Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is not a forum for general discussion about standing waves. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about standing waves at the Reference desk. |
This level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
It seems being a paradox. For
which means that it does not equal to 1. Thus caused not coresponse Normalization. Known a standing wave is expressed as
Can anyone talk about your thoughts? Thanks.
I'm a little not sure above. Could anyone discuss with me?
--HydrogenSu 19:03, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
As someone familiar with Sound Theory, Im really disappointed with this article. There is hardly any reference to the effects of standing waves with regard to Acoustics & Sound waves. Ask any producer, sound engineer, audiophile, anyone who works with sound in spaces and theyll probably say standing waves are their biggest problems. It would be great if theres more info on how standing waves occur, how they disrupt the listening experience, methods to negate them and other subjects that relate to these waves acoustically. I would write something up myself, but i dont know enough about them to do so (hence,looking it up) !!! Shado.za 11:47, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
is there anybody else can say properly about this subject. i really need to know about standing wave..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.139.212.162 (talk • contribs) 13:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
basically, if a string is set to oscillate (vibrate) from one end, and it is fixed at the other end, a wave travels along the string, until it gets to the end, where it is reflected back towards the other end. This is called superpositioning. By carefully adjusting the frequency of the string, you can form stationary waves, which is when the reflections occur so that a peak meets a trough, so they cancel (destructive interference). This forms a "node" point halfway along the string. Either side of the node point, a peak meets a peak, or a trough meets a trough, so they add together to create constructive interference. If the frequency of the open string is 25Hz, then there will be 2 standing waves when you double the frequency to 50Hz. 3 at 75Hz, etc etc. You can set a strobe light to flash at a similar frequency to "slow down" the motion of the waves. Hope this helps, Chris. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.66.44 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
This was added (with more typos in) to the main article. While having two similar definitions that don't really compliment each other can only create confusion, I don't really want to dismiss this explanation totally. I think this article is in need of a re-write, incorporating a lot more about the physical phenomena of standing waves and not just focusing on electrical engineering. I don't have time to do this myself but I think this and the explanation from the post above need to be worked into the article. OrangeDog 15:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Dude im just a uni phisist but that definition is complete and utter bolloks. The resultant wave of two opposing waves doesnt have to be standing simply because they constructivly superpose.
On the subject of definition: I think you have mixed up two different types of wave: standing and stationary. A standing wave is, as your animation shows, oscillating in place. This would not be much good to a glider pilot. A stationary wave, on the other hand, has no time variation but does have a spatial wave structure. This is good for the glider pilot because he can sit in a fixed position where the air is rising. Would you object if I tried to split your article into two -- one on standing waves and one on stationary waves? mnjuckes 2 April, 2007
The definition says that there is a constant amplitude for all points along the axis of the wave, which seems like the definition of a stationary wave, not a standing wave.
eww @ you.
you forgot the capitals. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.59.80.55 (talk) 04:21, August 23, 2007 (UTC)
Do the two waves have to have the same frequency to add to a standing wave, or is this just a simple case? Smithg86 22:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Does it mean moving the fluctuation up-and-down motion? Or a flow? Because rapids in a river is a flow, and that doesn't sound like a standing wave to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bonzai273 (talk • contribs) 09:51, 20 April 2008
I removed the wave equation from the article, since:
