Talk:Piezoelectricity

message: I'm confused by the philosophical discussion about U.S. research methods v.s. Japanese research methods.  Isn't this an article about piezoelectricity?
This paragraph is not about philosophy or research methods, but possibly an example of how legislation like patent laws, military secrecy, and other regulations on the free flow of information may interfere with a society’s ability to derive technology from a physical fact. If this is verifiable the paragraph should be rewritten with stronger focus on this aspect and carry references to other existing articles discussing the same problem.
--EugenNJ 13:40, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  US vs Japan research methods 

message: Shouldn't the definition be about stress-induced voltage rather than current? I would assume that most crystals don't have many free electrons, so it's not clear how they could generate much of a current. Voltage however is clear: you take a crystal with symmetrical charge distribution, the stress creates an asymmetrical charge distribution which is the same as a voltage. AxelBoldt, Wednesday, April 24, 2002
:Is this why it happens?  If so, it would be good to put that in the article explained in a bit more detail.  As it is, there is no explanation of why the piezoelectric effect happens, only a description of it.  128.118.68.50 20:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Constant stress, T, leads to constant electric displacement, D, as in:  Di=dij Tj + epislonij Ej.  Electric displacement is related to the charge induced on the surface of the material.  A battery applied to a piezo will not result in a vibration, unless the battery's output is converted into an A.C. signal.  Ultrasonic output can be generated if this A.C. signal has a frequency in the ultrasound range.  --Nathaniel 02:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Voltage or current? 

message: Piezoelectric effect redirects to piezoelectricity, and pyroelectric effect redirects to pyroelectricity, but ferroelectricity redirects to ferroelectric effect.  These should all be consistent.  The "-ity" sounds rather odd to me, and I think " effect" is better.  Any opinions? –radiojon 15:02, 2004 Apr 16 (UTC)
:I agree that we should be consistent.  There is probably a subtle difference between the "x effect" and "x-electricity", so we need to record both forms somehow.  I would say that the "x effect" is an abstract concept meaning "the process by which e.g. squeezing a crystal creates electricity", while "x-electricity" is a concrete thing, the electricity that you get as the result of the effect.  I think this means that the title of the article should be the "x effect", as you said above, but let's acknowledge the existence of the "x-electricity" form somewhere in each article. -- Heron 15:29, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, actually it is not that straightforward, because for the case of ferromagnetism, we would need to have ferromagnetic effect (for which the page does not exist) redirecting to magnetism. Incidentally, ferroelectricity (electric dipoles) is the analogue of ferromagnetism (magnetic dipoles).  --Nathaniel 02:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name and redirects 

message: everyone pronounces it differently.  there are two "proper" ways:
* pie ee zoe
* pee ay zoe
http://www.bartleby.com/61/59/P0295900.html
and it is not named after someone, as i heard somewhere:
From Greek piezein, to press tight, squeeze. See sed- in Indo-European Roots.
- Omegatron 15:23, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)
- THIS SHOULD BE IN THE MAIN WIKIPEDIA ENTRY AS IT IS SO OFTEN MISPRONOUNCED!!! I tried putting in there but someone took it out :(
I agree. I mostly hear pee-zoe and sometimes pee-ay-zoe or pee-etzoe. Never heard pie-ee-zoe. 93.97.48.217 (talk) 20:14, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  pronunciation 

message: I just searched Wikipedia and found no reference yet to the related subject of piezoelasticity. It would be useful to add a section to the main article.  Likewise, no reference yet to another related term electroelastic.  DFH 15:18:55, 2005-09-06 (UTC)
I could not find both the terms piezoelastic/piezoelasticity and electroelastic/electroelasticity in the dictionary . Are you sure these terms exist?  Perhaps the term "electroactive" should be used for electroelastic?  EAP is the abbreviation for electroactive polymers, of which PVDF is an example.  See  and . Nathaniel 09:09, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi! All the words you have written can be used: "electroelasticity" is quite used in mechanics. It simply means the coupling of electric and mechanical effects, so we don't need another article. Ceccorossi 16:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  As a person with no electrical/physical knowledge, I have the same problem as the original poster. I got here from "piezoelasticity" and I still don't know what it means. The article should at least mention the word, even if it only says "this is a synonym for (some other word)". 86.130.40.127 (talk) 23:11, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've not heard of "piezoelasticity" before but it sounds like a near synonym of "elasticity".  Judging from its name, a piezoelastic material would be one that responds elastically (presumably as opposed to plastically) to pressure.  Nothing to do with piezoelectricity in other words, which means it should not redirect here. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 00:24, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Piezoelasticity? 

