What is the equation for decay of natural sound over time?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the mathematical modeling of sound decay over time, particularly after an impulse of noise. The proposed equations for sound amplitude decay are y = 1/c^x and y = 1/(x+1)^c, with the consensus leaning towards the first equation. It is clarified that the decay typically follows an exponential function, represented as a = e^-x/T, where T is the time constant influenced by the Quality Factor (Q) of the resonator. The conversation emphasizes that the decay is exponential and linked to energy dissipation in acoustic attenuation. Understanding these principles is essential for accurately modeling sound behavior in various contexts.
mikejm
Messages
40
Reaction score
2
Let's say you have an impulse of noise, eg. via a guitar string, or a resonant bandpass filter, and it decays naturally. If "1" is the maximum initial amplitude of sound, and "0" is no sound at all, what is the equation for decay of sound over time (x)?

Is it:
y = 1/c^x

Or y = 1/(x+1)^c

I think it is y= 1/c^x but not sure.

What does nature do?

Thanks.

<moved from General Discussion>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
mikejm said:
Let's say you have an impulse of noise, eg. via a guitar string, or a resonant bandpass filter, and it decays naturally. If "1" is the maximum initial amplitude of sound, and "0" is no sound at all, what is the equation for decay of sound over time (x)?

Is it:
y = 1/c^x

Or y = 1/(x+1)^c
Most likely the first, not the second. The second equation is the translation 1 unit to the left of the graph of the first equation.
Also, c in your equations would usually be take to be the natural number e ##\approx 2.71828##, and named after Leonhard Euler, a Swiss mathematician.

Of course, the exponent base is arbitrary, as any exponential function can be rewritten using any other reasonable base.
mikejm said:
I think it is y= 1/c^x but not sure.

What does nature do?

Thanks.
 
  • Like
Likes tech99 and berkeman
The decay time constant depends on the Quality Factor, or Q, of the resonator. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_factor. My interpretation is that the wave decreases exponentially with a certain time constant, T. If the initial amplitude is 1 and the amplitude at time x is a,
a= e^-x/T
The time constant T is equal to 2Q/radial freq.
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron
tech99 said:
a= e^-x/T
That would be more correct as ##e^{-x/T}##. As written above, the standard interpretation would be as ##\frac{e^{-x}}{T}##
 
  • Like
Likes tech99
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...
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?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top