DATS V2: Vas Measurement-Coaxial Driver
 User Name Stay logged in? Password
 Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Search

 Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

 Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you. Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
 12th September 2018, 08:03 PM #1 StefanWajs   diyAudio Member   Join Date: Sep 2018 Location: Texas DATS V2: Vas Measurement-Coaxial Driver To measure the Vas of a driver one must input a driver diameter (cone + ½ of the surround), from which, I assume, that DATS calculates the effective cone area used in the Vas calculation. I am in the process of measuring the TS parameters of a KEF SP1587 “Uni-Q” (coaxial) driver. My question is: would it accurate to use a calculated ‘effective diameter’ based upon normally measured diameter minus coaxial tweeter diameter? (That is, convert the result of the two diameter measurements to a fictional effective ‘diameter’). A second question did enter my mind: would it be more accurate to use to actual cone ‘surface area’ rather than ‘diameter’? (Although a bit more complex to measure, the surface area can be significantly different than an area based solely on the diameter, especially with ‘deep’ driver cones).
 13th September 2018, 01:16 AM #2 ernperkins   diyAudio Member     Join Date: Nov 2009 Unfortunately you can't just subtract diameters to determine the effective Sd because Sd is related to the square of the diameter. Use D(effective) = square root of (Dwoofer (squared) - Dtweeter(squared)). Use that diameter value for DATS. IIRC the SP1587 is the driver in the Q100 speaker. If so, a couple of other people have already measured it:LINK1 and LINK2. Search for Q100 in LINK2.
 13th September 2018, 01:43 AM #3 eriksquires   diyAudio Member     Join Date: May 2013 Calculate the area of the outer driver normally, then subtract the area (not the diameter) of the inner driver. This will give you the area of the donut. Best, E __________________ All of my successes and failures can be explained by my attempts at getting a girlfriend. All of them.
 13th September 2018, 06:47 PM #4 StefanWajs   diyAudio Member   Join Date: Sep 2018 Location: Texas Thanks for your very helpful reply re SP1587; both 'links' were extremely detailed/helpful. I will compare my TS measurements with those presented (especially the woofer cone area).
 13th September 2018, 06:51 PM #5 StefanWajs   diyAudio Member   Join Date: Sep 2018 Location: Texas Thanks for your reply. That is the method I would normally use. However, I still have a question re that 'donut' method versus measuring and using the actual cone area.
 13th September 2018, 08:13 PM #6 Pallas   diyAudio Member   Join Date: Aug 2004 That can’t be right. Both of those put the driver sensitivity under the observed system sensitivity. See KEF Q900 Speaker System HT Labs Measures | Sound & Vision __________________ Serious Audio Blog
 13th September 2018, 10:17 PM #7 eriksquires   diyAudio Member     Join Date: May 2013 You can go either way, but as others have noted, the T/s parameters are a good guide, but not gospel, for speaker alignment, especially with various amounts of stuffing. Don't spend too much time trying to attain 0.0001% resolution, and instead spend it measuring the results empirically. Best, E __________________ All of my successes and failures can be explained by my attempts at getting a girlfriend. All of them.
Pallas
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Aug 2004
Quote:
 Originally Posted by eriksquires You can go either way, but as others have noted, the T/s parameters are a good guide, but not gospel, for speaker alignment, especially with various amounts of stuffing.
I repeat, a technique that determines a raw woofer has a lower sensitivity than the commercial system employing that woofer is not valid as to that woofer.
__________________
Serious Audio Blog

TMM
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Pallas I repeat, a technique that determines a raw woofer has a lower sensitivity than the commercial system employing that woofer is not valid as to that woofer.
You should not trust the efficiency number calculated from an impedance measurement. In addition, this number is typically calculated at 1Watt instead of at a fixed input voltage so it somewhat meaningless for a driver that does not have a resistive 8ohm impedance. The fact that T/S model is only a 1st order approximation adds further inaccuracy.

To determine the sensitivity look no futher than a frequency response measurement at 2.83V/1m. I trust Zaph's measurement to be accurate here: about 89dB around Zmin (~200Hz). This is inline with KEFs own spec of 86dB for the Q100 once you factor in a few dB of baffle step compensation.

As with all systems, you should measure the actual woofer and tweeter yourself, at the same time in order to to gauge the difference in sensitivity and design the crossover. There is too much error in T/S efficiencies, measurement system calibration and driver production variation to do it any other way.

Last edited by TMM; 14th September 2018 at 10:34 AM.

ernperkins
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Nov 2009
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Pallas That can’t be right. Both of those put the driver sensitivity under the observed system sensitivity. See KEF Q900 Speaker System HT Labs Measures | Sound & Vision
(I guess TMM responds quicker than I do!)

What you're seeing is the old 1W/1m vs 2.83V/1m difference in measuring SPL. If you look at Zaph's T/S parameters you'll see 83.92 dB efficiency and a DC resistance of 3.0 ohms. Here's what he says about his T/S measurements:

"Also note that the SPL number on the T/S parameters is an efficiency number based on one watt. Additionally, this number is calculated rather than actual. The SPL shown on the response graphs is a sensitivity number based on 2.83 volts and is actual rather than calculated."

On the other hand, the Sound & Vision article states: "All passive loudspeakers were measured with grilles at a distance of 1 meter with a 2.83-volt input and scaled for display purposes." And it also states that the Q100 sensitivity to is "88 dB from 500 Hz to 2 kHz."

By my calculations the difference between 1W and 2.83V for a speaker with a DC resistance of 3 ohms is a tad over 4 dB, changing Zaph's 1W value of 83.92 dB to about 88 dB. This matches closely to the measured SPL in his frequency response graph which is done at 2.83V.

Last edited by ernperkins; 14th September 2018 at 02:26 PM.

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Forum Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Site     Site Announcements     Forum Problems Amplifiers     Solid State     Pass Labs     Tubes / Valves     Chip Amps     Class D     Power Supplies     Headphone Systems Source & Line     Analogue Source     Analog Line Level     Digital Source     Digital Line Level     PC Based Loudspeakers     Multi-Way     Full Range     Subwoofers     Planars & Exotics Live Sound     PA Systems     Instruments and Amps Design & Build     Parts     Equipment & Tools     Construction Tips     Software Tools General Interest     Room Acoustics & Mods     Music     diyAudio.com Articles     Car Audio     Everything Else Member Areas     Introductions     The Lounge     Clubs & Events     In Memoriam The Moving Image Commercial Sector     Swap Meet     Group Buys     The diyAudio Store     Vendor Forums         Vendor's Bazaar         Sonic Craft         Apex Jr         Audio Sector         Acoustic Fun         Chipamp         DIY HiFi Supply         Elekit         Elektor         Mains Cables R Us         Parts Connexion         Planet 10 hifi         Quanghao Audio Design         Siliconray Online Electronics Store         Tubelab     Manufacturers         AKSA         Audio Poutine         Musicaltech         Holton Precision Audio         CSS         exaDevices         Feastrex         GedLee         Head 'n' HiFi - Walter         Heatsink USA         miniDSP         SITO Audio         Twin Audio         Twisted Pear         Wild Burro Audio

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Kev06 Multi-Way 21 9th January 2015 02:30 AM hugobors Multi-Way 5 27th September 2011 06:21 PM Ipanema Multi-Way 6 15th June 2011 03:03 PM hans p Multi-Way 2 6th November 2008 12:24 PM theAnonymous1 Swap Meet 0 24th April 2007 01:09 AM

 New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:23 PM.

Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.