message: The tensorial description seems to have a typo (But an important one). Without being an expert, all the literature that I have checked so far gives the following expression for the coupled equations: 
   
  \begin{align}
     \boldsymbol{S} &= \mathsf{s}\,\boldsymbol{T} \color{red}{-} \mathfrak{d}^t\,\mathbf{E} \\
     \mathbf{D} &= \mathfrak{d}\,\boldsymbol{T} + \boldsymbol{\varepsilon}\,\mathbf{E}.
  \end{align}
With a negative sign for the second term of the first equation, as opposed to having only positive signs as it shows currently on the entry. Am I missing something? (See, for instance: Kögl, M. and  Gaul,L. Piezoelectric analysis with FEM and BEM 2001, in Smart Structures V. 429, Springer Vienna.) Belbojacopo (talk) 04:58, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The negative sign occurs in the stress-charge form of the equations.  The version in the article is the strain-charge form. Bbanerje (talk) 09:34, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mathematical description 

message: While I have not studied this effect, looking at the matrices, it looks like there are several typos. For example, there is a s_{44}^E term where one would expect s_{55}^E. Likewise, there is a d_{31) term where one would expect there to be d_{32). Is this correct?
:It is correct for only the 4mm and 6mm point groups. A more generalized matrix equation is probably better. Polaron | Talk 03:23, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: most commercial PZT materials fall into these point groups.  So s_{12}^E=s_{21}^E, s_{44}^E=s_{55}^E, etc.  The generalized matrix equation can easily be created by removing all the zeros and putting back the constants 11, 12, 13, ... 21, 22, 23, ... 31, 32, 33...  However, the average person who is using such materials may want to know which constants are equal, which constants are equal to zero, etc.  I have made the change on the wikipedia site to indicate that the equations in this simplified form applies to the 6mm crystal class.  --Nathaniel 10:57, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

text: This section and the Crystal classes section need a little background info for the rest of us. — Omegatron 14:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Matrices 

message: In this article it states that the piezoelectric effect works in reverse (apply voltage and the crystal grows in size slightly). Then later on it states that "Piezoelectric materials also show the opposite effect, called converse piezoelectricity, where the application of an electrical field creates mechanical deformation in the crystal." Now, it is just me or do these two things sound extremely the same? Is there a difference between applying a volatage and applying an electrical field? I have heard about the Piezoelectric effect working in reverse, it is in fact published in the the book tittled "Crystals and Crystal Growing" a book published by the M.I.T. Press. Does anyone have any more information? If not, I am going to look into converse piezoelectric effect and if I do not find sufficient source then I may remove that bit of the article.
:in the converse piezoelectric effect, you apply a voltage/electric field to create a deformation in the crystal.  in the piezoelectric effect, you apply a deformation to the crystal and charge is generated on the surface of the crystal.  applying an electric field is carried out by applying a voltage to the surface of the piezoelectric crystal.  all piezoelectric materials exhibit both the piezoelectric effect and the converse piezoelectric effect.  --Nathaniel 11:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think the anon is asking if there's a difference between the "reverse" and "converse" effects. — Omegatron 13:53, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nowhere does this article refer to a 'reverse piezoelectric effect', which is a shame because that's what the OUP's A Dictionary of Physics calls it. However, there are lots of websites that, like ours, call it the 'converse piezoelectric effect'. I am sure that the two terms refer to the same thing. I don't see any confusion within our article, though - it consistently calls it the latter. --Heron 16:47, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Difference between "reverse" and "converse". — Omegatron 14:50, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Probably a typo, or at most a non-standard teminology.  I have changed it to "converse." 134.67.6.11 12:22, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion with Reverse Piezoelectric effect and Converse  

message: How is this related to Triboluminescence? --Gbleem 09:05, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think they are very related.  Triboluminescence involves breaking a crystal's asymmetrical bonds, creating an electric discharge due to the triboelectric effect?  Piezoelectricity involves a voltage generated by mechanically stressing a crystal without breaking any bonds. — Omegatron 14:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Triboluminescence 

message: "Ceramic electret microphones could be made small and sensitive."
: Electrets are not piezoelectric.  Was piezoelectric microphone intended? — Omegatron 14:18, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's also a list of polymer electret materials.  Why? — Omegatron 14:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microphones 

message: Is the flashing caused by triboluminescence (cracks in the crystal structure causing electrical discharges from the triboelectric effect) or from piezoelectricity (deformation of the crystal creating voltages and causing electrical discharges, like piezo ignition)?  See Talk:Ute tribe#Comment on piezoelectricity for discussion. — Omegatron 04:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flashing quartz Ute rattles 

