Horn Mouth Diffraction

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Dear all,

It is rather well understood that a finite aperture of a horn/wave-guide causes diffraction effects, [1]. However, neither this reference nor another paper [2], which at least tangentially touches on this issue, gives any insight on computation of a mouth shape that would give an optimal (whatever the criteria) diffraction.

I am also aware of the work of Jean Michel Le Cleac'h [3], but this appears to be concerned with the entire horn contour, and not only the mouth shape. As such, it appears inapplicable to a situations, where a horn contour is pre-determined, e.g., constant directivity.

I would appreciate if anyone, who aware of any theory/papers/software dealing with this issue, could post references.

Thank you,

M

[1] Geddes, E., R.: "Sound Radiation from Acoustic Apertures." JAES., vol. 41, pp. 214-23 (April 1993)
[2] Henwood, D.J.: "The Boundary element method and Horn Design, JAES, vol. 41, pp. 485-496 (June 1993)
[3] http://ndaviden.club.fr/pavillon/lecleach.htm
 
Dear al2002,

thank you for the reference.

However, it seems to me that we are micommunicating because the link that you have posted treats calculation of a wave propagation throug a wave-guide assumed to be conical; therefore, without mouth flare.

The only comment related to my inquiry is on p. 302: ". . . waves reflected . . . can be reduced by radius'd (flared) mouth treatment as we discussed in Sec. 6.6."

Could you tell me if Sec. 6.6. contains any theoretical derivation of the flare or just states to do so?

M
 
mefistofelez said:
Dear all,

It is rather well understood that a finite aperture of a horn/wave-guide causes diffraction effects, [1].
.
.
.

I would appreciate if anyone, who aware of any theory/papers/software dealing with this issue, could post references.


http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/speaker-design1.html

Look at the Horn paragraph. In fact, the whole article is a "must read".
 
mefistofelez said:
Dear al2002,

thank you for the reference.

However, it seems to me that we are micommunicating because the link that you have posted treats calculation of a wave propagation throug a wave-guide assumed to be conical; therefore, without mouth flare.
M

No miscommunication. The link was only given to illustrate the standard of the book. It does not, of course, show a diffraction calculation.

The only comment related to my inquiry is on p. 302: ". . . waves reflected . . . can be reduced by radius'd (flared) mouth treatment as we discussed in Sec. 6.6."

Could you tell me if Sec. 6.6. contains any theoretical derivation of the flare or just states to do so?

M

Yes, it does.
 
pooge said:

"Earl, in your waveguide paper you dealt with a radius at the baffle, but didn't specify its curvature. Can you eloborate on this?" The radius should really be as large as a wavelength of the lowest frequency, but a rule of thumb says that it should be no less than 1/4 wavelength at the lowest frequency of waveguide use. This will diffract a lot less energy, but still a significant amount at the lowest frequencies.
 
Dear Cloth Ears,

thank you for the link.

Dear jomor,

thank you for the article. If I understand the issue of mouth termination, there are two phenomena caused by diffraction. One is standing waves caused by reflection of the wave inside the horn, the other by interference of waves difracted outside the horn. It is the latter, I am interested in.

Dear al2002,

thank you for the reply.

Could you tell me if Sec. 6.6. contains any theoretical derivation of the flare or just states to do so?

Yes, it does.

Sorry, does it show a theoretical derivation, or does it just state how to curve the flare?

Thanks to the others who responded.

M
 
mefistofelez said:
Dear Cloth Ears,

Dear al2002,

thank you for the reply.



Sorry, does it show a theoretical derivation, or does it just state how to curve the flare?


M

Sorry for the delay. Have been busy and lost track of this thread.

There is enough theory in Geddes' book for you to derive the flare if you wanted to. However, for DIY construction do you really need to do this?

The quick and dirty rule of thumb, according to Geddes, is that the flare radius should be lambda, but lambda/2 will do if you are constrained by size.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.