Is there a way to model the doubling of a hornmouth using hornresp? I'm considering the response of arraying 2x synergy horns. I'd angle them so their dispersion doesnt overlap. Below 200hz the directivity loses control (horizontal) so from there on their would be overlap, but .below that 200hz the synergies would still be within 1/2WL of each other (center to center).
Try doubling the throat and mouth size, and the number of drivers. There may be real life subtleties that you recognise, but which hornresp doesn't concern with. You might also check with David on the hornresp thread in the subwoofer sub-forum whether this is a valid approach.
Assuming that the two-horn array is to radiate into half space (Ang = 2.0 x Pi), then simply model as a single horn radiating into quarter space (Ang = 1.0 x Pi). Due to the principle of images, halving the solid radiation angle in effect doubles the horn mouth area.
I should have added that the above modelling technique applies when the two horns in the array are connected in parallel, electrically.
I figured I could try both these techniques, but wanted to be sure doing it like this would be even a little bit relevant. The horn would only couple from 220hz and lower, which is why I maybe thought those 2 techniques wouldnt apply from 220hz and higher.
Some horn profiles won't. Some that will, won't if they are the wrong cross sectional shape. Some that wont, will after modification.
If you post your horns, we could postulate about wavefront shapes and arraying.
If you post your horns, we could postulate about wavefront shapes and arraying.
They are large CD horns with a middle exponential segment. Mouth is 75x108cm, depth is 38cm.
Attachments
Maybe a dumb question, but here it is:
When 2 horns couple, what becomes their new acoustic center? Because what happens if you want to couple a third horn. Do you use the acoustic center of the closest driver, or does each horn has to be close enough to all other horns to couple? Or do you couple this 3th horn to a new acoustic center (located somewhere between the first 2 coupled horns)?
When 2 horns couple, what becomes their new acoustic center? Because what happens if you want to couple a third horn. Do you use the acoustic center of the closest driver, or does each horn has to be close enough to all other horns to couple? Or do you couple this 3th horn to a new acoustic center (located somewhere between the first 2 coupled horns)?
Assuming the throat is matched in angle, and horizontally it possibly is due to the small dimension. As the walls curve later in the horn, the curvature leads that of the wavefront. If you find this is a problem, try arraying after removing the second half of the adjoining walls.
The vertical appears to be somewhat hyp/ex. It appears to be a line segment, if this is so then in an expanding horn like this it is possibly expected to draw it out into a point source? This is frequency dependent and not straightforward to guess but the wavefront should be just developed at the arraying point. In other words the wave should be concentric with the horns acoustic centre where you choose to remove the wall.
The acoustic centre of a conical horn is the apex of the cone. This is typically a virtual point.
Last edited:
Ok yes, but what becomes the new center with which you will couple a third horn? For example, you have 2 horns arrayed , how will you know if the third horn will be able to couple (below the 200hz were I lose directivity)? Does this third horn (his center) have to be within 1/2th WL of the horn that is closest, the horn that is the fartest, or a point between those 2 (so a 'new' acoustic center for the coupled frequencies, laying somewhere between the 2 original acoustic centers)
Joining them optimally may involve removing part of the walls physically (with a saw). They were designed with curvature that facilitates their being freestanding. Of course, you should measure and decide first, this has so far only been a thought experiment.
I see you are not asking about the wavefront acoustic centre, as I answered previously.
Are you are asking about combining for the purposes of mutual coupling? The optimum is to have the two mouths coincide (same location).
Are you asking about building on the wavefront size for extension/control purposes? The optimum is to have the mouths concentric.
Often we start with a goal. Sometimes it is about fitting a room geometrically. Sometimes it is achieving the largest practical mouth. Sometimes it is about directivity. Sometimes it is about reducing later interference. Each has its solutions.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.