This is either very wrong or I have still not understood diffraction from baffle edge

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
diyAudio Moderator
Joined 2008
Paid Member
We are playing at very high frequencies which could make things sensitive. This isn't a spherical source, but the conical shaped diaphragm looks even worse. Also the length of the line may not be at the right scale to see the solution clearly.

What is the cause of the nulls?
 
It looks to be behaving more like a driver in a flat baffle although no nulls directly on axis
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2020-10-11 at 2.40.05 PM.png
    Screenshot 2020-10-11 at 2.40.05 PM.png
    933.5 KB · Views: 238
  • Screenshot 2020-10-11 at 2.44.43 PM.png
    Screenshot 2020-10-11 at 2.44.43 PM.png
    684.7 KB · Views: 238
  • Screenshot 2020-10-11 at 2.47.38 PM.png
    Screenshot 2020-10-11 at 2.47.38 PM.png
    710.6 KB · Views: 230
Last edited:
Hmm. Can we deduce from this that at higher frequencies where the driver operates as a point source, there are fewer 'nulls' but as the driver produces longer waveforms, the 'nulls' reappear?
The modelling appears to be consistent and the next question would be how closely does it represent an actual physical driver and how do we go about evaluating this?

Does the same pattern change significantly if the angle of the triangles is doubled to 60 degrees? Also, can you can alter those 'gap triangles' to have curved sides like a parabolic function, and if so, would this change the overall pattern of nulls (assuming such a thing is possible)?

I've often wondered if a waveguide on a FR driver baffle would reduce the uneven radiating pattern like the spherical chamber does and here we are, actually modelling a similar thing, and including the rear surface too!

Thanks for trying these things for me too - both of you - it's really interesting.

… bedtime now.
 
We are playing at very high frequencies which could make things sensitive.

When I suggested a donut/toru, my idea was for a LF dipole source, not a HF waveguide. The sims that you are showing seem to be at a very HF - short wavelengths. I would not think that such a design would work well above the point where the wavelength/2 is about the size of the source.
 
diyAudio Moderator
Joined 2008
Paid Member
I would not think that such a design would work well above the point where the wavelength/2 is about the size of the source.
Yes, I was thinking it would be better to come back to the frequency where a plain dipole sees its first HOM, and work up slowly in frequency.

It began because the sim has no frequency scale.

Not sure whether OS can bring out a very long straight source to spherical? (Though it's probably moot with trying to use drivers this way into breakup). I feel if so it would take a device impractically larger than the current toys. Better cross that bridge when we get to it.
 

Attachments

  • 1SUW0.png
    1SUW0.png
    193.1 KB · Views: 167
Hmm. Can we deduce from this that at higher frequencies where the driver operates as a point source, there are fewer 'nulls' but as the driver produces longer waveforms, the 'nulls' reappear?
The sim doesn't know anything about drivers. The waveguide eliminates the largest on axis null which is the first one above the dipole peak. A flat baffle with round over doesn't have the same effect, see attachment. The sim isn't clear on the first null, tricky to get frequency low enough to show it properly.
Does the same pattern change significantly if the angle of the triangles is doubled to 60 degrees? Also, can you can alter those 'gap triangles' to have curved sides like a parabolic function, and if so, would this change the overall pattern of nulls (assuming such a thing is possible)?
It becomes more horn like if the angle is increased, not something we want I don't think? I've tried parabola, no real difference
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2020-10-12 at 9.32.03 AM.png
    Screenshot 2020-10-12 at 9.32.03 AM.png
    845.4 KB · Views: 205
Last edited:
Good idea, thanks - another 'outside the box' thinking - love it! (I wouldn't have thought about that).

I was cogitating about the possible difference between the front and rear radiating pattern but getting a bit ahead of myself.

Interestingly, I don't think the 'null' points at the rear are especially significant IF you use diffusers or distance from wall behind is above that critical 5 feet (I'm playing with Tim Perry's 'leanfusers' at the moment) but could be wrong about this.
 
Last edited:
Hmm, I wonder if we have something like this over here …

One idle thought seeing that one with rope on the perimeter is to make a whole new one using coiled up thick rope and covering it with material - it might have to wait until we're released from confinement/lockdown/etc that we're all getting fedup about and our media is doing very selective reporting ...

It looks like you are heading down the same path and guys like that Malthouse aren't helping
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.