Collaborative Tapped horn project - Page 373 - 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 19th October 2011, 01:39 AM   #3721
tb46 is offline tb46  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Hi Skiivari,

I agree, for a proof of concept it would be nice to at least know the T/S parameters of the driver involved (and the parameters you have for this driver don't seem correct).

Regards,
__________________
Oliver
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th October 2011, 02:33 AM   #3722
GM is offline GM  United States
diyAudio Member
 
GM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chamblee, Ga.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tb46 View Post
Hi Skiivari,

Your Mmd=41.08 looks low for a 12" horn driver. What driver? Manufacturer? Model number?

Regards,
Pretty typical for a 'vintage' prosound vented mid-bass for small scoop bins or 1:1 CR, expo flare FLHs. I assume it doesn't have much usable excursion, so with a low Fs-high Vas, not really a TH candidate except in a very large cab, though a T-TQWT should work well in considerably < 320 L with the trade-off of course being less acoustic efficiency/peak SPL. Not many 'free lunches' in audio.

GM
__________________
Loud is Beautiful if it's Clean! As always though, the usual disclaimers apply to this post's contents.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th October 2011, 03:30 PM   #3723
tb46 is offline tb46  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Hi GM,

Interesting, I figured to get the Mmd down that low the voice coil would have to be light in addition to a light weight diaphragm.

Looking at the T/S parameters some more: the Re=8 Ohm looks like somebody type in a nominal value, and the Sd=460 cm^2 is smaller than I would expect for a 12" driver. Both parameters have a strong influence on the simulation.

But Skiivari can measure all of the above to arrive at data that he can trust.

Regards,
__________________
Oliver
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th November 2011, 11:44 AM   #3724
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Hello guys.
I gave up on the mentioned driver and any type of horn.
Now I got 2 eminence 6's from my friend. The model doesn't read on the back and It isn't any one of the newer eminence 6's mentioned on their site. What they most resemble is the closed basket 6 except they have an open basket.
Specs are: (Self measured )
Fs= 76hz
Qms= 6.77, Qes=0.82, Qts= 0.73
Sd~~ 123 sq cm
Vas with 123 sd = 9.77l
CMS=4.53E-07(?) I have used E-04 in the sims as I think the spreadsheet has it in mm or something..

It doesn't really want to go much under 37ish hz in a nicely sized enclosure. I'm fine with this. 75l seems to be a sort of optimum one.

One question: is there a problem with going up to 120hz on a sub if it's corner loaded? Don't the sound waves start getting all directional etc?
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th November 2011, 02:07 PM   #3725
tb46 is offline tb46  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Hi Skiivari,

Your T/S values (Re=?) look reasonable in Hornresp. I end up with a 70L tapped horn.

As to the corner placement, it depends on your setup. E.g.: if you have two corners symmetrically aligned behind your main speakers, and two subwoofers the time alignment would be more of a concern than the cut-off frequency. I'd play it by ear :-).

Regards,
Attached Images
File Type: jpg guess at Skiivari 6.5in TH.jpg (35.0 KB, 475 views)
__________________
Oliver
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th November 2011, 02:37 PM   #3726
bjorno is offline bjorno  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Jacobsmountain
Send a message via MSN to bjorno
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiivari View Post
..I gave up on the mentioned driver and any type of horn...
HI Skiivari,

If you change your mind you could try a T-TQWT....In agreement with GM wrote in post# 3722:

b

PS:You mentioned earlier the IR for your FLH. Agree it looks bad. You can compare the wavelets in the submitted picture. In reality the T-TQWT uses damping materials in the path of the tapering resulting in a measured IR that would be superior to your HR FLH simulation too.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Bebek12_FLH-versus-T-TQWT.JPG (502.8 KB, 486 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2011, 05:06 AM   #3727
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Is this buildable?
Attached Images
File Type: gif test2.gif (14.7 KB, 370 views)

Last edited by 454Casull; 29th November 2011 at 05:26 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2011, 10:57 AM   #3728
AndrewT is offline AndrewT  Scotland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scottish Borders
It's a 2.5m long tapered tube folded to form a TH.
What is not buildable?
__________________
regards Andrew T.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2011, 01:35 PM   #3729
tb46 is offline tb46  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Hi 454Casull,

There are some folding suggestions, etc. in this thread:
TH or T-TQWP or ????

Regards,
__________________
Oliver
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th November 2011, 04:16 PM   #3730
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
The impulse response looks very poor and I can't figure out how to make it better.
  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



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:27 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