Talk:Piezoelectricity

Electron microscopes

There is no reference to the use of Piezoelectrics in Scanning Tunneling Microscopes and similar instruments although the article mentions its use in Optical Instruments. - Torris 10/18/2006

US vs Japan research methods

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)

Voltage or current?

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)

One more question connected with this is whether a "constant stress" leads to "constant voltage" from a peizoelectric material? There are lot of examples of vibrations, ultrasound etc which convey the meaning that a constant voltage from a battery applied to a peizo will result in a "vibration". This seems contrary to the definition of peizoelectric effect as stated. Could you kindly correct this. (144.189.5.201 12:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC))

Constant stress, T, leads to constant electric displacement, D, as in: D_i=d_ij T_j + epislon_ij E_j. 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)

Name and redirects

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)

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)

pronunciation

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)

piezoelectricity on a small scale

Can someone who knows include information on how small the materials can be made and still create a voltage differential under pressure? For instance, can piezoelectric sensors be made small enough and sensitive enough to record the impact of a single gas molecule on the surface of the sensor? --Flatline 12:39, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

I think this issue is at the forefront of research in ferroelectric (and presumably piezoelectric) crystals. Here is an interesting article: Unusual phase transitions in ferroelectric nanodisks and nanorods, Ivan I. Naumov, L. Bellaiche, and Huaxiang Fu, Nature (London) 432, 737 (2004). --User:huckit

Piezoelasticity?

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 [1]. 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 [2] and [3]. Nathaniel 09:09, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't know if it helps, but the correct term might be ferroelasticity. The piezoelectric effect couples the mechanical and electrical domains- so the terms 'piezoelasticity' and 'electroelasticity' (which I don't believe exist), might be referring to the direct and converse piezoelectric effect. Of course there is electrostriction, which is exhibited by all ferroelectric materials... this is

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)

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)

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)

"PZT"

PZT is mentioned in the first paragraph of this article. What is it?

PZT could be lead zirconium titanate, a ceramic. --Yyy 15:20, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct. I have updated the link. PZT is a ceramic made from a combination of powders of PbO2, ZrO2, and TiO2 (hence PZT) in a certain ratio of about 0.52:0.48 of Zr:Ti to obtain the optimum piezoelectric effect. The powders have to be mixed & heated to a certain temperature to get them to form the new structure (the perovskite structure) of PZT--calcination & sintering. Nathaniel 07:46, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

The deformation for PZT is given as "of the order of nanometers." This is often true in MEMS (MicroElectroMechanical Systems). However, if the change is really 0.1% of the original dimension, then there is not a "typical" value for the deformation. If a deformation is to be given, the original dimension should be included as well.

It really needs to state the relevant conditions. When is it 0.1%? How can a thin piezo buzzer generate very loud sound if only moving that much? — Omegatron 14:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

If particle displacement is found according to:

$\xi ={\frac {p}{Z\cdot \omega }}$

And Z for air is 410 Pa·s/m = 410 N·s/m³, and a buzzer on this page can generate 85 dB SPL at 2.3 kHz, the particle displacement should be:

$85=20\,\log _{10}\left({\frac {p}{20\mu Pa}}\right){\mbox{ dB}}$

so p = 0.4 Pa

$\omega =2\pi 2300=14450$

so ω = 14450 rad/s

displacement is 67.5 nanometers. Huh. 120 dB SPL or 100 Hz would be more like a few microns, though. — Omegatron 15:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Mathematical description

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:

  ${\begin{aligned}{\boldsymbol {S}}&={\mathsf {s}}\,{\boldsymbol {T}}\color {red}{-}{\mathfrak {d}}^{t}\,\mathbf {E} \\\mathbf {D} &={\mathfrak {d}}\,{\boldsymbol {T}}+{\boldsymbol {\varepsilon }}\,\mathbf {E} .\end{aligned}}$

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)

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)

Matrices

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)

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)

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

Confusion with Reverse Piezoelectric effect and Converse

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)

I think the anon is asking if there's a difference between the "reverse" and "converse" effects. — Omegatron 13:53, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

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)

Difference between "reverse" and "converse". — Omegatron 14:50, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

"Piezoelectric materials also show the opposite effect, called inverse piezoelectricity, where the application of an electrical field creates mechanical deformation in the crystal." Is this the same as converse piezoelectricity or just a typographic mistake? Mingmasterz 00:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

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)

Triboluminescence

How is this related to Triboluminescence? --Gbleem 09:05, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

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)

Microphones

"Ceramic electret microphones could be made small and sensitive."

