Modernising Underpants - Sound Cancelling & Odour Retaining Tech

  • Thread starter wolram
  • Start date
In summary, the inventor has come up with an idea for sound cancelling underpants, but the problem is more complex than just making the sound stop. The invention needs to be done in real time, and the noise frequency can vary so much.
  • #1
wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
4,446
558
How can such a basic item of clothing be modernised you ask, well i have come up with an idea for sound cancelling underpants, the idea is to use upto date technology to capture sounds and produce an anti sound, and thus no one will have suffer embarrassment in meetings etc.
The only problem i have, is doing this in real time, this problem arises from the fact that the noise frequency can vary so much, so i will have to spend a lot of time making recordings . It may even be that each pair of underpants has to be tuned to the individual user, which will be a major disadvantage.
In the pipe line is odour retaining pants, but these are not looking promising, as so far they need to be at least 1/2 thick, and with people wanting to wear eye patches, i can not see how these could be packaged.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Do it digitally?
Have a microphone, a DSP and play the opposite sound through your iPod headphones.
 
  • #3
Complex problem! Some of the sound emanates from the underpants, themselves (think of a flag snapping in the wind), and that has to be dealt with. Instead of active sound-cancellation, perhaps you ought to start working along the lines of acoustic damping, with fabric that resists vibration at the relevant range of frequencies.
 
  • #4
mgb_phys said:
Do it digitally?
Have a microphone, a DSP and play the opposite sound through your iPod headphones.

The problem is more complex, a free standing (noise) from one is unmodified, but with people in a sitting position the sound could be modified, ie, the chair could produce harmonics.
 
  • #5
turbo-1 said:
Complex problem! Some of the sound emanates from the underpants, themselves (think of a flag snapping in the wind), and that has to be dealt with. Instead of active sound-cancellation, perhaps you ought to start working along the lines of acoustic damping, with fabric that resists vibration at the relevant range of frequencies.

Ah yes ,what frequency does a G string vibrate at?
 
  • #6
You just need sound cancelling headphones tuned to only cancel farts.
 
  • #7
  • #8
Underwear with a cork would be a lot easier.
 
  • #9
mgb_phys said:
You just need sound cancelling headphones tuned to only cancel farts.


The point of the idea is that others do not perceive the sound, i do not have much of an idea about how much energy is emitted, i guess there could be an OFM difference, like some people just squeak and others blow a trumpet.
 
  • #10
mgb_phys said:
Do it digitally?
Have a microphone, a DSP and play the opposite sound through your iPod headphones.
Probably wouldn't work too well if your fart is high pitched. Also, to effectively cancel at all locations, you'll need to attach the speaker to your butt.
 
  • #11
wolram said:
How can such a basic item of clothing be modernised you ask, well i have come up with an idea for sound cancelling underpants, the idea is to use upto date technology to capture sounds and produce an anti sound, and thus no one will have suffer embarrassment in meetings etc.
The only problem i have, is doing this in real time, this problem arises from the fact that the noise frequency can vary so much, so i will have to spend a lot of time making recordings . It may even be that each pair of underpants has to be tuned to the individual user, which will be a major disadvantage.
In the pipe line is odour retaining pants, but these are not looking promising, as so far they need to be at least 1/2 thick, and with people wanting to wear eye patches, i can not see how these could be packaged.

You might want to consider attacking the problem at the source.

For instance a butt-whistle could limit the frequency range that your noise cancellation apparatus would need to deal with.
 
  • #12
wolram said:
The point of the idea is that others do not perceive the sound, i do not have much of an idea about how much energy is emitted, i guess there could be an OFM difference, like some people just squeak and others blow a trumpet.
The speaker you use will produce a canceling signal that matches the amplitude of the received signal, so that shouldn't be the concern.
 
  • #13
LowlyPion said:
For instance a butt-whistle could limit the frequency range that your noise cancellation apparatus would need to deal with.
Ah! A hybrid passive+active system - what fun!
 
  • #14
I think conservation of energy prevents the noise from cancelling everywhere.
 
  • #15
wolram said:
The point of the idea is that others do not perceive the sound,
Whats the fun in that!
It's only fair to give any surrounding victims a warning before the smell hits them - in fact in version 2 of my system there would be an siren and a flashing light.
 
  • #16
Okay, i think a reed like sensor would be the best, it would depend on accurate possitioning,
and real time electronics, butt i am sure it could be done.
 
