|
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
|
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 |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Amsterdam
|
I am wondering what the minimum size for the two vents of a dipole sub should be, considering the phenomenon of the acoustic impedance.
Rod Elliot (sound.westhost.com) describes the implications for closed box speakers, giving their minimum cone sizes: <quote> ...small cones (in small boxes) will be incapable of reproducing spectacular bass, regardless of the claimed Xmax of the driver. As an example (and please note that this is a very rough estimate only) the following table shows the expected minimum frequency of various sized drivers in a sealed enclosure having a small baffle, and radiating into ½ space. Vented boxes work differently, but the vent area still limits the low frequency performance. A very large vent (needed for good performance and low noise at extra low frequencies) in an enclosure cannot be effectively driven with a small loudspeaker cone area. Driver Diameter Minimum Frequency (-3dB) 200mm (8") 40 Hz 250mm (10") 32 Hz 300mm (12") 27 Hz 380mm (15") 21 Hz 450mm (18") 18 Hz ... </quote> Anybody? |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
|
That information from Rod seems appropriate, but, I can not see the connection to your question (?)
And... I can not, for the life of me, figure out where 2 vents would go in a di-pole sub. |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Amsterdam
|
Consider a system with a 15" sub in an H-frame where the two ends are of course open, but by holes (vents..) of, say, 8". My question is, does the size of the holes now determine the lower frequency in the way described above, or is it only determined by the size of the sub driver itself. I understand these holes need to be of reasonable size in any case to avoid wind noise.
I'm unsure because the 8" holes would pretty much behave like 8" drivers in this configuration, but data from Axel Ridtahler's RiPole Subwoofer seems to suggest otherwise. Last edited by Deodato; 29th December 2010 at 04:30 AM. |
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Fostex 206e baffle hole size | ljk11 | Full Range | 2 | 3rd January 2009 09:01 PM |
| Air Core inductor: Hole Size ! (waveforms shown) | -_nando-_ | Class D | 67 | 14th January 2008 08:52 PM |
| bass matrix hole size....does it matter | i4gotmyid | Multi-Way | 1 | 5th October 2007 03:27 PM |
| Help, Foxtex Fe207E FE206E hole size | OzMikeH | Full Range | 5 | 6th April 2007 10:51 AM |
| PCB Hole Size | ptah | Parts | 10 | 30th November 2006 01:51 AM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.26270 seconds (30.00% PHP - 70.00% MySQL) with 10 queries |