|
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| Planars & Exotics ESL's, planars, and alternative technologies |
|
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: Mar 2008
|
Hi there,
this bending transducer works much like the well known devices from MBL. But instead of having the shape of a melon, enclosing a volume totally, this device is open and can be coupled into an enclosure. There are 2 curved planar panels radiating. With proper dimensions and wise choice of material, fullrange operation and applicable dynamics should be possible ... What do You think guys ? Cheers |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
|
Front View with magnets removed ...
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Mountain View, California
|
Nice idea LineArray
One other idea that you might consider: rather than the diaphragms being rectangular (as viewed from the front) - they could be trapezoidal i.e. different width from top to bottom. In this way it might benefit behaviour as a full range driver. Keep thinking - you are definitely on an interesting track here. Cheers, Ed |
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
|
Thank you Ed,
i thought of trapazoidal shape, but i think the mode of movement of the "voice coils" will suffer from that ... Do You think of that because you want to avoid resonances ? Regards Oliver |
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Mountain View, California
|
Actually I was considering frequency response, plus the size & mass of the source, thinking that you might achieve a graded transition from high frequency to low frequency as the panel dimension increases.
However, I note your concern as to the behaviour of the voice coil if the two edges are not parallel - the whole assembly would experience additional forces in the vertical direction as well as the intended squeezing. Ed |
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
|
Hi Ed,
i built a prototype 3 Years ago - veeery sloppy - just to test the idea. Diaphragm and VC were very heavy. Resonant frequency was subsonic, you could watch the decay with your eyes when you tipped the "voice coil" open circuited. I was astonished that highs produced were "OK". I think upper frequency limit is limited mainly by the width of the diaphragm and the sonic speed of the material. Distance from VC to VC limits frequency range. My Proto had only one VC, the other end was fixed. From my gut feeling i would say, that due to the sonic speed of diaphragm material chosen, a quarter wavelength (with longitudinal dispersion along the diaphragm) is the maximum width (path from VC to VC) of the diaphragm. With AL (c around 6000 m/s) lambda is 6000[m/s]/20000[1/s] = 0,3 m. So max width would be 7,5 cm. (...The 'Planot' device e.g. MUST have torsional vibration ...) With two VC ( excitation from both sides) maybe width can be doubled. If the upper frequency limit additionally is compromised i consider a width around 20cm as practical limit for fullrange operation, when Aluminium is used. However beryllium is faster around 12000 m/s ... Total mass seems not to limit upper frequency limit, but overall efficiency, like things are with conventional dynamic speakers. Although trapezoidal shape may be interesting for other puposes, it seems not necessary for reaching higher frequencies IMO ... What i intend is forced oscillation of the 1. bending mode over the e n t i r e audio range. I hope, that with proper dimensioning and damping, this is achievable ... Cheers, |
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: copenhagen
|
It is the principle in MBL isnt it.
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Oulu
|
I have been thinking this a lot lately:
1) Radiation pattern is symmetric -> Good power response. 2) Magnets are not blocking sound propagation in the air. 3) Magnetic flux can be high. 4) If the tube is very long you can actually use it as a combined "speaker box and reflex pipe" which can be tuned to maximize bass untill the cut-off frequency. But I would use a bit stuffings inside? One cone material that could be used is thin FR4 printed wired board which has relatively high sound velocity and easier to use than exotic metals. You can get FR4 from 100um thick and can etch voice coil on it. |
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
diyAudio Member
|
Does it have roots in US patent 3686446, explored by Paddock later on?
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
diyAudio Member
|
So basically best diaphragm material is hardened aluminium (>8000 m/s) - 2 layers and between viscoelastic material - Latex? EE-Power Technology CO. LTD offers nice 1,8-3um aluminium foils.
|
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Fullrange Bending Transducer | LineArray | Full Range | 0 | 23rd April 2009 01:38 PM |
| Just a simple sketch.... | Andy G | Multi-Way | 9 | 26th July 2007 09:10 AM |
| Box design sketch (pics) | Ornlu | Subwoofers | 10 | 13th July 2005 02:22 AM |
| Sketch of my platter design | InDaGroove | Analogue Source | 0 | 5th February 2005 03:54 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.38566 seconds (24.51% PHP - 75.49% MySQL) with 11 queries |