  • #17
Gokul43201 said:
Probably wouldn't work too well if your fart is high pitched. Also, to effectively cancel at all locations, you'll need to attach the speaker to your butt.
Pitch is probably proportional to how tightly the butt-cheeks are held together and inversely proportional to the mass of the cheeks. For shapely ladies that favor tight pants, a "soprano" version of the underpants might be necessary. Marketing 101 - know your target customers.
 
  • #18
turbo-1 said:
Pitch is probably proportional to how tightly the butt-cheeks are held together and inversely proportional to the mass of the cheeks. For shapely ladies that favor tight pants, a "soprano" version of the underpants might be necessary. Marketing 101 - know your target customers.

Doe's the mass of the surrounding medium make a difference? i guess it will but would have thought it would have a dampening effect.
 
  • #19
Ivan Seeking said:
I think conservation of energy prevents the noise from cancelling everywhere.
By "everywhere", I meant most everywhere within earshot of the fart.

As for the odor, there's always activated charcoal inserts.

Here's a picture (just in case lisa's reading this thread - she loves pictures like this :wink:)

mensunderwear.jpg
 
  • #20
turbo-1 said:
Pitch is probably proportional to how tightly the butt-cheeks are held together and inversely proportional to the square root of the mass of the cheeks.
There. Fixed it for you! :biggrin:
 
  • #21
Gokul43201 said:
By "everywhere", I meant most everywhere within earshot of the fart.

Coming soon to S&D: The farting ghost phenomenon.
 
  • #22
wolram said:
Doe's the mass of the surrounding medium make a difference? i guess it will but would have thought it would have a dampening effect.
Not just the mass, but other qualities, as well. There's a reason that organ-pipes aren't made out of lard.
 
  • #23
I told my doctor I suffered from silent, but deadly gas, and he prescribed a hearing aid.
 
  • #24
turbo-1 said:
There's a reason that organ-pipes aren't made out of lard.

I'd be keen to hear you elaborate on this.

Does it have anything to do with fundament frequencies?
 
  • #25
My suggestion would be velcro flies.

I'm fed up of standing at the urinal, fiddling around down there for minutes on end trying to undo tiny buttons just to fetch the wee lad out.
 
  • #26
brewnog said:
My suggestion would be velcro flies.

I'm fed up of standing at the urinal, fiddling around down there for minutes on end trying to undo tiny buttons just to fetch the wee lad out.

You know there are herbal remedies that claim to alleviate this condition.
 
  • #27
brewnog said:
My suggestion would be velcro flies.
I take it you don't work in the espionage business? Or you do, and you're a real quick draw...

VZ2OtD7Afmg[/youtube]
 
  • #28
Thanks for the feed back guys :smile: i have a prototype on the drawing board, now all i have to do is miniaturise every thing, the bass speakers are going to be the biggest problem, so far i have managed to fit every thing into the size of a ghetto blaster.
I just need some volunteers to eat curried sprouts and drink beer to test it out.
 
  • #29
The solution to both problems (finding wolram's miniaturised thing and fitting his amplifier equipment) is obviously kilts!
 
  • #30
mgb_phys said:
The solution to both problems (finding wolram's miniaturised thing and fitting his amplifier equipment) is obviously kilts!


I thought it was Brewey having trouble :confused: the kilt idea has the advantage of hiding the electronics in the sporran.
 
  • #31
I would appreciate if you guys could elaborate on the fact that pitch is inversly proportional to the square root of the mass of the butt cheeks. It seemed to me that another parameter is more relevant to the pitch actually, not even to mention the difference between chickpea and beer influence.
 
  • #32
wolram said:
the kilt idea has the advantage of hiding the electronics in the sporran.

Underpants and kilts ? But I thought ...
 
  • #33
To bring this to the academic level i have found this paper,

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WJG-4H57JKV-2&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=f7b3f543db0ba8fe07d8828c69a5b13f

Obviously fitting baffles is out of the question.
 
  • #34
"Acoustic resonance in a staggered tube array: Tube response and the effect of baffles"
If you staggered my tube array - I'd be baffled as well
 
  • #35
LowlyPion said:
You might want to consider attacking the problem at the source.

Here you go Wolram. Just insert and you're on your way.

http://i.ehow.com/images/GlobalPhoto/Articles/2164696/GunSilencer-main_Full.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Replies
43
Views
13K
Back
Top