Is it possible to construct an ESL which does not slap with low frequencies? - 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 27th December 2011, 09:20 PM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Default Is it possible to construct an ESL which does not slap with low frequencies?

Happy Holidays All,

Well I have successfully constructed a great many ESL panels, and have even was able to stretch the 6uM mylar to over 2.5% elongation consecutively without any issues. I am utilizing an electronic crossover and the music sounds near perfect....and that's where the questions begin. It seems that if I run these panels below 140 bass slapping is present.

The question... Is it possible to develop an ESL which will not slap?

I am considering making a test panel using .125 thickness 3m double sided tape (instead of the .060, and quadrupling the voltage as the inverse square law would suggest, would someone care to surmise the quality of sound which can be realized with this hypothetically?

Will this distance prevent slapping from occurring, could increased Bass be produced below 140, would the High frequencies be reduced?


Has anyone built perforated panels using D/S spacing of .125?


Thanks In advance,
Doc/Jerry
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2011, 02:49 AM   #2
beun is offline beun  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
I use a .125" (3mm) spacing on mine and have no issue with slapping. I can run them full range, at least down to 60Hz, and the first thing to crap out is actually the transformer saturating. I do segment the membrane with a maximum segment width of not more than 5".
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2011, 03:46 AM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: hobart tasmania
I have never noticed this problem with Quad ESL57's, either. I recommend always run 57's with a suitable amplifier, in my case Quad 303 Quad ESL & ESL63 Information

Cheers / Chris
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2011, 04:05 AM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary on the Bow
Doc; what is you actual diaphragm width (unsupported)??? You have the tension but you still don't have the stability so there is only one answer and that is to add additional stator spacers. Best regards Moray James.
__________________
moray james
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2011, 07:25 AM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Utrecht
You also should consider (if you haven't yet) some damping of the fundamental resonance. Fine mesh glued on the stator, speaker grill cloth, silicone dots on the mylar, these are things which has been used succesfully used.
Without damping there will be a high Q resonance with a large associated excursion and uncontrolled sound. As an untamed resonancepeak can be around 15 dB, it sure will ' eat up' excursion limits.
__________________
drs M.J. Dijkstra
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2011, 08:05 AM   #6
Calvin is online now Calvin  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Calvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: close to Basel
Hi,

well, it all depends on which quality You are content with, doesnīt it?
Constructed as open baffle system, the tendency to flap always remains. Putting a panel into a cabinet on the other hand creates different but similarly serious issues.
A ESL offers no first class bass compared to the qualities a dynamic driver bass may offer. At least, I havenīt heard of just one ESL with truely outstanding bass qualities.
If the panel is constructed as Fullranger, You have to accept compromises in the midhighs. The required higher voltage and power demands donīt come for free. Damping felt mats and such stuff, needed to mechanically control high-Q resonance, donīt perform linear, neither in the amplitude domain nor in the frequency domain and certainly remain audible in the mid-highs.

If the panel is constructed as a pure bass panel, You can optimize certain parameters, but it still is clearly inferior to a dynamic bass system. The mechanical losses inherent to a dynamic driver, that control itīs performance to a large extent, are much smaller. They would have to be supplied for by the design itself, by some form of mechanical means or by some form of external control circuitry.
Still though serious issues of the electrostatic principle will be left unsolved.
For example the lower force-per-unit-area-relation, or the low mass membrane, which discludes typical boxes as cabinets. Not to mention the vast levels of driving signal voltage and power demand.
A bass ESL performs inferior compared to a dynamic bass on nearly each and every aspect such as:
- size
- dynamic range
- power demand
- drive requirements an on the amplifier
- demand of room floor space
- distortion
- low and lowest frequency performance
- kickbass performance
- lower mids performance
- probabely even costing more than a decent dynamic bass system

jauu
Calvin
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2011, 11:55 AM   #7
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Thank you all for your comments and suggestions.

Moray James- I segment my 15x48" panels along the long axis with 3 spacers at 3 3/4".

M.J. Dijkstra-I forgot to mention I do run a separate sub and do not rely on the ESL for bass, essentially I do dampen low frequencies on my PC EQ.

It certainly sounds like it is "give and take with every aspect of an open baffle design" , by designing for bass you sacrifice the highs, and if you construct a mid/high panel your panels may be subject to slapping.

Beun- do you run your ESL at full range, do you use a parametric EQ or a electronic crossover? How large are your ESL panels?

Calvin, thanks for you explanation as always.

Jerry
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2011, 03:21 PM   #8
fperra is offline fperra  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lakewood, WA
If you tensioned the mylar to 2.5% elongation I suspect what you thought was mylar is something else or, if it is mylar, it went beyond it's yield strength, and you have less tension than you think. I just recently made some cells and could never get much more than 1.8% elongation before it gave out.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th December 2011, 12:14 AM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
I don't think 2.5% elongation exceeds the tensile strength of 6uM hosphenstaf C, however I do see your point if that were the case.

I was stretching at 1.5% with good results however, the increase of tension has an improved response and dynamics over that of a less stretched panel.

To achieve this tension you need a well made jig, and secure the mylar with double sided tape.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th December 2011, 02:03 AM   #10
beun is offline beun  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Doc,

I have made several speakes in the following sizes:

1) The big one, 3'3" x 6'6"
2) The WAF one 2' x 5'
3) The tall one 30" x 82"

All of them are more or less full range and go at least down to 80Hz. All are curved in the horizontal plane (like ML) but the segmentation runs vertical and as mentioned is never wider than 4 or 5" or so.

I could run them full range and have done so in the past but currently I run them with a highpass at around 60-80Hz depending on the size of the speaker and cross them over to a sub.

When your tension is sufficient it is impossible for the membrane to slap when your width is not more then 4" and the pacing is 1/8". At 1/16th maybe, but transformer saturation sounds more logical and I can tell you it sounds really nasty
  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
subwoofer noise at low frequencies justinc Subwoofers 7 3rd March 2010 12:05 AM
CD With dodgy low frequencies ... mart34 Multi-Way 5 12th July 2009 04:01 AM
biamp used only to drive low frequencies kdlsrinu Solid State 5 25th August 2005 10:43 AM
Low dist at high frequencies Pan Solid State 3 11th December 2004 11:31 PM
Protecting Tweeter from low frequencies... wigginjs Multi-Way 10 29th November 2004 02:24 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:14 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Đ1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2