TH-18 Flat to 35hz! (Xoc1's design)

Yes, using a driver with more displacement, and the power handling to deliver the displacement could give ~+4dBSPL peak output, maybe less than +3dB when power compression losses from voice coil heating are taken into account. The 18SW115 is rated 1700watts (AES), 18TBX100 1000watts, less than +3dB power handling difference.
Ideally, each doubling of mutually coupled cabinets and power results in +6dB output, +3dB efficiency from doubling the cone area and cabinet volume, +3dB from doubling the power.

Say one 18TBX100 does 126 dB, two will do 132dB, four 138dB.
One 18SW115 does +4dB, 130dB, two will do 136dB, four 142dB.
The next +6dB requires another trailer ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
For the cone correction would it be best for the 100mm section in the centre to be parralel with the baffle or at the same 4° angle as the rest of the horn? Also as mentioned in a few posts earlier on, the 36° angle is too steep and causes an early expansion, playing around, 24° seems to provide a more even expansion to the first fold, I'm still plotting out a flattened horn and can then play around with the parameters a bit more.

1000004647.png
 
The initial expansion is closer to 17° when the cone correction line is added` (approx 19 ° to the baffle dependent on Driver cone profile). Of course this is still bigger than the 2.7° of the S2 -S3 section. Probably due to adapting from the original TH18 layout - Either the compression could be reduced or the entire S2 to S3 section tapered more. But that is the complication of applying this geometry - The speaker becomes driver specific to a degree and looses its one size suits many drivers layout that has seemed to be fairly sucessful!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I'm not agree with that, different angle than parallel with cone is not correction.
I built two boxes th118 in that way and i listened, good feedback and deep bass.
Not are finished yet, last steps to cover screws, edges and painting.
Many thanks and great people on this thread ⭐⭐⭐⭐
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20240315_095856.jpg
    IMG_20240315_095856.jpg
    266.7 KB · Views: 34
  • IMG_20240315_132139.jpg
    IMG_20240315_132139.jpg
    364.2 KB · Views: 35
  • IMG_20240315_132146.jpg
    IMG_20240315_132146.jpg
    288.9 KB · Views: 33
  • IMG_20240331_140533.jpg
    IMG_20240331_140533.jpg
    258.6 KB · Views: 31
  • IMG_20240316_110408.jpg
    IMG_20240316_110408.jpg
    278.3 KB · Views: 36
  • IMG_20240316_113535.jpg
    IMG_20240316_113535.jpg
    257.8 KB · Views: 36
  • IMG_20240316_110416.jpg
    IMG_20240316_110416.jpg
    272.1 KB · Views: 34
  • IMG_20240314_182355.jpg
    IMG_20240314_182355.jpg
    341.1 KB · Views: 30
  • IMG_20240315_093913.jpg
    IMG_20240315_093913.jpg
    290.6 KB · Views: 32
  • IMG_20240315_093905.jpg
    IMG_20240315_093905.jpg
    310.2 KB · Views: 29
  • IMG_20240314_175518.jpg
    IMG_20240314_175518.jpg
    280.2 KB · Views: 27
  • IMG_20240314_161553.jpg
    IMG_20240314_161553.jpg
    328.5 KB · Views: 27
  • IMG_20240314_180821.jpg
    IMG_20240314_180821.jpg
    306 KB · Views: 27
  • IMG_20240314_175513.jpg
    IMG_20240314_175513.jpg
    397.9 KB · Views: 25
  • IMG_20240314_175506.jpg
    IMG_20240314_175506.jpg
    326.7 KB · Views: 24
  • IMG_20240314_163819.jpg
    IMG_20240314_163819.jpg
    333.8 KB · Views: 32
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
First sound waves where hit the panel and create main pressure, like intake after exhaust. Second corner with second pressure, third corner create third pressure with 4 corners pushing out that pressure one by one, this is my opinion and is very clear for me if i did a mistake i'm here to listen.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20240331_162823.jpg
    IMG_20240331_162823.jpg
    320.8 KB · Views: 32
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Remember that the cone is, well, a cone. Consider how the CSA changes as you move from the edge of the cone to the center. It's very different to how the CSA will change between two non-parallel flat panels. As a result, if adjusting a panel to compensate for the cone, its angle will definitely not be the same as the cone's angle.
The angles though are based on the average CSA from Martins calculations (post #2,963) not the actual angle of the cone.
 
Last edited:
First sound waves where hit the panel and create main pressure, like intake after exhaust. Second corner with second pressure, third corner create third pressure with 4 corners pushing out that pressure one by one, this is my opinion and is very clear for me if i did a mistake i'm here to listen.
But none of the sound waves in the bandwidth have that short of a 1/4 wavelength ? So how are you going to create these ‘pressure/Velocity’ points at those fold/direction changes?
 
How does it sound at 200? The low end is fine, I can EQ and it's NOT level restricted. 4 12"s per side in this space as direct radiators are plenty of output, but a nice clean TH is pretty compelling and everything above 150-200 is already horn loaded. A pair of these per side would be a solid 30dB of headroom I'd never, ever touch.
 
Well, original project doesn't have deflectors with one exception for handling. Where the wave sound hit the corner creating deep bass. ++corners will be deep and deep + delay and directive decrease in front but help for a quality target of sound. Cheers
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20240402_163144.jpg
    IMG_20240402_163144.jpg
    109.6 KB · Views: 38
Also considering for ease of building making the
You won't lose much if any low-frequency performance if you build it like the example below, and it should be a slightly easier build, and I suspect a bit safer for the driver as well.

View attachment 1259621

Still playing around with models and considering if the ease of that 90 angle will affect things?

Screenshot 2024-04-03 083400.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Well, original project doesn't have deflectors with one exception for handling. Where the wave sound hit the corner creating deep bass. ++corners will be deep and deep + delay and directive decrease in front but help for a quality target of sound. Cheers
That drawing looks a lot different that what you built, the cone correction is right up to the baffle and then folded back on much steeper angles - does that just apply a lot great compression on the driver?
 
That drawing looks a lot different that what you built, the cone correction is right up to the baffle and then folded back on much steeper angles - does that just apply a lot great compression on the driver?
there is a safe area and it doesn't harm the driver on a wide range of models, it doesn't matter what you load in this case. if you have the measurements in hand, you can do the different model cone correction and get closer to it and make the compression higher, gaining extra power (driver stress)