Cleats and internal volume - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Full Range

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 9th January 2014, 04:08 PM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South East USA
Default Cleats and internal volume

Greetings! My spring project is to build the Avebury speakers from Woden Design (with Alpair 12P drivers). I've had the plans for almost a year, having had trouble locating suitable Baltic Birch (being lazy didn't help). To get my head around the assembly steps, I modeled the speakers in 3D.

I am planning to add a continuous cleat around the inside front, to attach the speaker board to (and possibly make removable). As you can see in the attachment, the cleats (in blue) add about 90 Cubic Inches of volume.

As for my question... Should I make any adjustments to account for the extra 90 cubic inches? If so, in what dimensions? Or, is this too small a value to be concerned with? I don't know enough about speaker design to know if this matters...

Thanks!

Full size image here: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/galle...php?photo=9864
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Cleats.jpg (29.8 KB, 133 views)

Last edited by acceler8; 9th January 2014 at 04:43 PM. Reason: Added URL for large image
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2014, 07:07 PM   #2
DrBoar is offline DrBoar  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
DrBoar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Stockholm
No,
It is a small fraction of the cross section so I would not bother with that. Do use hardwood for the cleats. The removable baffle will reduce the structural strength of the cabinet, so having hardwood cleats adds some bracing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2014, 07:57 PM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ohio USA
Do use hardwood for the cleats. hardwood cleats adds some bracing

I read this as Do not use hardwood for cleats 3 times, until I read it one one word at a time. Didn't make sense for a while

Anyway, I am very interested in this project. I have thought long and hard over this project specifically and would love to know how it comes out.

I built a pair of the Lotus^2 with CHR-70 gen II some time ago and I genuinely love them. I want to move them to the bedroom and want something with more authority for the living room.

Robert

Last edited by testproggie; 9th January 2014 at 07:58 PM. Reason: grammer error
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2014, 09:43 PM   #4
zman01 is offline zman01  Bangladesh
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Dhaka
acceler8,

Have you checked with Scott? 90 cubic inches will be close to 1.5 liters... also such a large removable baffle can have an impact on structural strength as DrBoar has mentioned.

Last edited by zman01; 9th January 2014 at 09:46 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2014, 10:31 PM   #5
chrisb is offline chrisb  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: victoria BC
While the two are closely related, with a manifold "horny" design of this nature, I's surmise that altering the net CSA (Cross Sectional Area) of any segment could be more significant than the change in overall cubic volume - so definitely check with Dr Moose.

To echo the earlier comments, the Avebury is a substantial sized enclosure on which I'd be concerned about making the entire front baffle removable. There is rather a lot of bracing supplied by the several folds of lateral panels, and I'm not sure that much if anything would be gained by the addition of cleating for the full length front.
__________________
you don't really believe everything you think, do you?
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com commercial site planet10-HiFi
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th January 2014, 04:29 PM   #6
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South East USA
Good advice on contacting Scott, thanks! I just sent him an email.

I hadn't considered that the baffle size would be an issue... Is there a guide, or general rule of thumb regarding sizes? I guess the worst possible effect would be vibration/rattling? Or are there other issues that might show up?
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th January 2014, 05:25 PM   #7
chrisb is offline chrisb  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: victoria BC
Hindsight and all, I forgot to ask ealier - is there a particular reason that was expressed in the first post as to why you'd want to make the front panel removable?

I can certainly understand that in cases such as the Pensil series of MLTLs, in which several builders (myself included) have found that fabricating with removable back panel is very handy for adjusting quantities and distribution of damping materials, but IIRC, such fill is not specified in any areas of the manifold designs other that the driver chamber?

Other than vibration/rattling, which sturdy cleated fastening of removable panel could mitigate, the major "issue" that I could see arising would be air tight seal, which would be very important in the first and presumably highest pressure section of the folded path. Again, that could be achieved with closed cell foam gasket tape or similar, but unless there's a bona-fide reason for extra work, I generally try to avoid it. (just as my wife)
__________________
you don't really believe everything you think, do you?
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com commercial site planet10-HiFi

Last edited by chrisb; 13th January 2014 at 05:31 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th January 2014, 04:37 PM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South East USA
I got a response back from Scott (Very fast, great Customer Service!) He too advised not to make the baffle removable. He also indicated that the cleats would indeed affect the design (and even offered to do the calculations if I insisted on using the cleats!)

So, I am ditching the removable baffle plan. Thanks for all the great advice!

As for why I wanted to go this route, I had two reasons. First, it gave me some wiggle room on routing out the speaker hole (which I am not very confident about). I could save it for last, and if needed redo it. Second, I was wanting to caulk all of the inside joints. In Weem's "Designing, Building and Testing Your Own Speaker System" he mentioned how crucial an air-tight seal was for this type of box. By doing the baffle last, I would be able to get to all of the joints. Instead, by gluing all the middle pieces to one side I can only 100% caulk that one side. The other side can only be caulked on visible joints.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Volume of FF85K for internal box size calculations roadsterdriver Full Range 12 11th September 2009 06:23 PM
Internal volume dimensions abbster Multi-Way 2 21st June 2008 08:09 AM
Midrange Internal Volume in a 3-Way 69stingray Multi-Way 5 9th November 2005 07:33 AM
Figuring internal volume,Sonotube mace Subwoofers 3 17th March 2005 08:15 PM
What Internal Volume for a guitar cab? Mind Riot Multi-Way 4 24th February 2004 09:55 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:15 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2