message: I'm writing as a simple user, not in any way an expert. After reading this article I am still left with the following two questions:
- Could we get any simple conversion factors for the most common piezoelectric materials in usage to estimate the electric energy that could be harvested from a certain amount of applied force (for a given size - area or volume or both - of material)? And conversely, what amount of physical distortion can we expect from a given current applied?
- Does the piezoelectric effect - in this case electric energy from material stress - take place only while the material is being compressed, or also when it has been compressed and continues to lie in a stable state under continuous stress?
I will be grateful if someone could explain the above issues in the article.
-- Also, is there any relationship between crystal size/mass and electrical output?  I assume the output of a large mass w/ small stress would be silimar to a small mass w/ large stress; is this correct?  The math was over my head, but it seemed to me that mass wasn't part of any equation in the article. Could someone explain this(or the equations) in lay-terms please.  Mingmasterz 01:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions 

message: "When several elements are stacked upon each other and to the end a blade is placed we can drive the crystal and with the displacement achieved we will have an ultrasonic cutter. This kind of tool is useful when cutting plastic materials or similars as soft material doesn't get affected by the ultrasonic vibration; in fact the cut happens to a local melting of the material due to friction and no application of heat."
I assume this is written by someone whose first language isn't english and knows nothing of grammar, punctuation or chosing the right words... could someone who knows what the heck they're trying to say rewrite this into decent english.--KX36 17:45, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Plus, that's not a transducer; it's an actuator. I'm inclined to just delete it since it's not very informative and the statement about soft materials is factually questionable, in addition to being almost unintelligible. The gist is "stick a knife on a vibrating piezo and it chops". Tarchon 17:24, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Ultrasonic transducers" section: 

message: What is the source of this dispute? Is there actually a dispute? Or is it merely the requirement of a citation...because honestly, I think that whole section should go and be redone. The whole reference to electrets seems foolish. Electrets have nothing to do with piezoelectricity and this section is misleading. I would prefer for someone to discuss more (I could...but would need some research first...I'll look back in my solid state physics books) the symmetry issue, as a long list of materials is somewhat foolish. Its such a wide range of materials. --Lagrangian 23:23, 23 April 2007 (PST)
: Looking over the edit history, the "dispute" tag was added at the same time that the citation request was added. That whole materials section needs to be edited -- it's kind of a random collection. 75.45.75.65 22:43, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Factual Accuracy Dispute

message: I delected the following sentence: "The bending forces generated by converse piezoelectricity are extremely high, of the order of tens of millions of pounds (tens of meganewtons), and usually cannot be constrained. The only reason the force is usually not noticed is because it causes a displacement of the order of a few nanometers (billionth of an inch)." First of all the placement was rather odd; second (and more importantly) it's a bit misleading because scale is not discussed (and neither is macroscopic construction, although I suspect this refers to a single crystal).  I have no particular objection to the thought being rewritten ans reinserted if anyone cares to.  134.67.6.11 12:17, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Force comment

message: I added a section called "Mechanism." I came to this page looking for why this effect happens, and found nothing until I noticed an explanation hiding in the "Crystal classes" section. Since I obviously don't know how this effect works, I don't know if that is a complete or accurate description of how or why crystals produce potential. I don't even know if "Mechanism" is the right term. However, what I did doesn't look bad, so I decided to be bold--if I did something wrong, it'll at least bring attention to this section. Twilight Realm (talk) 21:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mechanism 

message: Hi everyone. I recently had a complaint on the French fr:Piézoélectricité from a guy who argued that I had deleted his commercial link, whereas there were reportedly many such links from competitors here. I therefore came here to make up my mind and deleted some of them while tranfering some others to the references section. I might have been a bit too strict, though I don't have the feeling I deviate so much from the indications in Wikipedia:External links. Many companies do include a basic tutorial or theoretical part on their websites, I don't think there is any need for citing them all. In my opinion, references to the International Standards and to a couple of well known books (like Mason's) should do the job. Best regards. Tizeff (talk) 09:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: What do you think about adding this diagram to the article?</br>
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Piezoeffekt350px.gif</br>
--91.43.74.141 (talk) 13:20, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diagram 

message: The article states that PZT is the most common piezoelectric ceramic in use today. I am under the impression that it would be more correct to say that PZT is the most common man-made in use. As quartz is probably more widely used and is a piezoelectric ceramic. This is just a picky argument though.The Lamb of God (talk) 16:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most common piezoelectric ceramic 

message: Is it an example of the piezoelectric effect? --64.81.149.67 (talk) 19:11, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flint & Steel? 

