Horn loaded electrostatic ?? - Page 11 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Planars & Exotics

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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 20th April 2012, 10:53 PM   #101
diyAudio Member
 
bolserst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Quote:
Originally Posted by brsanko View Post
if you crossed it over at say 200hz or lower and stacked a bunch of panels together and loaded the horn to push a whole lot of air with very little diaphram excursion it should work fine.
Yup. Horn loading a stack of panels will result in reducing the excursion of the diaphragms, same is it does for a single diaphragm. So, the maximum SPL output capability will not be any greater than if you used the same number of stacked panels built with larger D/S spacing without the horn.

But, now that I think about it, one difference with the horn loaded case is that you would be able to use lower bias and drive voltages with the horn loaded stack, which would be an advantage. No higher output, but potentially an easier/safer build.


This is very similar in concept to the ESL AMT discussed here:
Electrostatic AMT?
Electrostatic AMT?

Replacing a simple ESL panel with an array of AMT pleats reduces the required excursion of each of the ESL panels which make the pleats. But, the resulting maximum SPL output capability is the same if the frontal radiating area is the same. The advantage is the ability to use lower bias and drive voltages since the excursion requirements are reduced.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th April 2012, 11:09 PM   #102
brsanko is offline brsanko  United States
diyAudio Member
 
brsanko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Duluth, MN
Send a message via MSN to brsanko
Quote:
Originally Posted by bolserst View Post
Yup. Horn loading a stack of panels will result in reducing the excursion of the diaphragms, same is it does for a single diaphragm. So, the maximum SPL output capability will not be any greater than if you used the same number of stacked panels built with larger D/S spacing without the horn.
How do you figure? Why wouldn't the horn increase the output SPL like it does in every other application?
__________________
PASSIONN
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th April 2012, 11:11 PM   #103
brsanko is offline brsanko  United States
diyAudio Member
 
brsanko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Duluth, MN
Send a message via MSN to brsanko
What is AMT?
__________________
PASSIONN
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th April 2012, 11:54 PM   #104
diyAudio Member
 
bolserst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Quote:
Originally Posted by brsanko View Post
How do you figure? Why wouldn't the horn increase the output SPL like it does in every other application?
The horn will increase the output SPL of the ESL. But, the horn reduces the excursion(ie output) of the ESL by the same amount. So, the net gain in output capability is zero.

Perhaps reviewing post #93 will help:
Horn loaded electrostatic ??


AMT = Air Motion Transformer

Last edited by bolserst; 21st April 2012 at 12:00 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2012, 12:06 AM   #105
brsanko is offline brsanko  United States
diyAudio Member
 
brsanko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Duluth, MN
Send a message via MSN to brsanko
Except that the factor that limits the output SPL of the ELS is excursion so if the horn reduces excusion at the same SPL then you turn it up. It may not increase efficiency per se' but power handling and maximum output would be increased greatly.
__________________
PASSIONN
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2012, 12:14 AM   #106
diyAudio Member
 
bolserst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Quote:
Originally Posted by brsanko View Post
Except that the factor that limits the output SPL of the ELS is excursion so if the horn reduces excusion at the same SPL then you turn it up. It may not increase efficiency per se' but power handling and maximum output would be increased greatly.
Remember the factor that limits the maximum output SPL of ESLs is Force per unit area.
This is a byproduct of the physical restraint of obtainable voltage gradient in the gaps between diaphragm and stator before the air conducts and arcing or corona results.

Review post #71 and #76
Horn loaded electrostatic ??
Horn loaded electrostatic ??
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2012, 12:18 AM   #107
brsanko is offline brsanko  United States
diyAudio Member
 
brsanko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Duluth, MN
Send a message via MSN to brsanko
I see. I guess if I want the ultimate ELS speaker I'll have to go with smaller wide range panels and either a dynamic sub or or hidden larger panels.
__________________
PASSIONN
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2012, 02:03 AM   #108
Mark Kravchenko --- www.kravchenko-audio.com
diyAudio Member
 
mwmkravchenko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Perth Canada
I beg to differ on the thought that there will be no net gain from proper horn loading. A well designed horn can give you 9 db and better gain over a normal room loading. There is a gain in efficiency due to the better acoustical impedance matching of the diaphragm to the horn throat versus an open air loading.

Carry this to it's simple conclusion. Force over unit area will not change. But the effect of the same force over unit area in a horn will create a gain in acoustical output linked to the design of the horns passband and therefore possible gain.

Less movement of the diaphragm will create more acoustical pressure if the diaphragm can meet this simple requirement.

There must be enough force over unit area to overcome the greater pressure seen on the diaphragm at the horn throat.

The multiple diaphragm method will most likely solve this problem.

And it has been precisely this problem that has stalled previous attempts to successfully horn load an ESL. Overcoming the increased acoustical loading or more simply greater air pressure on the surface of the ESL membrane.

I for one think You guys may be on to something.
__________________
Mark
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2012, 02:41 AM   #109
diyAudio Member
 
bolserst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Hello mwmkravchenko,

I think I understand what you are getting at, let me try and restate it to check.

Suppose I have an ESL panel with 3mm excursion limit that reaches its excursion limit in the desired bandwidth at the drive voltage which produces peak force per unit area before arcing. For this example, lets say the SPL measured at 100Hz is 100dB.

Now, add a horn sized and designed to increase the airloading on the ESL placed at the horns throat by a factor of 3. The same peak drive voltage will now only provide peak diaphragm excursions of 1mm. The horn will take this 1/3 less output and provide 9.5dB of gain resulting in the same 100dB measured.

Next, stack 2 more panels behind the original one and drive it with the same voltage. Diaphragm excursion will increase to 3mm, and the measured output will now be 109.5dB. Is this what you were getting at? If so, I agree.

But, rather than stack the 2 additional panels behind the first and adding a large horn, you could simple place the 2 additional panels to the left and the right of the original. The excursion of all 3 panels would be 3mm and the measured SPL would 109.5dB. The width would probably be similar or smaller than the horn and the construction much simpler.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2012, 02:59 AM   #110
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Jackson,michigan
I was just going over that in my thinking and I would have to agree with you on that one,bolserst.

The ideas that I had concerning horn loading an ESL was not so much to improve gain but to help increase the dispersion angle of the panel to help reduce the beaming effect at the higher end of its bandwidth.

A 4" or 3" wide panel is not that bad at all but if you increase the width to 6" to 10" the problem becomes very prominent as you increase the width of the panel.

I know that we have discussed many different methods to combat this issue,But I am still curious as to if a horn might be a viable alternative at least for the midrange frequency's and up.

jer
  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
Front loaded and back loaded horn DrWoofer.com Subwoofers 0 3rd August 2007 06:55 PM
rear loaded horn farriswheel Car Audio 2 27th July 2007 05:03 AM
Rear Loaded Horn David R. Carlso Full Range 3 9th January 2006 10:04 PM
Need help with horn-loaded sub slicemaster101 Multi-Way 26 17th September 2002 01:09 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:34 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