Okay I've got this design for a sub and i've designed thje port into the encloure (see pics) is this okay? I've designed this sub of a port with the same surface area (on the front) as is in my WinISD model so will this be okay as i have kept the length of the port the same.
So what i want to know is:
Is this design of port okay?
Can I change the width and height of a square port as long as it is the same surface area?
Thanks
Boscoe
So what i want to know is:
Is this design of port okay?
Can I change the width and height of a square port as long as it is the same surface area?
Thanks
Boscoe
Hi,
It should be OK, the arrangement is quite common but with one or two
strips front to back to allow the two surfaces to reinforce one another.
And yes you can essentially vary the shape of a rectangular port,
though here going full width is by far the easiest of the options.
rgds, sreten.
It should be OK, the arrangement is quite common but with one or two
strips front to back to allow the two surfaces to reinforce one another.
And yes you can essentially vary the shape of a rectangular port,
though here going full width is by far the easiest of the options.
rgds, sreten.
Last edited:
This should wotk fine. I almost always do it this way (althou as sreten points out, usually with a port spacer to reduces resonances of the unclamped ends).
The high aspect ratio port will, as a generalization, start rolling off a bit sooner, and a bit slower as it effectively puts some resistance in the port. This usually gives a better end result, despite the common wisdom of some, that the port will compress sooner. I find more control & finese than in a typical low aspect ratio port.
And at least one of the beta testers of my CHR-Ken found that bass was deeper than in a same volume box he had with the same driver but conventionally ported.
dave
The high aspect ratio port will, as a generalization, start rolling off a bit sooner, and a bit slower as it effectively puts some resistance in the port. This usually gives a better end result, despite the common wisdom of some, that the port will compress sooner. I find more control & finese than in a typical low aspect ratio port.
And at least one of the beta testers of my CHR-Ken found that bass was deeper than in a same volume box he had with the same driver but conventionally ported.
dave
+1 to Dave, I use that Box/port design quite frequently. Very easy to build. Not too hard to change the port length (shorter)either. Good luck.
This approach was commonly used in the early days of ports as it was simple to build. More precisely it is the mass of air we are concerned with....as is determined by the volume of the port.
________________________________________________________Rick........
________________________________________________________Rick........
- Status
- Not open for further replies.