maybe with moderate->-higher Q drivers? lumped resonance with all hole diameter the same might be estimated - holes towards tned might grow progressively larger (?) - would max be no more than wall thickness?
http://www.google.com/patents?id=JjAmAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA2&dq=5,552,569&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1_1
http://www.google.com/patents?id=JjAmAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA2&dq=5,552,569&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1_1
prior art = sure = Norman C. Fulmer 1952 application plus Karlson spoke of holes forming aperture in the first "Acoustic Transducers"
Fulmer
http://www.google.com/patents?id=yh...332&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=0_1#PPA1,M1
Excerpt from Karlson's 1st "Acoustic Transducers" patent filed 1951
link - http://www.google.com/patents?id=tsVfAAAAEBAJ&dq=2816619
"The discussions on said tapered aperture have been largely based on an essentially open or unrestricted hole in the coupling chamber. However, it is also the intent 35 of my invention to include a tapered aperture which consists of a series of holes or perforations. A tapered aperture so constructed also presents possibilities for further control of the characteristics of said coupling chamber by a variation in the size and the multiplicity of said holes. 40 These holes can be made both resistive and reactive in nature with the result that a great variety of effects may be introduced by this means."
are you sometime going to do a "real Karlson" type?
Fulmer
http://www.google.com/patents?id=yh...332&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=0_1#PPA1,M1
Excerpt from Karlson's 1st "Acoustic Transducers" patent filed 1951
link - http://www.google.com/patents?id=tsVfAAAAEBAJ&dq=2816619
"The discussions on said tapered aperture have been largely based on an essentially open or unrestricted hole in the coupling chamber. However, it is also the intent 35 of my invention to include a tapered aperture which consists of a series of holes or perforations. A tapered aperture so constructed also presents possibilities for further control of the characteristics of said coupling chamber by a variation in the size and the multiplicity of said holes. 40 These holes can be made both resistive and reactive in nature with the result that a great variety of effects may be introduced by this means."
are you sometime going to do a "real Karlson" type?
freddi said:
We should send that to the attention of the patent office... it is prior art that is exactly what his is.
It is way down in the queue... i have Moray's plans and i did hear his when i saw him in Calgary. We compared it to the mFonken, but they had the unfair advantage of FE127eN.
dave
K are somewhat Zen designs - from what little pddlling I've done with larger coupler, the starting gap and first few inches of aperture can affect results so that might be done on an empirical basis. Theres no front chamber "gain" probably other than coupled cavity peaking (?) - there has to be a favorable subjective balance struck with practical tilt-back angles of 20-30 degrees from vertical and frontal aspect. Port placement may matter somewhat. Its traditional to try rear lowpass choke shelf. I don't understand how to do a t-line rear and would not think at small cabinet volumes that it would present much advantage over a simple ported chamber (?) "Some" small K might be approached as something which would rely upon a sub to complete the spectrum? Carl Neuser claimed a lot of mass load Fs shift from the front coupler but I could not see much with WT3 on a x15 coupler ( a 4.3 cubic foot bulk speaker with about 1 cubic foot front chamber) when removing its wings - but I could not remove the sides of the rear chamber.
the patent office missed the boat on reading Sapkowski's patent - wonder how many more they missed? :^)
the patent office missed the boat on reading Sapkowski's patent - wonder how many more they missed? :^)
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.