Advice needed for sub enclosures - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

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 1st February 2013, 07:53 PM   #21
diyAudio Member
 
Inductor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cascais
oliv928,
You have a lot to read in the thread bjorno it's linking.
bjorno, to help oliv928 a little, I think you said on post #5 on your link, that a T-TQWT (~73 L) is the better option for a sub. From your experience is better than a BR? My simulator says it's a better choice, together with BR, for this driver, being both good options.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2013, 10:33 PM   #22
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
thank You guys for your help. It is very nice of You. As an information, here is the typ of amplifier I want to use with the sub system. I give You this data because I am not 100% sure it is considered as active amp. Also, keep in mind that i want to use two bass enclosures (one L one R), so that, by putting the Philips speakerson them, I will have a classical look of big 80's speaker. That's why I will use only one channel of each stereo amp.
I went to that design, after recommendation of a french guy. He told me I could not have correct impedance on the system with passive filters. Also it will give me the possibility to adjust level of bass with the amp gain control knob (and cross freq), which seems to be a good comfort for a first project.
I will read the thread you linked to me with a lot of interest.
Thanks again.
Attached Images
File Type: png module ampli sub carac.png (38.7 KB, 113 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2013, 03:56 PM   #23
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
I have seen the thread. Unfortunately this is a TQWT design. Why not, but the construction doesn't seem very easy to do. I would say I prefer to stay on classical volume (BR I suppose).
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2013, 02:58 AM   #24
bjorno is offline bjorno  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Jacobsmountain
Send a message via MSN to bjorno
Quote:
inductor wrote:

I think you said on post #5 on your link, that a T-TQWT (~73 L) is the better option for a sub. From your experience is better than a BR? My simulator says it's a better choice, together with BR, for this driver, being both good options.

Hi All

Have a look at the submitted new BR simulations for this tread original Driver= Phillips AD12200-W8 and compare with the new Mivoc-AW3000 BR simulation.
IMO the Phillips driver should work well in a BR but the Mivoc is IME easy to get sounding with bad 'Ported sound tails'.

Added more suggestions for the Phillips driver(s)..

b
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Mivoc-AW3000-BR_calc.jpg (491.4 KB, 96 views)
File Type: jpg PHILIPS AD12200-W8_BR-sugg.jpg (405.9 KB, 77 views)
File Type: jpg PHILIPS AD12200-W8_sugg.jpg (903.8 KB, 73 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2013, 04:14 AM   #25
diyAudio Member
 
Inductor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cascais
Quote:
Originally Posted by oliv928 View Post
I have seen the thread. Unfortunately this is a TQWT design. Why not, but the construction doesn't seem very easy to do. I would say I prefer to stay on classical volume (BR I suppose).
bjorno is simulating a BR (bass-reflex enclosure) with 64L. (I guess... just taking in what he's doing.)
You originally were venting the idea of 76L at f3=28Hz on post #11, so that's not very far back.
In the lautsprechershop.de website they show an example of a BR,
Quote:
MIVOC AW 3000
recommended cabinet 2:
81 L volume bass reflex cabinet
with HP100 reflex tube, 27 cm long.
from 29/23 Hz (-3dB/-8dB).
Strassacker: Speaker Building, Components
In this case port is long almost 30 cm (27cm Lenght/9.6cm Diam.). And it doesn't provide for adequate speed of air (>17m/s). Are you going to use a circular port? It's not a problem with speed of air in the limit at max. SPL.
Speed of air 18.5 m/s for 111.9 dB with 1 speaker/1 m. Only if you are using your sub always at max. level.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2013, 09:14 PM   #26
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inductor View Post
bjorno is simulating a BR (bass-reflex enclosure) with 64L. (I guess... just taking in what he's doing.)
Well, I think You are wrong. bjorno recomend 51L. So it is different with my 76L. If bjorno find the real best solution I would probably go with this volume. But if larger Vol gives better bass sound I can make it also. Or something in between ?
I will probably go with tubular vent. I won't play it at max level.
Thank You
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2013, 10:20 AM   #27
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
When I mix all that figures I have simulated in winIsd and Bowsim and could go for :
BR V=60L f3=34Hz
Then dimensions could be :
H=66mm W=40 D=30
Vents : Why not 2 circular vents ? Then d=4.7cm L=11.29cm for mach=0.10

Do You think it could sound well ? What about dimensions proportions ( for resonance problems ) , max excursions on the AW3000 , and Vents choice ?

Thank You very much
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2013, 12:53 PM   #28
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
I also try a freeware 3D design to refine the proportions of all to prepare and carpentry. The only one I Locate FreeCAD is. It is super easy to use and comprehensive, but rather buggy, which ultimately makes use very painful to go through the layout of the boards. Do you know one by chance?
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2013, 01:48 PM   #29
Dissi is offline Dissi  Switzerland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Winterthur
Quote:
Originally Posted by oliv928 View Post
Vents : Why not 2 circular vents ? Then d=4.7cm L=11.29cm for mach=0.10
The total vent surface would be only 1/14 of the driver surface, that's at least factor 2 too small. You better use two 7 cm vents, length 26 cm. Choose the depth of the cabinet accordingly (35 cm or more).
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th October 2013, 07:27 AM   #30
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
I am coming back on the subject because I have bought the wood panels. Do You think it is a problem if W and D are the same. For example W=D=40cm (stationary wave). If yes, how different do they have to be ? D=38 W=40 , is it OK ?
  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
Bigger than needed pa enclosures. holger honda Multi-Way 9 14th January 2014 06:15 PM
Changing enclosures, need advice..... hags Multi-Way 4 7th May 2010 12:22 PM
How cheap can you get? ~$60 assembled pair w/ bamboo enclosures - offer advice. -=Germania=- Full Range 79 8th January 2009 04:58 AM
advice on micro speakers and enclosures geom_tol Car Audio 12 15th June 2007 12:19 PM
Help/advice needed jjs4028 Multi-Way 13 11th October 2006 10:16 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:46 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