High damped vs. Low damped

[twinter]

Now I'm seriously confused. I used to believe that my Q = 0.6 was overdamped. Now I am hearing that it's underdamped. 🙁

By the engineering definition, yes, systems with Q values greater than 0.5 are technically underdamped.
But from a practical stand point, loudspeaker systems with Q values of 0.5 to 0.707 are considered 'well' damped.
Structures and thick panels may be considered well damped with Q values from 1 to 10, so desired Q values are application dependent.
Don't let the words of the technical definitions for Q overly guide the determination of practical desired values for the particular application.

"The Q-factor or quality factor is defined as the ratio of energy stored to the energy dissipated per cycle for under-damped systems."

 

[Andersonix]

Especially if the woofer is making any midrange then one should 'fully stuff' the box to cut down on the 'woofing' that gets back out through the cone.

 

[tcpip]

Good. Then I am on preferred ground, with Q of 0.6, sealed. 🙂

 

[sreten]

Bass responce is completely dominated by room modes.

Hi,

However how the speaker interacts with the room modes
depends on its bass roll-off and its placement in the room.

rgds, sreten.

 

[twinter]

Another relevant article on loudspeaker Qtc by John Kreskovsky, using different sine wave type inputs and complex wave inputs. The article is 2 pages long, so use the arrows.

Box-Q