Electrets are not piezoelectric. Was piezoelectric microphone intended? — Omegatron 14:18, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

There's also a list of polymer electret materials. Why? — Omegatron 14:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Flashing quartz Ute rattles

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)

Suggestions

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)

"Ultrasonic transducers" section:

"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)

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)

Factual Accuracy Dispute

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)

Don't have time to discuss at the moment but J. Chem Ed. 2007 p. 12 has some useful info.

first Discovery of piezoelectricity ?

The french wiki says: The dicoverer of piezoelectricity is the monk René Just Haüy (1743-1822) in 1817, while studying spath of islande. True ? 20 may 2007

Damned good question. For what it's worth, I've always heard that the Curies discovered piezoelectricity. After poking around some, I infer from a few places (Antoine César Becquerel and René Just Haüy, among others) that Haüy did some basic work in crystal effects related to piezoelectricity (pyroelectricity, for example), but may not have dealt with piezoelectricity per se. However, I also find some places (like Britannica here that baldly state that Haüy did indeed discover piezoelectricity. 75.45.75.65 22:43, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Here we go: [4]: "...Hauy and Becquerel tried to find a relationship also between mechanical stress and electric polarization but the findings they reported were far from conclusive. The experimental setups at the time were always prone to be perturbed by the omnipresent triboelectricity (electric charge due to fristion) on the insulators, such as amber."

Ok thanks, I recently deleted that bit on French Wiki considering I could not find any relevant source. Reading this, I guess it would be worth trying to have a look at the original work by Haüy though. I might be interested in doing this, but somewhat later Tizeff 12:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

It is not easy to have access to the original work of Haüy in 1817. However I could find some more information in a recent book (Leçons de physique, de chimie et d'histoire naturelle - l'Ecole normale de l'an III, which can be considered as pretty reliable. This book notably cites the 1817 paper as well as a later book by the same author. I updated the article of French wiki accordingly [5]. Tizeff 10:06, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

By the way, what's the source for the bit on David Brewster? 75.45.75.65 22:43, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Force comment

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)

Mechanism

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)

External links

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)

Diagram

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

Most common piezoelectric ceramic

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)

      I thought quartz, though sometimes manmade, is not a ceramic!  It is a single-crystal material, while, I think, ceramics are poly-crystalline.  No?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.139.237.168 (talk) 01:57, 27 April 2012 (UTC) 

Flint & Steel?

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

Sensor/actuator

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)

Constant stress producing DC electricity?

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)

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)

Top Image

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)

I concur. This is a terrible and ambiguous image for such a lengthy and important article. Dev Gualtieri 23 January 2014 —Preceding undated comment added 23:24, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

It's the effect not the charge!

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)

I would agree that the article's wording is not quite correct. It's not quite 'charge is generated,' but I don't know how to phrase it exactly. Maybe a potential gradient or the aggregate of dipoles formed in the crystal? (75.80.54.216 (talk) 22:40, 8 July 2016 (UTC))

External links modified

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:

• 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 {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:46, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Piezoelectricity/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

i am myself a stud`ent who wants know alot about p-0e effect n its properties.actually i dont have much knowledge but i wna share whatever i have .inverse or converse p-e effec means by sending electric pulse sound waves are genrated in the specimen placed under transducer(in material teatng in ndt field .a specific application ).opposite to direct p-e effect here chargge is applied on crystal and poles are formed by the rule of polarization.and these poles are attracted or repelled according to the carges surrounding them as ac is applied or we can say as in case of electric field. plz correct me if i m wrong.my email is [email protected]

Last edited at 16:26, 28 November 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 03:01, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

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 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 {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:16, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

I really don't understand nabla u + u nabla / 2

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)

Piezoelectric Ignition

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

External links modified (January 2018)

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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Artificial muscles

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

Vector image available

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)

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)

Current application details

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)JustSomeWikiReader

Japan Vs USA thing

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)