The Golden Ratio of 1.618 - 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 8th October 2012, 03:39 AM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Question The Golden Ratio of 1.618

Do the internal dimensions of 13.335cm, 18.429cm, and 29.818cm follow the Golden Ratio of 1.618? One website calculator says yes, another says no.

13.335cm is my smallest allowable dimension so I started from that number.

I am seeking to construct a dimensionally non-resonant sealed box for a driver.

Thanks.
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th October 2012, 03:47 AM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
BTW, the numbers of 13.335cm, 21.578cm, and 34.913cm appear to be more correct to meet the 0.618 : 1.000 : 1.618 ratio...
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th October 2012, 03:57 AM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Try:

1. Find the cabinet volume
2. Find the volume's cube root. That's your 1.0 dimension.
3. Multiple the cube root by .618 and 1.618. Those are the other two dimensions.
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th October 2012, 04:59 AM   #4
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
13.335 x phi = 21.576

21.576 x phi = 34.910

A box a hair over 10 litres.

What do you need an on-line calculator for? One of the ones you used is out-to-lunch.

Robert's algorithm for working from a required volume is bang on

Using the golden ratio will not create a non-resonant sealed box. The use of irrational numbers (phi or not) to determine a boxes dimensions just helps keep them from piling on top of one another (be careful with the squareroot of 2)

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 8th October 2012, 10:41 AM   #5
T101 is offline T101  Bulgaria
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Sofia-Bulgaria
A non-resonant box is the sphere. B&W Nautilus makes use of long distances behind the driver. For the bass driver they serve as a closed transmission line or a kind of or maybe labyrinth/aperiodic/infinite baffle.

You could install it in a pipe, just make sure the length is one quarter of the lowest reproduced wavelength and fill it with fiberglass or stone wool or a mix of all known wadding.

After all with midranges, your aim is not the LF alignment and as long as you are in the flat area of the response, the enclosure is demanded to do just one thing. Actually it is required not to do anything and specifically not to send reflected waves through the cone.

I remember a discussion between me and one of the reputable members here, we agreed that a good choice for midrange is well stuffed chamber with open back. Slight dipole effect (eliminates the environment due to the side null) and nothing is returned through the cone due to the non-interacting character of the enclosure.
A note of caution is to stuff the chamber well, because otherwise it will act as an U-frame and those always exhibit the so called U-H-frame peak which is not manageable in a bandpass such as the midrange, only low pass or in exotic examples highpass if it occurs low enough which in turn is governed by dimensions.

Best regards!

Last edited by T101; 8th October 2012 at 10:58 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th October 2012, 02:51 PM   #6
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
The inside of a sphere has one very strong standing wave since all distances across the inside are the same. The outside is very nice.

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 8th October 2012, 05:21 PM   #7
balerit is offline balerit  South Africa
diyAudio Member
 
balerit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: South Africa
Quote:
Originally Posted by planet10 View Post
13.335 x phi = 21.576

irrational numbers (phi or not) to determine a boxes dimensions just helps keep them from piling on top of one another (be careful with the squareroot of 2)

dave
1.41 is the closest to the very desirable ratio for room sizes of 7/5. ref:

Wes Lachot Design || Studio Design and Acoustic Consulting
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th October 2012, 05:56 PM   #8
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
Thanx for the article.

The trap to avoid when using root-2 is that root-2 x root-2 is a very undesirable ratio.

Toole's work shows that there are no magix ratios for rooms... partly due to the fact that windows, doors, and the construction of the walls, more often than not give resonances that do not correspond to the physical dimension.

A huge step in solving room issues is to cant one of the surfaces (ie vaulted ceiling). If the cant can be in 2 directions you are even further ahead.

This also applies to speaker boxes, but at higher frequencies and the consideration that it is easier to achive a "stiff room" so the actual dimensions have greater coorespondence to functional dimensions.

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 8th October 2012, 06:18 PM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
StigErik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
There is no such thing as a non-resonant box.

The only thing achieved by using different dimensions for height, length and width is to spread the resonances so they coincidence less. Which dimensions that actually work depends, and should be calculated for each case. And one should look at both axial, tangential and oblique resonant modes.
__________________
dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles and dipoles
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th October 2012, 07:05 PM   #10
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
I like golden ratio encolsures for strength. It makes for a very stiff box without adding bracing/panels. It also helps that no single dimension is too small/large, but with all the great "tower" designs out there, I'm not sure golden ratio has any advantage... internal dampening may be more important.
  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
Sealed enclosure -- golden ratio? jmar Multi-Way 42 21st December 2009 07:42 PM
The Golden Ratio Stage Stee Solid State 7 22nd February 2009 08:46 PM
Golden Ratio Height edjosh23 Full Range 13 3rd February 2009 09:52 PM
Golden Box Ratio - Important or not? Ornlu Subwoofers 5 27th May 2005 06:52 AM
Golden ratio - Example? icebear Multi-Way 5 17th April 2004 08:40 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:19 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