Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Software Tools SPICE, PCB CAD, speaker design and measurement software, calculators

VituixCAD
VituixCAD
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 28th January 2018, 03:44 PM   #231
aczern is offline aczern
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
What sources of electroacoustics do you use when writing VituixCAD?
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th January 2018, 04:33 PM   #232
kimmosto is offline kimmosto  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kuopio
Whole AES E-Library has been available, Acoustics: Sound Fields and Transducers by Beranek & Mellow and everything I can found from the internet. For example some MIT lessons and JOS @ccrma.stanford.edu.
Few practical books such as Loudspeaker Design Cookbook and our national reference TEE ITSE Hifikaiuttimia by P. Tuomela.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2018, 12:57 PM   #233
3ll3d00d is online now 3ll3d00d  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
3ll3d00d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
I have a question on how best to go about measuring a speaker with multiple drivers per way, the design is basically a WMTW like
Code:
     T
W         W
   M   M
is it better to measure the ways together or separately?

I was thinking that if you measure each driver separately then you would enter the physical location of each individual driver and enter it as a 2 drivers whereas if you were to measure the drivers together then you would estimate the physical location as the mid point between the 2 drivers and enter it as a single driver

Obviously the latter is less work because you cut the no of measurements in half so that would be nice but I'm not sure if it will still produce a good result (I'd guess it should).

Last edited by 3ll3d00d; 10th February 2018 at 01:04 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2018, 04:24 PM   #234
kimmosto is offline kimmosto  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kuopio
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3ll3d00d View Post
is it better to measure the ways together or separately?
Drivers and ways are measured separately. At least one woofer in a group should be measured separately. The other can be skipped (and use same measurements) if difference in baffle diffraction is not significant. Near field measurement is trickier if both woofers are in the same cabinet volume because both woofers should be connected to power amp to get correct response at low freq. I've damped the other woofer with thick pillow to prevent excessive sound leak.

This document was originally written for WWMTMWW. Should be quite valid to your project.

Last edited by kimmosto; 10th February 2018 at 04:26 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2018, 04:41 PM   #235
3ll3d00d is online now 3ll3d00d  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
3ll3d00d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Thanks for the link to the doc

I got my words mixed up in my previous post, what I meant to say was "drivers" not "ways". i.e. if measuring say 0-90 degrees horizontally, is it better to measure each driver separately and enter individual x-y offsets or measure them both playing together and estimate the x-y position as the midpoint? I take it from your doc that, given the baffle effects are the same in this case, measuring a single driver should be sufficient.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2018, 09:16 PM   #236
DBMandrake is offline DBMandrake  Scotland
diyAudio Member
 
DBMandrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Glasgow, UK
Noticed a minor bug - I think it has been there for a while, but I keep forgetting to report it.

On the crossover tab at the bottom you have "Way X settings" that include Gain, Delay, Invert and Enabled.

Of these, I've noticed the check boxes for Gain and Delay do not work - the value entered in the adjacent value entry box always applies to the results regardless of the checkbox state on or off.
__________________
- Simon
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2018, 03:22 AM   #237
kimmosto is offline kimmosto  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kuopio
Quote:
Originally Posted by DBMandrake View Post
check boxes for Gain and Delay do not work
Those two checkboxes are for Optimizer only - as tooltip tries to tell. Active Gain and Delay can be optimized automatically just like filter block parameters.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2018, 10:19 AM   #238
kimmosto is offline kimmosto  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kuopio
The latest addition (rev 1.1.29.0) is power dissipation analysis. Graph shows power spectrum of all (enabled) resistors in passive filter. Cursor shows part# and resistance value. See changelog.

Click the image to open in full size.

Spectrum of crest factor is flat. Power drops to 1/4 by entering 6 dB.
Pink noise option emulates spectrum of music. Response is square root of 1st order low pass, giving slope of -3 dB/oct. Average corner frequency is about 2 kHz, but significant variation exists. Initial/default value is 3 kHz.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2018, 06:18 PM   #239
gfiandy is offline gfiandy  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
gfiandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cambridge UK
Many thanks for continuing to add more features to your great software.


It seems a bit cheeky to ask but having seen your power dissipation display above, I wonder if it is possible to give a similar estimation for the drivers. I quite often end up doing calculations on the power dissipation in tweeters which are often padded down quite a lot to make sure they are OK with the system power.


Many thanks,
Andrew
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2018, 10:12 PM   #240
kimmosto is offline kimmosto  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kuopio
^Power dissipation of drivers wouldn't be a problem to add but I suppose resistances and drivers can't be visible at the same time due to different Y scaling.
How padding down and system power are related? Is your typical system semi-active, and padding is for reducing noise of amplifiers due to very high sensitivity of tweeter? Or do you use shunt resistor to reduce and equalize impedance? Level tuning possibilities with fully passive crossover are very limited - within less than 1 dB.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


VituixCADHide 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

Forum Jump


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:51 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 15.00%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2018 diyAudio
Wiki