|WikiProject Physics||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|This article is written in British English (colour, realise, travelled, aeroplane), and some terms used in it are different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
For the adiabatic definition, I think that means constant entropy, not enthalpy. see http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/AdiabaticBulkModulus.html Ojcit 20:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Links to hyperphysics.phy-aster.gsu.edu are non-existant. These links are located in the reference section of the page.
- Currently reads http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hph.html, and comes out at the front of the site. Would be useful to embed the link deeper into the site.
- —DIV (126.96.36.199 09:21, 19 March 2007 (UTC))
Is there any special reason for calling this K? B also seems common. —DIV (188.8.131.52 09:21, 19 March 2007 (UTC))
Bulk modulus (B) Compressibility (K)
Sorry to the person who did the bulk of the writing on this page, but you've got the symbols backward. B is for bulk modulus and K is for compressibility. When I get some time, I will try to repair the damage, but it's going to take a lot of work as the error is spread across several pages. Elert 20:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)elert
Actually using B (it's actually a lower-case beta, but that's neither here nor there) for compressibility, and K for Bulk modulus is the correct way to do it. It is logically a little backwards, but is nonetheless correct. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 18:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
K has always been used to express Bulk Modulus, also not sure why B has to be used for Compressibility considering that it is the reciprocal of K anyway - 1/K is easier for the reader to immediately understand the relationship. However, I would propose to broaden the current formula definition to differentiate between solids and gases. While the current definition refers to both solids and gases, the nature of the higher compressibility of gases lends itself to a change in density (due to the change in volume). Hence I would propose the Bulk Modulus formula for gases to also be stated as follows: K = ρ0(δp/δρ)0 , where ρ0 is the equilibrium density of the gas, δp is the change in pressure to realise δρ, the change in density of the gas and K expressed as Nm-2. Grathan (talk) 09:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
"the bulk modulus is not the same in all directions" I don't think the bulk modulus varies with direction. Also, I would like to include the equation that B = ratio of hydrostatic stress to volumetric strain. I know this is implied by the thermodynamic definition, but it is a much more useful relationship for mechanics of materials.And it points up that even for an anisotropic crystal, the bulk modulus is a scalar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tibbits (talk • contribs) 16:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- It does in single crystals. A typical bar of steel, for instance, will have a great many grains facing every which way, masking the effect. An extreme example of anisotropy would be a layered material like the cuprate high temperature superconductors - clearly the in-plane bonding differs significantly from the cross-plane electronic structure. A less extreme example can be seen in the regular trivalent rare earth structural sequence, where hexagonal structures transform under pressure to be more close-packed by compressing preferentially along the c-axis (the height of the right hexagonal prism). - Eldereft (cont.) 22:27, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- I agree that the elastic modulus varies with the orientation of measurement with respect to the crystalline axes of anisotropic crystals. I disagree that the bulk modulus varies. Change in volume does not refer to the direction of the deformation. The bulk modulus is a scalar. Tibbits (talk) 14:33, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- I would like to see the anisotropy section of the bulk modulus page removed. K = dP/(dV/V) = dP/(ex + ey + ez). Note that the denominator of the rightmost expression is an invariant of the strain tensor, hence insensitive to orientation of coordinate system, as is pressure as well. This reinforces the argument that both pressure and volumetric strain are scalars, so their ratio is also a scalar.Tibbits (talk) 05:17, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
When the article says: It is defined as the pressure increase needed to decrease the volume by a factor of 1/e, is the 'e' the mathematical constant e? If so, it should have a link.--ML5 (talk) 11:54, 27 September 2011 (UTC)