Are we there yet?

So I've attached a zip file with my WinISD results.

It includes the WinISD file and a text file with the results and design.

I think it looks pretty good. (but I'm a Rookie).

My enclosure design currently has an internal volume of 1417.5 Cubic Inches.

This was actually derived from the Fat Box formula referenced from my textbooks and targeting 1400 Cubic inches. (See attached text file).

So Imperialistic calculations. I did this as a base line volume.

WinISD calculates the "Optimum" volume to be 2100 Cu.In.

A 50% addition to imperialistic volume.

Another reference suggested adding 25% to imperialistic volume.

Which would be 1750 Cu.In.

So my first question?

Does WinISD calculate optimum volume by oversizing the enclosure to account for "Normal" Batting?

and/or

Do I need to add volume to the base line, for example the recommended 25% increase.

So I've attached a zip file with my WinISD results.

It includes the WinISD file and a text file with the results and design.

I think it looks pretty good. (but I'm a Rookie).

My enclosure design currently has an internal volume of 1417.5 Cubic Inches.

This was actually derived from the Fat Box formula referenced from my textbooks and targeting 1400 Cubic inches. (See attached text file).

So Imperialistic calculations. I did this as a base line volume.

WinISD calculates the "Optimum" volume to be 2100 Cu.In.

A 50% addition to imperialistic volume.

Another reference suggested adding 25% to imperialistic volume.

Which would be 1750 Cu.In.

So my first question?

Does WinISD calculate optimum volume by oversizing the enclosure to account for "Normal" Batting?

and/or

Do I need to add volume to the base line, for example the recommended 25% increase.

#### Attachments

Last edited: