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 2nd December 2012, 07:56 AM   #31
Rudolf is offline Rudolf  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Rudolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by theaudiophile View Post
The reason you are getting confused is because you are oversimplifying.
I wouldn't call it oversimplifying. I'm just trying to keep one effect separated from the other. That indeed makes it easier for me to understand.
Quote:
How can you be sure that the grazing angle of the tweeter rays are exactly 0 radians? Only in theory do such extreme cases arise. In practice, you are looking at strictly positive grazing angles, which means reflections do occur.
The grazing angle need not be 0 exactly, that's right. But I don`t see how it could be any greater than 10. Since the exit angle equals the incidence angle, the reflected wave would not travel much different from the original wave imho.
Quote:
In addition the texture of the baffle, the geometry of the tweeter faceplate, can all affect the outcome.
Sorry, I am a slow thinker. You are too fast for me. Can't we take one step at a time?
__________________
www.dipolplus.de
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd December 2012, 11:09 AM   #32
Bon is offline Bon  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolf View Post
Do you have any opinion if there is a problem for the waves just travelling on the plain baffle surface?

I have pointed out a number of reviewed research articles which discuss the issue grazing ray contribution to far field sound radiation. The most recent is the Masters thesis of Vladimir Pavasovic. He describes the scope of his study thus:
This research has attempted to answer the following questions:
- What is the best method for effectively modeling sound radiation at grazing angles relative to that in the normal direction?
- What are the contributing factors to the amount of sound propagated to the far-field?
- What is the sound radiation when the angle of incidence is close to 90?

The treatment is mathematical and the predictions are in accord with previous numerical simulations and experimental measurements of other researchers. The study is motivated by attempting to understand the sound radiation from panels and orifices in factory roofs, which IMO has a reasonable basis for comparison with the sound field radiated by a loudspeaker diaphram.
__________________
Bon
"Moderation is a fatal thing. Nothing succeeds like excess." Oscar Wilde.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd December 2012, 11:54 AM   #33
diyAudio Member
 
speaker dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Mountain, Framingham
Quote:
Originally Posted by theaudiophile View Post
I want to see if I can get an agreement from the experts here about this. I was having a dispute with a professor of physics about the use of wool to control reflections from the tweeter. He tells me there is no reflection since there is no wave with angle of incidence at pi/2 radians.

I can clearly hear the positive effects of wool on the baffle. Its also intuitively clear that it must be soaking up some of those nasty waves which are sliding along the baffle that should not really be there.

What do you guys think?

If there are no reflections whats the point of applying wool? Why does it work?
I had to think about your professors comments a bit. At first I thought he was saying that there is no energy radiated at 90 degrees, clearly not the case.

Rather he seems to be saying that no energy is coming at an angle and bouncing off the baffle to the sides of the tweeter (i.e. energy doesn't go out into space and curve back to bounce off the baffle at some distance from the tweeter, this assuming your thermal gradients aren't too great!**).

This may be true but we see that there is a significant difference between the damped baffle case and the undamped baffle. The undamped case is clearly suffering from diffraction that the stuffing reduces.

My assumption has always been that the baffle damping either hides the edges (and does so without creating a reflective barrier), or that the energy moving down the damped surface constantly turns into the absorbing material. Either way, the impedance transition at the edge is reduced (or at least the energy getting to it), and secondary radiation is no longer a problem.

Your professor's error is in thinking that the only use for damping would be in killing energy arriving at a non grazing incidence. Clearly it works on the grazing incidence energy as well.

**http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/Demo...t/refract.html


David S.

Last edited by speaker dave; 2nd December 2012 at 12:03 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd December 2012, 12:34 PM   #34
system7 is offline system7  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
system7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
I don't think we have got a handle on this problem yet. I've slept on it, and I'm still not there. We've got to ask the right question.

Let's state the question clearly. What will be the effect of adding some damping felt around the front baffle, and particularly the tweeter?

Click the image to open in full size.

Now the air on the baffle front is not moving, it is constrained by the boundary. What IS moving is a pressure wave away from the tweeter dome. It eventually meets the speaker edge and diffracts in all directions.

