Can someone comment on my hornresp simulations on the MCM8? - 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 22nd November 2010, 04:08 AM   #1
blamus is offline blamus  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Default Can someone comment on my hornresp simulations on the MCM8?

Just started to learn how to use hornresp. can the TH experts give me some comments just for educational purposes? the aim is to get as high SPL as possible in as small an enclosure between 35-80Hz, in a vehicle powered by a 70W amp at 2 ohms.

best regards
Attached Files
File Type: txt THdual1.txt (407 Bytes, 52 views)
File Type: txt THdual2.txt (412 Bytes, 15 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2010, 08:16 AM   #2
MaVo is offline MaVo  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Number 1 looks fine to me. Its interesting how you got that design to work by using such a long L12. I usually try to make L12 as short as possible, but here it seems to be better your way.
Number 2 has this deep notch directly above the passband. If the real box is just slightly off (which is very likely to happen - happened to me all the time), it could jump right into the passband.
Try to make your designs a little "safe" or "stable" concerning parameter variation, because what you build will never be a 100% representation of what you design.

All that said, i would go with no.1.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2010, 10:10 PM   #3
blamus is offline blamus  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Default I made some improvements - i think!

Thanks Mavo for the comments!

Thats a very valid point about the huge notch may get into the passband when built, I never even thought about it that way.

I made some adjustments/improvements - smaller and louder:

Now all my simulations are done in 2pi and 2.83v, so I can compare to other box programs such as winisd

3. Flat from 40-100Hz at 99db, at 75L - This is a variation from TH1 above, smaller, higher SPL, flatter.

4. 30-80Hz, 93-99db, rising response at about 6db/oct. 46L. This I think I like. I believe the response shape here is perfect for cabin gain. Larger than TH2 above, the notch is still there but at a higher freq, way above the low pass would be used.

displacement seems fine at 12V (70W@2ohms) if I high pass at 25Hz.

This time I have included both screenshots and the honresp export, so people can just look at it or import it if they want to play with it (please!)


What do people think? Are these designs worth pursuing? As in, can it be improved much more?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg TH dual 3.jpg (156.7 KB, 283 views)
File Type: jpg TH dual 4.jpg (168.1 KB, 278 views)
Attached Files
File Type: txt thdual3.txt (409 Bytes, 8 views)
File Type: txt thdual4.txt (413 Bytes, 6 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2010, 10:31 PM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Pacific Northwest
Compression (area of horn at throat entry vs Sd) looks a little high. I tend to aim for values lower than 4 with these drivers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2010, 10:50 PM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by blamus View Post
What do people think? Are these designs worth pursuing? As in, can it be improved much more?
Caution: I don't think HornResp includes losses in its modelling. What looks flat in the same might not end up being flat when you measure it. Rolloff might end up being higher and faster than predicted, for example. On the plus side, the response is likely to be smoother than predicted.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2010, 05:19 AM   #6
blamus is offline blamus  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemike View Post
Compression (area of horn at throat entry vs Sd) looks a little high. I tend to aim for values lower than 4 with these drivers.
You mean the ratio hornresp shows when I put the mouse over S2? I have done a bit research there and apparently jbell has tried using a compression ratio up to 8:1 and its fine for these particular drivers. But I maybe wrong.


Quote:
Caution: I don't think HornResp includes losses in its modelling. What looks flat in the same might not end up being flat when you measure it. Rolloff might end up being higher and faster than predicted, for example. On the plus side, the response is likely to be smoother than predicted.
So do you think sim 3 would work better even with cabin gain? Which one do you think would work best in the average car? Or do you think none of them are any good? Am I doing the right thing/heading in the right direction? I really have no idea!
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2010, 03:20 AM   #7
Mark Kravchenko --- www.kravchenko-audio.com
diyAudio Member
 
mwmkravchenko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Perth Canada
Quote:
You mean the ratio hornresp shows when I put the mouse over S2? I have done a bit research there and apparently jbell has tried using a compression ratio up to 8:1 and its fine for these particular drivers. But I maybe wrong.
4 to 1 is usually safe. 8 to 1 is asking for some blown drivers if they are not tough enough. Remember that the ratio is describing the area of the cone to the area of the throat. That means that what ever pressure is being created by cone movement is being amplified by roughly eight times.

Mark
__________________
Mark
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2010, 03:35 AM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Pacific Northwest
Jim got away with high compression by using a compression chamber, something you don't have. Additionally, his is a front-loaded horn, not a tapped horn.

I've not taken these drivers much above 4:1 in tapped horns. I've not killed a driver yet, but I really have not tried.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2010, 12:24 PM   #9
jbell is offline jbell  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: .
yea, 8:1 with a compression chamber works great -- I've yet to rip a cone in that configuration -- and I've tried. 8:1 FLH with chamber is the most efficient config I've found. I've yet to find a TH config for the mcm that will beat the FLH's I've done.

I'm not sure why you are using 2.83 volts and 2pi with a pair of 4ohm drivers in parallel?

If you want a 1 watt reading @ 2 ohm, you need to be using 1.41volts.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2010, 07:32 PM   #10
MaVo is offline MaVo  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Have you ever tried the 8:1 without a compression chamber? And what size do you use?
  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
how accurate are the box simulations? scampo77 Car Audio 20 3rd November 2009 04:06 AM
Seas L15 simulations Khron Multi-Way 3 11th April 2006 04:38 AM
Assistance with SPICE Simulations JMB Multi-Way 2 8th February 2006 09:28 PM
Xamp-simulations problem_s grataku Pass Labs 25 31st July 2003 05:10 PM
Protel simulations Kees Solid State 2 12th November 2002 03:47 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:42 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