
Home  Forums  Rules  Articles  The diyAudio Store  Gallery  Blogs  Register  Donations  FAQ  Calendar  Search  Today's Posts  Mark Forums Read  Search 
Parts Where to get, and how to make the best bits. PCB's, caps, transformers, etc. 

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 
28th December 2005, 10:34 PM  #21 
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sweden

Something that is bothering me is that the filters are ignored. They are assumed to exist, so the the signal splits between the branches, but neither the filters nor their effects are modelled in the equations. I have been thinking quite a lot about this during the past days (at least there is one good thing with insomnia ),but I still haven't figured out quite what this means and how it affects the whole thing. Have you considered the phase of voltages and currents in the branches, for instance?

29th December 2005, 06:02 AM  #22 
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ..

is Parseval's theorem related to your question?
also Christer is on to another possible issue  the biwire situation is not an exact equivalent to "mono" circuit by some "inverse superpostion "  they describe different linear systems with (slightly) dfferent linear responses 
29th December 2005, 07:43 AM  #23 
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kuala Lumpur

Two more possible causes:
1) A speaker cable carrying current I and with a spacing d has a repulsion u.I.I/2.pi.d N/m. At 1A and d=2mm this is 104 N/m, which might be enough to cause the wires to move apart in the insulation. If they move then work has been done and energy absorbed. 2) A speaker cable with current flowing is a moving coil microphone. The sound from the speakers may be picked up. Both of these effects depend on the current flowing and will be reduced by biwiring. Their significance is another matter. 
29th December 2005, 01:23 PM  #24  
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: away

Quote:
The A^{2} term is a result of signal A. Alone, the cable will dissipate A^{2}R_{c} watts, and the load will dissipate A^{2}R_{loadA} watts. The B signal will do the same by itself, producing B^{2}R_{c} watts, and the load will dissipate B^{2}R_{loadB} watts. When the signals are combined, each load should see the exact same dissipation it saw independently. However, the cable resistance now sees BOTH currents flowing in it at the same time. That means, the equation for the cable dissipation now has to be R_{c} * (A + B)^{2} watts. This produces the expected A^{2}R_{c} term associated with the A signal and A load, the B signal term B^{2}R_{c}, and as a result of the math, a 2AB R_{c} term.. The 2AB term of dissipation within the cable is a different time dependent function than the squared terms in the loads. Where did that time dependent power come from? The entire system power dissipation cannot change as a result of the one or two wire case, they should be equivalent as far as the amplifier can tell, the loads should dissipate the exact same thing, but yet, that 2AB term is there, dissipating at the cable.. Therein lies the issue.. Cheers, John 

29th December 2005, 01:29 PM  #25  
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: away

Quote:
A real analysis using real components of course will be needed for testing this hypo (as phase accurate is doing), but we only get there if this infernal 2AB cannot be explained using current understanding...if it is explained away, then there's nuttin to do...is there? However, if harmonics are generated, we have some thinking to do, don't we? I love this stuff. Cheers, John 

29th December 2005, 01:44 PM  #26  
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: away

Quote:
Related only in that it cannot be violated. The crux of my concern is because of the conservation of energy. Since the sum dissipates more energy in the cable than the separate dissipations, the 2AB term must be taking power from elsewhere.. (Parseval's theorem states that integration of power in the time domain equals integration of power in the frequency domain)..I believe my analysis integrates to equivalence, it's the instantaneous power I am considering, which is not what Parseval's theorem states, it is integral from infinity to +infinity. Quote:
Either result is equally acceptable, as is of course the result that they are exact equivalents.. I sleep soundly regardless of the outcome of this discussion..I enjoy the discussion..thank you. It's the journey, not the destination.. Cheers, John 

29th December 2005, 01:57 PM  #27  
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: away

Quote:
I had calculated the forces on a #18 guage wire a while back. With 10 amperes, no insulation (1 mm spacing), the force was .02 N/m. That is .0018 ounces per inch of wire. awfully low, and with the modulus of the insulation considered, the movement will be very small. The change in spacing which would alter the inductance of the wire needs to be very large in order to shed or store energy from the internal currents. I also did those calcs somewhere, just don't remember where.. For case 2, again, the amount of wire to wire movement must very large to generate voltage of any significance.. I suspect humans cannot survive those levels of vibration. In any case, you have presented very good possibilities to be tested if we were trying to explain why biwiring changes the sound.. My analysis is using ideal components to determine how the overall system should work. Thanks. Cheers, John 

29th December 2005, 03:40 PM  #28  
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: away

Quote:
The power of freq 1 is the dark blue line. The power of the higher freq is the pink?? line. The sum of those two is the yellow one. This represents the power dissipated in both loads, and the power that would be dissipated in separate resistors. The purple line is the 2ab line. the bright blue one is sum of all three, Asq plus Bsq plus 2AB. What I find really fascinating is the fact that 2AB swings plus AND minus, this represents negative power?????? Also note that the sum of all three terms NEVER goes below zero power into negative territory. The fact that 2AB goes negative, while seemingly nonsense, remember that it in itself is an artifact of the product of the A and B, so it can never exceed in negative value, that of the two squares summed does in the positive value..In other words, it is impossible mathematically for the power to go negative.. I'd be sellin refrigerators if that were the case...and, to the king of sweden, no less.. Cheers, John 

29th December 2005, 03:57 PM  #29 
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kuala Lumpur

Motor effect can be strong, if you have ever connected a jump lead between car batteries with one battery having a shorted cell so a large current flows  the cable will kick.
The microphone effect can be measurable, I tried it with 1A dc flowing and tapping the cable was visible on a scope. The magnetic field around a close pair is strong enough. Another thought  normal strands of multistrand wire with current flowing will attract each other and this may have resistance effects. This would explain why cat5 based cables using a few conductors of individually insulated wire seem to work well for me. 
29th December 2005, 04:11 PM  #30  
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: away

Quote:
I need this equation daily, as I typically run 1500 amps in wires that are about 16 guage, and the 50 mil spacing raises lots of forces. If I do not keep the conductors still to the tune of 50 microinches in a 2 to 5 tesla background field, they have "problems", ala "red october". Quote:
What you should have done is push the amp dc into a zip cord, hook up the scope, and put it into a room where a stereo is playing loudly. That would have given you a better indication of level of effect. Quote:
I suspect cat 5 issues are significantly different from what is being discussed here. Cat 5 pairs are orthogonal so inductance goes down as parallel inductors would..capacitance goes up with number of conductors..the characteristic impedance is also parallel calculated with a start at 100 ohms, 8 pair gives 12.5 ohms Zline. Cool stuff, but not applicable to the instantaneous power issue we are discussing.. Excellent points, however..thank you. Cheers, John 

Thread Tools  Search this Thread 


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Attach single wire to pcb?  h_a  Parts  13  29th April 2009 04:14 AM 
Favorite size wire for signal wiring?  G  Tubes / Valves  8  12th February 2009 05:19 PM 
Hookup Wire for Hard Wiring a Power Amp?  vdi_nenna  Solid State  10  1st April 2008 05:07 PM 
Single Ended, Single driver: Inroom distortion measurements  Gerrit Boers  Full Range  4  27th November 2007 08:12 AM 
Wiring my AV12  what size of wire to use?  BAM  MultiWay  3  9th January 2004 05:41 AM 
New To Site?  Need Help? 