constructive interference are when both signals are integer multiples of their wavelengths away from their source (their antennas).
No this is not so. If they start in phase (as they do here) they will be in phase anywhere where the path difference is a whole number of wavelengths plus the same fraction of a wavelength. So for eg they would be in phase if one had gone 3.5 waves and the other had gone 4.5 waves.
 
  • #10
Merlin3189 said:
No this is not so. If they start in phase (as they do here) they will be in phase anywhere where the path difference is a whole number of wavelengths plus the same fraction of a wavelength. So for eg they would be in phase if one had gone 3.5 waves and the other had gone 4.5 waves.
I said MAXIMUM constructive interference. Isn't this what the question means?
 
  • #11
Merlin3189 said:
#5 came while I was writing.
They are in phase at the antennae. But when the signal from one antenna reaches the other, it will be delayed by the time it takes to travel 9.5m and will now be out of phase. As that wave and the one from second antenna are now travel together, they can never get back into phase in that direction.
Which now shows me what the question is driving at! My original comment is in fact wrong. It is only true along that line once you get past the space between the antennae.

Your comment about m and n now makes sense to me. They do not have to be whole numbers. (You can see that easily by looking at the point where the signals must obviously be in phase.)
Well in any way, how can I solve for m an n? My equation has an infinite number of solutions if they don't need to be whole numbers. Is my equation set up wrong?
 
  • #12
Essentially you can ignore whole numbers of waves, because the wave is identical to itself when shifted by any whole number of wavelengths.
Max constructive interference then occurs when they have both traveled the same extra distance.

Have you found one easy point where the two waves will be in phase yet?
 
  • #13
Merlin3189 said:
Essentially you can ignore whole numbers of waves, because the wave is identical to itself when shifted by any whole number of wavelengths.
Max constructive interference then occurs when they have both traveled the same extra distance.

Have you found one easy point where the two waves will be in phase yet?

can i set m to 2 and n to 1.58? This would give me an x of (2.5 * 2) or 5. But this can be done with any arbitrary point. I could have also set m to 1.99, and it would have given me another x value.
 
  • #14
If you use the equation 2.5m = 8.95 - 2.5n then m an n are not whole numbers, but they must have the same fractional part.

So, eg if the antennae were 7.5 apart and λ= 3, you could have, say m= 0.25 and n= 2.25,
so that: dist from ant A = x= 0.25 x 3 = 0.75 and dist from ant B = (7.5-x) = 2.25 x 3 = 6.75

In fact I found it much easier (on this simple example) to just draw the diagram and mark in the points where the waves must be in phase.
I did make up an equation, so that I could be in tune with your approach, but I did not find that as easy. I stayed with m and n as whole numbers, but added a fraction for the final bit.

I suspect PF experts might prefer to use a cos function, but that does not make it easier for me.
 
Last edited:
  • #15
Just noticed I'm talking as if the antennae are 9.5 metres apart, but it should be 8.95 metres. So I've gone back and edited them.
 
  • #16
Merlin3189 said:
Just noticed I'm talking as if the antennae are 9.5 metres apart, but it should be 8.95 metres. So I've gone back and edited them.
i still don't understand... why doesn't my equation have an infinite number of solutions? How do I figure out which m and n values I should use?
 
  • #17
can i set m to 2 and n to 1.58? This would give me an x of (2.5 * 2) or 5. But this can be done with any arbitrary point. I could have also set m to 1.99, and it would have given me another x value.
But if m=2 and n= 1.58, then the fractional part is different. You would need 2.58 and 1.58 (which is not a solution) or 1.99 and 2.99 (which is also not a solution)
You were correct to say that the waves would be in phase if m and n were whole numbers, but that gave you no solutions on the line.
So then we have to look for solutions where m and n are NOT whole numbers. So then there is another condition. You can't just use any numbers for m and n.
The waves are in phase after they have gone any whole number of λ, but they are also in phase after they have BOTH gone 0.5λ, or both gone 0.7λ, or both gone 0.3421λ, etc. Also they are in phase if one has gone 0.3λ and the other 1.3λ or 2.3λ or 3.3λ etc. So the new condition is that the fractional part is the same.

So if you call the fractional part k, then the two distances are n+k and m+k where m and n are again whole numbers.
 
  • #18
The usual approach is to formulate the problem in terms of the path difference.
You get constructive interference from two in-phase sources where the path difference is a whole number of wavelengths.
This is where you have been getting confused.

You've probably seen the derivation done for Young's interference ... check that.

So why not work out the equation for how far point x is from each source, then subtract one from the other?
 

Similar threads

Constructive Interference in Coherent Antenna Arrays
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
Solving Double Slit Homework Qs: Phase Difference & Destructive Interference
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
How Fast Was the Car Moving in the Radar Speed Trap Experiment?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Calculating Time Delay for Radio Telescope Pointing
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
What is the Maximum Wavelength for Constructive Interference of Sound Waves?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Radio Broadcast Antenna Peak Intensity
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Inteference of incoherent light waves
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Wave Interference at Radio Station Antennas
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
What is the Width of the Antenna for Optimizing TV Reception on Channel 10?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Which waves can have a constructive interference?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K