Is this the appropriate place to add more practical information about the implications for sound? If not what's the right way to do that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.160.181.190 (talk) 02:23, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Moved from the article. OrangeDog (τ • ε) 18:27, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN STANDING NAD PROGRESSIVE MECHANICAL WAVES ON STRING: (1)IN STATIONARY WAVES ENERGY DOES NOT PROPOGATES IN SPACE BUT IT REMAINS CONFINED BETWEEN TWO ADJACENT NODES. (2)IN STATIOARY WAVES AMPLITUDE OF ALL PARICLES IS NOT NECESSARY SAME. (3)IN STATIONARY WAVE ALL PARTICLES COMES TO MEAN POSITION SIMULTANEOUSLY AND AS WELL AS ACQUIRES EXTREME POSITION SIMULTANEOUSLY. (5)IN STATIONARY WAVES ALL PARTICLES ACQUIRES MAXIMUM ACCELERATION SIMULTANEOUSLY OR MAXIMUM VELOCITY SIMULTANEOUSLY. (6)IN STATIONARY WAVES PORTION BETWEEN TWO ADJACENT NODES IS CALLED AS LOOP OR SEGMENT. (7)IN STATIONARY WAVES KINETIC ENERGY IS MAXIMUM WHEN ALL PARTICLES ARE AT MESN POSITION AND POTENTIAL ENERGY IS MAXIMUM AT EXTREME POSITION. (8)POTENTIAL ENERGY IS CONFINED NEAR NODE AND KINETIC ENERGY IS CONFINED NEAR ANTINODE. (9)IN STATIONARY WAVES IN A SEGMENT MECHANICAL ENERGY IS CONSERVED IN ABSENCE OF DAMPING BUT MECHANICAL ENERGY OF PARTICLE IS NOT CONSERVED,IT OSCILATES FROM NODE TO ANTINODE. (10)IN SATIONARY WAVE PHASE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TWO PARTICLES IS EITHER ZERO OR PIE I.E. EITHER OUT OF PHSE OR IN THE PHASE.ALL PRTICLES IN SAME LOOP ARE IN PHASE.
In a travelling EM wave there is no phase shift between E and H. So can there be such a shift in a standing wave? The shift is illustrated by a picture in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.28.180.109 (talk) 10:48, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
i created a new standing wave related image, i present it here incase anyone wants to stick it in the article anywhere
how about combining and harmonic as they are sort of related. and not all pages reference to all three as related.
--someone —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.222.120.22 (talk • contribs) 04:49, 9 May 2010
...a standing wave – also known as a stationary wave – is a wave which at each point in its medium has a constant amplitude.
A travelling wave generated by a constant source will also have constant (peak) amplitude at all points in a medium. In particular, a plane wave travelling down a lossless transmission line will have constant amplitude down the line. More accurately, the essential properties of a standing wave are; no net transfer of energy and infinite SWR. A finite SWR implies a wave that can be decomposed into travelling wave and stationary wave components (assuming a linear medium). SpinningSpark 18:51, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Can someone fix the formatting for the gallary in the "Opposing waves" section?
It appears that the movie file of "Kayakers surfing a standing wave in Great Falls National Park." located above the gallery in the previous section is pushing the gallery to the left.
It is only "fixed" if I zoom in to >150% on a 1080 monitor.
I don't quite know how to fix it, but if someone does could they kindly reply to me here about how to fix such things in the future?
--Davidjessop (talk) 16:22, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
In the section on "Opposing waves", an image showing the first 6 harmonics was captioned: "Standing waves in a string – the fundamental mode and the first 5 overtones." This same image is used further down in the section "Standing wave on a string with two fixed ends" "Standing waves in a string – the fundamental mode and the first 5 harmonics."
The second instance was added later, and has a factually incorrect description. As per the page on Harmonics: "A harmonic is a wave with a frequency that is a positive integer multiple of the frequency of the original wave, known as the fundamental frequency. The original wave is also called the 1st harmonic" "Harmonics may also be called "overtones", "partials" or "upper partials". The difference between "harmonic" and "overtone" is that the term "harmonic" includes all of the notes in a series, including the fundamental frequency (e.g., the open string of a guitar). The term "overtone" only includes the pitches above the fundamental." "n = 2 2nd partial 1st overtone 2nd harmonic"
This indicates the first instance description is correct, with it being the fundamental frequency and the first 5 overtones; which could also be labelled as the first 6 harmonics, or the fundamental mode and the next 5 harmonics. The image description for the second instance incorrectly implies that the fundamental is not a harmonic and incorrectly implies that the 1st harmonic is not the fundamental frequency. I propose updating the second instance to match the first, with both having the simple description: "Standing waves in a string – the fundamental mode and the first 5 overtones." But when I made this change it was reverted.
While I am fine with other options for the wording, I do not want it to be what it is now as that is facually incorrect and contradicts other pages. Does anyone have any objection to that wording, and if so, can they state what they think it should be and why? Black.jeff (talk) 00:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.