IB vs sealed in excursion requirements - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Subwoofers

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 24th September 2009, 01:57 PM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Parra, Sydney
Default IB vs sealed in excursion requirements

An IB will generally require more displacement than a sealed box to produce the same spl right?

Software like unibox, etc that can predict excursion (modelling IB as a very large 9999L sealed box) appear to disagree, perhaps they aren't taking something into account?

Whats the rough ballpark figure for extra excursion?

Last edited by tech.knockout; 24th September 2009 at 02:00 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2009, 02:28 PM   #2
tinitus is offline tinitus  Europe
diyAudio Moderator R.I.P.
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by tech.knockout View Post

An IB will generally require more displacement than a sealed box to produce the same spl right?
Only if the IB goes deeper, which is usually does and the reason to do it
Br have huge problems below the tuning
Closed doesnt have those problems, and neither does IB, I suppose
But very often IBs are with multiple woofers

Last edited by tinitus; 24th September 2009 at 02:30 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2009, 03:43 PM   #3
GM is offline GM  United States
diyAudio Member
 
GM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chamblee, Ga.
Qtc tells all, so the lower it is, the higher the F3, ergo the greater the excursion and EQ required to maintain a nominally flat BW to the higher Qtc's F3. Below this point, increased excursion is required due to the IB's weaker acoustic loading, though at some point its air mass loading becomes so great that Qtc starts to drop. WinISD Pro plots this trend.

GM
__________________
Loud is Beautiful if it's Clean! As always though, the usual disclaimers apply to this post's contents.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th September 2009, 10:17 AM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Parra, Sydney
Well unibox is telling me the sensitivity at very low frequencies say <30hz is higher for IB than for any qtc sealed box.

So what free software out there models the loss in excursion due to less "acoustic loading"? Only upmarket(non free) software like WinISD pro?

Last edited by tech.knockout; 25th September 2009 at 10:24 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th September 2009, 12:27 PM   #5
DaveCan is offline DaveCan  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
DaveCan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Moncton NB
Lots of good info here http://ibsubwoofers.proboards.com/index.cgi

I read that IB is much more efficient down low etc.. And also for true IB they recommend at least 10X the vas of the driver for volume of space behind it.. Here's the Fact page http://home.comcast.net/~infinitelybaffled/index.html

Last edited by DaveCan; 25th September 2009 at 12:32 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th September 2009, 12:01 AM   #6
Ron E is offline Ron E  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Ron E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: USA, MN
Quote:
Originally Posted by tech.knockout View Post
An IB will generally require more displacement than a sealed box to produce the same spl right?
Sealed box and IB require exactly the same excursion for the same SPL. The only thing making noise in either one is cone movement. Move the cone the same amount, get the same SPL.

IB will usually bottom quicker, but that is because they are more efficient at frequencies below the sealed cutoff. The SPL at bottom at the same frequency will be the same whether sealed or IB, the Sealed will take more power to get there...
__________________
Our species needs, and deserves, a citizenry with minds wide awake and a basic understanding of how the world works. --Carl Sagan
Armaments, universal debt, and planned obsolescence--those are the three pillars of Western prosperity. óAldous Huxley
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th September 2009, 07:40 AM   #7
diyAudio Member
 
chris661's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sheffield
Blog Entries: 8
Sealed provides damping at lower frequencies.

See attached.

At those same frequencies, the SPL for the huge box is greater, but the midbass is lower (lower Q). Damping (and therefore cone excursion) is what changes the Q of a sealed box. Smaller box means more damping means less SPL at 10Hz, but more higher up.

Chris
Attached Images
File Type: jpg excursion.JPG (113.8 KB, 80 views)
__________________
"Throwing parts at a failure is like throwing sponges at a rainstorm." - Enzo
My setup: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi...tang-band.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th September 2009, 07:50 PM   #8
Ron E is offline Ron E  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Ron E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: USA, MN
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris661 View Post
Sealed provides damping at lower frequencies.
No, a sealed box provides increased stiffness, which reduces excursion. Below resonance the system is compliance controlled, meaning that changes in stiffness are the dominant factor. The maximum output level (read the original post) is the same for both configurations. Power to get there is different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris661 View Post
Damping (and therefore cone excursion) is what changes the Q of a sealed box. Smaller box means more damping means less SPL at 10Hz, but more higher up.
If a sealed box gives damping, why does Q go up?
Note: Q going up means damping goes down (Q = 1/damping ratio)

Damping is dissipation, like a shock absorber. The volume trapped behind the speaker in a sealed box acts like a spring.
__________________
Our species needs, and deserves, a citizenry with minds wide awake and a basic understanding of how the world works. --Carl Sagan
Armaments, universal debt, and planned obsolescence--those are the three pillars of Western prosperity. óAldous Huxley
  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
Help with BTL power requirements dayveshome Solid State 5 28th March 2008 11:45 AM
Ladegaard Arm Air Requirements ? valveitude Analogue Source 10 1st February 2007 08:06 AM
Soundeasy PC requirements Dryseals Multi-Way 2 8th April 2006 07:32 PM
high excursion drivers for sealed boxes pkgum Subwoofers 20 28th November 2001 07:07 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:16 PM.


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