message: There was an error in the "applications" section: the crystal earpieces were placed under "sensors", but they clearly are actuators, so I changed it's place... For the second time.
So, please, don't change it back if you don't know what you're doing.
Frlara (talk) 05:28, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sensor/actuator 

message: I am interested in the possibility of using piezoelectric devices under constant applied stress (such as compression under weight) as replacements for batteries. All the scientific studies I can find seem to be about the generation of AC from vibratory stresses, not DC from constant stress. Furthermore, the standard experimental protocol examines the deflection stress of a cantilevered beam, not compression stress.
If anybody comes across research pertaining to constant stress applied to piezoelectric devices to produce DC electricity, please add them as sources to this article.
Dlw20070716 (talk) 03:42, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry to burst your bubble, but your idea is based on a false premise. A piezoelectric medium is a dielectric, this precludes a steady flow of current. The only thing that happens under static pressure is that the medium will electrically polarize. At that point, the device is like a charged capacitor, when you short it, current will flow, but after that in essence it is empty. Why: The charge will distribute itself over the plates in a way that will counterbalance the dielectric polarisation, so no field is left to drive a current (until you remove the pressure). - Snaily (talk) 07:38, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Constant stress producing DC electricity? 

message: The image at the top of the page is currently "A_piezoelectric_system_(Without_contact_tabs)_2013-06-21_10-02.jpg", a photograph of a CRT monitor with an image of a portable CD player and, presumably, a piezoelectric speaker, with the caption: "A piezoelectric system (without contact tabs)."  Surly there is a more representative image available.  tbhartman (talk) 21:09, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Top Image 

message: Piezoelectricity is the effect wherein a voltage difference or electricity is generated due to applied mechanical stress. It isn't the charge produced. Piezoelectricity is at best the phenomenon, or the electricity generated. That does not equate to the charge produced. All sources I look at are consistent with my interpretation. I don't thave access to the cited book though. Opinions?
Chandra.sarthak (talk) 10:01, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's the effect not the charge! 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Piezoelectricity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.head.com/tennis/technology.php?region=eu&tag=intelligence
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:46, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Substituted at 03:01, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Piezoelectricity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://moodle.fp.tul.cz/nano/pluginfile.php/2476/mod_resource/content/3/FPM_Piezo_lecture1.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:16, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Sorry, I just don't understand.  no link, no "Where u is" nothing to help someone who doesn't already recognize what you are saying.  I understand the rest of it, but can't get that.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.252.8.222 (talk) 20:11, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  I really don't understand nabla u + u nabla / 2 

message: Piezoelectric Ignition systems have been used on gas stoves, both domestic and camping.
60.242.247.177 (talk) 01:49, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Piezoelectric Ignition 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Piezoelectricity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140221180044/http://piezomat.org/ to http://piezomat.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/680638 Elias (talk) 10:19, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Artificial muscles 

message: I've made an SVG version of :File:Piezo bending principle.jpg but I haven't added it to the article yet. The original image seems to suggest that a voltage of the same polarity is produced when the piezo element is flexed in either direction. Is this actually correct? Please compare the two images below and let me know if the SVG needs to be changed. You'll notice that I've reversed the polarity in the lower part of the image; I can change this back easily enough if necessary.
===Original (Piezo bending principle.jpg)===
===SVG (Piezo bending principle.svg)===
If the SVG looks OK, then please go ahead and insert it into the article. 忍者猫 (talk) 15:28, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: I'll go ahead and change the image. According to the illustrations at piezo.com, the polarity does change between compression and tension, so the JPEG illustration is incorrect. However, it looks like I got the plus and minus symbols the wrong way round. Now fixed. -- 忍者猫 (talk) 07:12, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vector image available 

message: If the SVG looks OK, then please go ahead and insert it into the article. 忍者猫 (talk) 15:28, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: I'll go ahead and change the image. According to the illustrations at piezo.com, the polarity does change between compression and tension, so the JPEG illustration is incorrect. However, it looks like I got the plus and minus symbols the wrong way round. Now fixed. -- 忍者猫 (talk) 07:12, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: SVG (Piezo bending principle.svg)

message: So, up the page someone asked (Constant Stress DC...) about the current that results from a piezo device, and the question clearly results from a lack of discussion of the basic electric details of the application of the device. It would be useful to provide such a basic description: the device generates an electric potential when compressed. That can then be used to drive a current; as the responder above said, it is like charging and discharging a capacitor. This should be noted in the article. And further, what then happens when the crystal is compressed, but discharged? Does the discharge affect the degree of compression of the crystal? Is there a reverse voltage that happens then when pressure is then released? Will voltage not build up again while pressure is left applied? So many questions arise about practical application which this article doesn't address at all. A phys.org article on piezos says the standard unit for measure of merit for piezo materials is "picocoulombs/newton" . The article says nothing about this. 2001:56A:F0E9:9B00:70C9:8143:900D:6088 (talk) 18:56, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current application details 

message: A source could be cool because It feels someone pulled it out of their ass. What about talking about european developments too Mirad1000 (talk) 23:24, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japan Vs USA thing