I've never studied fluid dynamics or FEA or any of the more advanced stuff. While this is very kind I wouldn't have anything at all to offer in this field.
I know enough to satisfy my own curiosity in general acoustics and enclosure design and that's about it. My math is only grade 10 level (and I forgot most of that) and I don't know most of the formulas that make the simulators work.
I use several different programs to design and/or analyze enclosures and crossovers and I have a general working understanding of general acoustics. In the grand scheme of things I'm only at an intermediate hobbyist level. If this is something you are interested in pursuing and commit to learning the theory and playing with a few simulators you can meet or exceed this level yourself. None of it is hard but it does take awhile to learn.
I know enough to satisfy my own curiosity in general acoustics and enclosure design and that's about it. My math is only grade 10 level (and I forgot most of that) and I don't know most of the formulas that make the simulators work.
I use several different programs to design and/or analyze enclosures and crossovers and I have a general working understanding of general acoustics. In the grand scheme of things I'm only at an intermediate hobbyist level. If this is something you are interested in pursuing and commit to learning the theory and playing with a few simulators you can meet or exceed this level yourself. None of it is hard but it does take awhile to learn.
What fun is copying a box I can buy used, cheaper than the materials to construct it. It's about creating something new and interesting. So far it sounds amazing, but sadly I will probably tinker with it until it fails. To my know edge no one has connected the cones before. When I first tested it without the connection it sounded mediocre. As soon as I connected the cones, it was like day and night. I knew I had something special. I should leave well enough alone. I would be fooling myself if I said I could.
I don't know what you mean by "sum distructivly
I see untapped potential energy. Separating the cones with a partition and allowing the connection to pass through then connecting the front chamber
of one speaker to the rear of the other harnessing another cone surface area rather Than allowing it to cancel out the opposing speaker. They are forced to be in phase by the connection. What do you mean sum distructivly? I'm a little slow sometimes. Thanks much for your input. That's how I have learned much from many very smart people here.
I see untapped potential energy. Separating the cones with a partition and allowing the connection to pass through then connecting the front chamber
of one speaker to the rear of the other harnessing another cone surface area rather Than allowing it to cancel out the opposing speaker. They are forced to be in phase by the connection. What do you mean sum distructivly? I'm a little slow sometimes. Thanks much for your input. That's how I have learned much from many very smart people here.
You might be surprised at what's been done before. I'm sure cones have been physically connected and there's even a Geddes patent for an acoustical lever (not the same but tangentially related) based on a much older patent.
The reason it sounds different connected vs not connected is because the load on each driver is very different and the coupling chamber is very large so they were not well coupled even with the chamber sealed, and especially not with the chamber ported, until you physically connected them. With the large sealed chamber and a different load on each driver they were free to behave somewhat independently. The physical connection put an end to that.
Usually iso chamber are as small as possible and sealed, that's the only way to make them work together without physically connecting them because the air is not a great medium for this. The less air between the drivers the better and it HAS to be sealed to work as an iso chamber.
I have no idea what's going on in your drawings but theoretically if you could divide the coupling chamber and seal the two halves from each other completely you could use those 2 new chambers to provide an acoustic load. Each of the new smaller chambers would have to be ported to somewhere else (either into an existing chamber or to the outside). If they both ported to the outside the ports would need to be EXTREMELY long to tune them to usable subwoofer frequencies and the ports would have to be dramatically different length or they would just cancel each other. (Or the port ends would have to be located at very different physical locations wrt each other and the listener which wouldn't be too practical.)
Doing this (either porting the 2 new chambers to the outside or into existing chambers) would be an incredibly complex summation and unless precisely calculated it's likely to end up worse than what you have now, not better.\
Even if you could get the port lengths right, the 2 new small chambers are very small, too small to provide much acoustic benefit.
At this point I think you would be better served by studying general acoustics and playing with simulators than blindly hacking at your box. What you are suggesting is very complex and very likely isn't going to do what you want it to.
Doing this (either porting the 2 new chambers to the outside or into existing chambers) would be an incredibly complex summation and unless precisely calculated it's likely to end up worse than what you have now, not better.\
Even if you could get the port lengths right, the 2 new small chambers are very small, too small to provide much acoustic benefit.
At this point I think you would be better served by studying general acoustics and playing with simulators than blindly hacking at your box. What you are suggesting is very complex and very likely isn't going to do what you want it to.
I really don't understand the simulators that well. This design is far to complex for me to attempt simulation at my level of understanding.
And hacking at the box is a simple and easy for me to discover new concepts. It offers instant real results. I started with the simulators. This is not all arbitrary. I hope to provide some idea of what not to do as well as what works. Thanks, your advice is well taken and appriciated.
And hacking at the box is a simple and easy for me to discover new concepts. It offers instant real results. I started with the simulators. This is not all arbitrary. I hope to provide some idea of what not to do as well as what works. Thanks, your advice is well taken and appriciated.
It may be crossing over into a 2 stage diaphram pump design that I have seen. without the check valves in vapor lock condition.
Only one way to find out if it works. Or what it does.
Build and test.
I don't think most things are dicovered in simulators. Although they are much better understood in them.
Only one way to find out if it works. Or what it does.
Build and test.
I don't think most things are dicovered in simulators. Although they are much better understood in them.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.