I don't know if thinking about putting felt on a parabolic microphone dish is the same problem, but I could certainly map it conformally into a loudspeaker.

I just include the smoke rings, because a tweeter might be doing something similar and we should keep open minds.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Parabolic_Microphone.JPG (63.5 KB, 113 views)
File Type: jpg Smoke_Rings.JPG (81.5 KB, 117 views)
__________________
Well, there it is! Best regards from Steve in Portsmouth, UK.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd December 2012, 12:48 PM   #35
Pano is offline Pano  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
Pano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Milliways
Blog Entries: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Decker View Post
Anybody tried gluing a sheepskin to the front baffle with cutouts for the drivers?
Yes, that and felt and faux fur. It all works. I use artificial sheepskin in front of my bullet tweeters that are not mounted on a baffle. It really help FR and phase. Wool felt on a baffle face will give an audibly smoother result.

I don't understand why the big argument. Just try it - it's easy to hear and measure the effect.
__________________
Take the Speaker Voltage Test!
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd December 2012, 03:36 PM   #36
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolf View Post
The grazing angle need not be 0 exactly, that's right. But I don`t see how it could be any greater than 10.
Sorry, I am a slow thinker. You are too fast for me. Can't we take one step at a time?
So you believe that there are mysterious soundwaves from the tweeter whose angle of incidence is 0~10 degrees. Can you explain where such waves would come from? You initially told me yourself that no such waves can exist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolf View Post
Since the exit angle equals the incidence angle, the reflected wave would not travel much different from the original wave imho.
That reflection will be delayed so it will smear the time domain performance.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd December 2012, 04:59 PM   #37
Rudolf is offline Rudolf  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Rudolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by theaudiophile View Post
So you believe that there are mysterious soundwaves from the tweeter whose angle of incidence is 0~10 degrees. Can you explain where such waves would come from? You initially told me yourself that no such waves can exist.
I did talk of a grazing angle of 0-10. If I got the definitions right the grazing angle is 90- incidence angle. Does that help?
Quote:
That reflection will be delayed so it will smear the time domain performance.
Yes. For a flush mounted 1" tweeter it may become a problem in the ultrasonic region perhaps.
__________________
www.dipolplus.de
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd December 2012, 06:00 PM   #38
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: MN
Seems to me that if there were any of these waves able to just barely reflect off the baffle, as opposed to nicely propagating out until diffracting into full space at the edge, they would be extremely low amplitude and nearly 90 off-axis. Pretty insignificant compared to edge diffraction, which is already usually a minor effect.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd December 2012, 06:11 PM   #39
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New England
Quote:
Originally Posted by dumptruck View Post
Seems to me that if there were any of these waves able to just barely reflect off the baffle, as opposed to nicely propagating out until diffracting into full space at the edge, they would be extremely low amplitude and nearly 90 off-axis. Pretty insignificant compared to edge diffraction, which is already usually a minor effect.
Yeah, but some guys like to argue about minutiae.
__________________
"It's all about the music!"
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd December 2012, 07:22 PM   #40
system7 is offline system7  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
system7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
I think everyone is floundering with this one...

All very "Woolly" and "Baffling" for sure.

There doubtless IS an effect. But none of you geniuses has come near predicting exactly WHAT happens or WHY.

Me, I'm clueless. But the muse may come to me yet...

I always think if you can't explain something simply, you don't understand it.
__________________
Well, there it is! Best regards from Steve in Portsmouth, UK.
  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
Wool for stuffing lines Shadydave Subwoofers 3 23rd November 2012 12:05 AM
Any experience here with thin wool felt? david yost Planars & Exotics 9 31st October 2008 05:03 AM
using 'steel wool' as box stuffing terry j Multi-Way 3 24th October 2008 05:19 PM
long haired wool vitalstates Full Range 23 7th February 2007 04:09 PM
Glass wool. Is it dangerous? sachi Multi-Way 15 20th March 2005 01:31 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:22 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