TQWP with FE166ESR - 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 7th February 2005, 03:14 AM   #1
Tachyon is offline Tachyon  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sweden
Default TQWP with FE166ESR

Me and my friend are about to build our first pairs of fullrange speakers.
We will use the new Fostex FE166ESR drivers.
A tall tapered nonfolded quarterwave constuction.
I have downloaded the mathcad stuff from:
http://www.quarter-wave.com/
Need some final exact cabinet measurements.
We will also use the suggested Baffle Step Correction Circuit.
To drive the quarterwaves we will use a tubeamp and for the other speakerpair a gaiclone.
Any recomendations, suggestions for improvement is welcome!
Attached Images
File Type: gif ml_tqwt.gif (31.1 KB, 626 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2005, 03:39 AM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Harrisburg, PA
I did some modeling using MJK's mathcad worksheet for this driver, but decided to build the recommended backloaded horn. Check my post in which I summarized the modeling results.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showt...121#post553121

Note: all the dimensions are internal.

Good luck.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2005, 12:35 PM   #3
Tachyon is offline Tachyon  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sweden
Please elaborate further why you choose the original backloaded horn construction. My friend favours that one, I like the estetics of a tall, slim speaker.
The drivers are recently just ordered so we are in no hurry to build. I will follow the other thread to see what conclusions you guys come up with. The hybrid Karlson/Transmission Line cabinet looks interesting.
Thanks for your reply.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2005, 04:26 PM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Harrisburg, PA
I have built number of MLTLs and decided to go for something different. Plus the back loaded horn sounded interesting and I have heard good reports on its performance with this driver. Not a lot of deep thinking went into this decision.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2005, 05:33 PM   #5
jeremym is offline jeremym  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Toronto, ON
If you decide to go with the TQWP, I suggest you use a round tube port. I put a slot port like that in one of my designs, and it did not behave like I expected. I had to shorten it quite a bit, and it was not easy to do. Tube ports are easier to tune. Just something to think about.

Jeremy
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2005, 10:02 PM   #6
Tachyon is offline Tachyon  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sweden
Thanks for the tip on the port,
read somewhere that the size of it should be the same area as the driver, is that correct?
If we do the a TQWT it will be with a pointed top.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg sideview.jpg (8.5 KB, 528 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2005, 10:25 PM   #7
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
Quote:
Originally posted by Tachyon
read somewhere that the size of it should be the same area as the driver, is that correct?
The relatively recent ML-TQWT studies have shown that -- typically -- a port smaller than driver area is best.

Actually driver area does not affect any aspect of the design of a TQWT other than that it is a conveinient fixed parameter. The parameter of interest is the Vas.

dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2005, 10:54 PM   #8
jeremym is offline jeremym  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Toronto, ON
What it looked like you were considering building, from the drawing at least, is a mass loaded TQWP. Essentially the air in the port helps to determine the tuning frequency of the enclosure. It's sort of a bass reflex, TQWP hybrid.

I believe the suggestion to make the terminus equal to Sd is from an older "rule of thumb" type approach TQWP design. My first speaker project was like this-and while it sounded quite good, it was far from optimal. I think you can get more predictable, and far flatter response from a mass loaded pipe, like MJK's mathcad worksheets allow you to design.

The way I approach this, is to start by modelling a BR enclosure for the driver I want to use with a program like WinISD (free too!). Then I use the recommended box volume and port geometry as a starting point for a design. I model that as a tall thin tapered pipe in martins ML TQWP, or BR worksheet. Typically, you will need to shorten the port considerably, and play around with Vb. Start with a reasonable line length-usually less than 60". Begin with the speaker at 1/2 of the line length and move it up or down to flatten out some of the ripple caused by the 2nd or 3rd pipe harmonic. If you try to vary only one parameter at a time, then you can get a feel for how different changes affect the response, and zone in on a near optimal design. I like to design with no stuffing, it allows me to see how close I am getting.

Enjoy your speaker project, and keep us posted as to what you decide to do.

Jeremy



Quote:
Originally posted by Tachyon
Thanks for the tip on the port,
read somewhere that the size of it should be the same area as the driver, is that correct?
If we do the a TQWT it will be with a pointed top.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2005, 11:22 PM   #9
GM is online now GM  United States
diyAudio Member
 
GM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chamblee, Ga.
Quote:
I believe the suggestion to make the terminus equal to Sd is from an older "rule of thumb" type approach TQWP design.
FYI, it's no R-O-T, but what is required for peak efficiency at Fb and actually is spelled out in the original bass reflex patent of 1932. What has been learned in recent decades is that you don't necessarily want peak efficiency at Fb.

GM
__________________
Loud is Beautiful if it's Clean! As always though, the usual disclaimers apply to this post's contents.
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th February 2005, 01:25 AM   #10
Tachyon is offline Tachyon  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sweden
Thanks for all the help guys!
I'm a newbie at speaker construction, so this feedback is highly appreciated. I will download the WinISD and make my virtual model from there. Feels a bit odd to start with a BR construction, but with the port it makes sense. Some of the terminology and parameters that is used is unknown to me.
Hopefully this will become clearer as I move ahead with this project.
Thanks again.
/Ralph
  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
Fostex FE166ESR Thiele-Small params. Poindexter Full Range 6 6th December 2005 02:54 PM
Sneak peak at my Fe166ESR project and a 'Pass' question. Illusus Full Range 27 4th April 2005 04:22 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:55 PM.


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