|
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| 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 |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: toronto
|
I'm not sure if i'm wording this correctly, please bear with me.
If i use more than one of a given driver, how do i calculate the efficiency of the "array" ? i've been wanting to build a pair of Karlson cabinets(say what you will about them) and for the HF/mid bit i figured i'd try something a little more unorthodox than a regular old mid + tweeter. in the Karlson's case, it might be easier to achieve an aesthetically pleasing solution this way anyway. plus it makes a method for me to achieve 8 ohm final impedance. So i was looking around and it seems Tang Band has these 2-inch aluminum drivers that go from 330-20k Hz. it might be debatable whether or not they really achieve that low, but i was going to use them from 800 and up anyway. the woofer i wanted to use was 6 ohms. i figured 4 of these little 2" drivers(8 ohms each) paralleled woudl give me 2 ohms, in series with the 6 ohm woofer equals 8 ohms nominal. i plan to use a Zobel on the woofer, maybe the Tang Bands too. thing is, the woofer is 95 dB efficient and the Tang Bands are each only 86, or 88 if i get the paper cone version. i don't feel like attentuating the woofer at all because i want high efficiency. if i string together maybe 4 of the TBs per cabinet, what sort of efficiency gain could i achieve for the collective four of them, if at all? how do i calculate or predict that? i guess it would sort of be a mini transmission line because i wanted to vertically stack them on one side of the Karlson box, which would just look like a segment of a line array i once saw built out of these things. not that i have any illusions of achieving the effect of a real line array, more like just a neat looking mid-tweeter stack. i know there is a formula in James Griffin's line array paper, but is that one that really only applies to LA construction? thanks |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
|
If you place two identical low frequency drivers close together (almost touching) they will behave as a single unit with twice the cone area with a 6 db rise in response. Three db from doubling the electrical power and 3 db form the increase in radiation impedance.
The freqency F(0) below which this behavior will give a 3 db increase is given by the equation f(0) = (c/d)*sqrt(n) f(0) = frequency c = speed of sound in meters d = center to center distance between the two drivers (in meters) n = number of drivers used Ref. Engebretson (1984) Wolff and Malter (1929) |
|
|
|
|
#3 | ||
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scottish Borders
|
Hi Bikehorn,
Quote:
You need to design, build, test, adjust and re-test a crossover to suits the drive units. Quote:
All, This guy need help
__________________
regards Andrew T. |
||
|
|
|
|
#4 | ||
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: toronto
|
Quote:
Quote:
As for the zobel, i figured it would probably be good to have a flat-ish impedance curve so that the crossover behaves more predictably. some of the things i've read on crossover design suggest that a zobel is mandatory...i haven't concluded that myself but mind you i'm not an expert either. i read some more on those 2" Tang Bands and it looks like their HF performance is actually a little wanting - or it was in Darren Kuzma's line array anyway. i think i may just go back to a 3-way with a planar tweeter. |
||
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Tennessee
|
Bikehorn,
My equations and graphs in my Near Field Line Array white paper are correct within the caveats that I mention in my paper. They are correct for line arrays or any other kind of driver array for that matter. You'll get the array gain but you will need to adjust for the impact on sensitivity. The downer in all of this is the caveat of center to center spacing mention by B4 in his reply. I use a rule of thumb of no more than a wavelength spacing between drivers for most of my arrays. With a frame of 2.25 inches the closest c-t-c distance is 2.25" which is 6027 Hz. Hence, your tweeters will have loss of directivity above that frequency and their sensitivities wil not necessarily add. While your ear may miss some of the associated comb lining in the 10-20 kHz octave, I still would not recommend that you use the 4 driver array that you proposed. To get a feel for how these drivers respond, take a look at the unequalized frequency response data by Darren Kuzma's 32 driver line array with the Tangband W3-880's. Observe the general fall off of the response as frequency increases. Darren used EQ to raise the uppper response as you can see in the equalized plot. Jim |
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Québec, Québec
|
bikehorn, with crossovers, 6 + 2 is not equal to 8.
It will be equal to 2 over the crossover frequency and 6 under the crossover frequency.
__________________
DIYaudio for President ! |
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
|
Ok, here it is, I have a graph but I don't know if I can paste from my computer.
The f(0) you calculated will be the reference point. For two drivers. - At .5 * the f(0) will be a full 3db increase - At 1.1 * f(0) will be no change as compared to a single driver For 4 drivers. - At .3 * f(0) you will have a full 6 db increase as compared to a single unit - At 1.1 * f(0) you will have the same output as a single driver (same as the 2 driver system) Notice that for the two driver system it says 3 db increase. you would have to also add 3 db to the full frequency response because we doubled the power output going from say 8 ohm to 4 ohm. f(0) is the point (below) were the mutual coupling becomes effective. I have modeled the above in Leap and it is almost perfect although Leap also takes diffraction and other things into account. This is a good starting point anyway, final tweaking is obviously necessary. I use 339 m/s for speed, close enough. I get 9,437 Hz using 339 m/s and two drivers, a bit different then yours but I think you will manage. Quote:
Good luck |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
|
Here is the pictoral image of mutual coupling.
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Las Vegas
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: toronto
|
Quote:
ah, thanks for clarifying that. oops, i feel stupid. can you guess this is going to be my first set of DIY speakers? also, thanks to everyone else who answered/clarified. i'd have replied earlier but i was busy with exams and was not on my computer very much. since reading this i have radically changed my philosophy...no more tang bands, no 6 ohm woofer, and no pseudo line-array built into the side of a Karlson. the Karlson will have to have some kind of other mid/HF solution. |
|
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| driver sensitivity vs system sensitivity | bvan | Full Range | 12 | 5th November 2007 07:57 PM |
| Would this tear in the driver affect sound? (pic inside) | wixy | Multi-Way | 1 | 6th January 2007 07:41 AM |
| Multiple driver sensitivity gain? | woody | Multi-Way | 3 | 12th February 2004 03:24 PM |
| driver sensitivity | griff | Multi-Way | 10 | 31st January 2002 08:32 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.13459 seconds (83.95% PHP - 16.05% MySQL) with 11 queries |