Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Finite-element analysis of a 6" woofer
Finite-element analysis of a 6" woofer
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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10th October 2018, 03:19 PM   #21
Dave Zan is offline Dave Zan  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by panson_hk View Post
Without the dust cap, the cone bends at 1.474 kHz as shown...
Now the educational part starts!
I don't know if you have read the current thread about cone so-called "break up".
Some of the claims there are definitely incorrect, I hope your simulations will provide better information.
I am particularly interested in the radially symmetric modes, to see the extent to which the surround resonance contributes to the response of the speaker.
It will be simpler if the surround contribution is small, so we only have to consider the behaviour of the cone itself.
I have seen discussions of surround resonance but not found much data, so I look forward to more of your results.

Best wishes
David
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2018, 01:50 AM   #22
panson_hk is offline panson_hk  Hong Kong
diyAudio Member
 
panson_hk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy19191 View Post
Plate and shell elements are different. There are also different kinds of these types of element which work well for some situations but not for others. The degrees of freedom they discard can be required near boundaries or where more general elements are used.

If you are not experienced using these elements it may be wise after you have built a full model to run a few checks to prove that you have not suppressed important degrees of freedom and have used sufficient resolution. That is, setup a representative simulation and repeat it using several levels of grid refinement everywhere, low and high order elements, elements that suppress no degrees of freedom and those that suppress ones considered unimportant,... and compare the results looking for differences.
Thanks Andy. I will use the thin-walled element carefully.

My FEA code (midas NFX) uses plate/shell interchangeably. It has membrane element. I believe membrane of midas NFX is equivalent to plate (a more common name) of other codes.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2018, 03:07 AM   #23
panson_hk is offline panson_hk  Hong Kong
diyAudio Member
 
panson_hk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Zan View Post
Now the educational part starts!
I don't know if you have read the current thread about cone so-called "break up".
Some of the claims there are definitely incorrect, I hope your simulations will provide better information.
I am particularly interested in the radially symmetric modes, to see the extent to which the surround resonance contributes to the response of the speaker.
It will be simpler if the surround contribution is small, so we only have to consider the behaviour of the cone itself.
I have seen discussions of surround resonance but not found much data, so I look forward to more of your results.

Best wishes
David
Thank you David.

I aware of the thread, but have not read it thoughtfully. It is a main topic (break up) for my study.

Elastic modulus and damping of rubber is frequency dependent (how about foam). I wonder using constant elastic modulus/damping ratio in simulation would result in good result. On the other hand, the freq. dependent effect may be not as big as other effects.

I have been reading a paper http://lab.fs.uni-lj.si/ladisk/data/...20analysis.pdf
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2018, 07:53 AM   #24
Dave Zan is offline Dave Zan  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by panson_hk View Post
...Elastic modulus...is frequency dependent (how about foam)....
Yes, I recall Klippel has some equipment to test exactly this, so presumably it is sufficiently important to justify his considerable prices.
There should be some information on the website too.

Bohdan Raczynski did his own FEA analysis and achieved an impressive match with measured results.
http://www.bodziosoftware.com.au/Cone_Break_Up.zip
I don't know how detailed the frequency dependent materials models were.
I will email him and ask for more details.

Best wishes
David
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2018, 08:16 AM   #25
panson_hk is offline panson_hk  Hong Kong
diyAudio Member
 
panson_hk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Hi David,

I have seen the Klippep MPM tool. Based on the available information, it doesn't seem to provide modulus and damping across the audio band. It provides a single value for each.

Based on their AES 2018 paper, they include that in a different way. The method of MPM is not good for higher frequencies. I guess we need that of dynamical mechanical analyzer (DMA).

AES E-Library >> Optimal Material Parameter Estimation by Fitting Finite Element Simulations to Loudspeaker Measurements

Thanks for the Bohdan's analysis. The SoundEasy guy, right?

Last edited by panson_hk; 11th October 2018 at 08:38 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2018, 08:57 AM   #26
Dave Zan is offline Dave Zan  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by panson_hk View Post
Thanks for the Bohdan's analysis. The SoundEasy guy...?
Yes, maybe the SoundEasy bloke since he is in Australia
I didn't notice the Klippel MPM limitations until after I posted my comment and too late to edit.
Just to fit the FEA to measurements seems reasonable, also because the article you linked in #23 shows the parameters vary only slowly and smoothly.

Best wishes
David

Last edited by Dave Zan; 11th October 2018 at 09:08 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2018, 11:23 AM   #27
andy19191 is offline andy19191  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: -
Quote:
Originally Posted by panson_hk View Post
Elastic modulus and damping of rubber is frequency dependent (how about foam). I wonder using constant elastic modulus/damping ratio in simulation would result in good result. On the other hand, the freq. dependent effect may be not as big as other effects.

I have been reading a paper http://lab.fs.uni-lj.si/ladisk/data/...20analysis.pdf
I have only glanced at the paper but it looks typical for the simple largely unphysical damping models in general FE codes: some experimental effort to provide information to tune the damping model for a particular geometry. If the damping is tuned to be good in one frequency range it will almost always be at the expense of others.

Alternatively one can specify damping in terms of the modes rather than space (probably depending on the FE package). The problem here is that damping in the surround, cone and spider is different and varies differently with frequency. It can however account for damping in the glued joints which isn't straightforward in space.

Damping plays a significant role in the detailed motion of a speaker driver particularly for soft cone drivers. The simple models in most general FE codes are fairly unphysical and rely on being tuned up with supporting experimental information. The resulting model may or may not be adequate depending on the questions you want it to answer.

More sophisticated damping models exist but are rarely available in general purpose FE codes. They typically require the material properties to be defined on a nomograph something like this. An example of their use with an FE code is given here. If you are looking to use FE simulations to investigate the detailed motion of high performance soft cone drivers like the Scan-Speak study mentioned earlier my guess is this is the level of damping model that is likely to be required. For other studies the simpler damping models may be sufficient.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th October 2018, 01:00 AM   #28
panson_hk is offline panson_hk  Hong Kong
diyAudio Member
 
panson_hk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Thank you Andy for your valuable information.

What do you think about elastic modulus linearity? I use linear elastic modulus in static analysis with nonlinear geometry enabled. I think this is a typical setting. I wonder actual stress-strain data of tensile test should be used to improve accuracy.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th October 2018, 10:30 AM   #29
andy19191 is offline andy19191  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: -
Quote:
Originally Posted by panson_hk View Post
What do you think about elastic modulus linearity? I use linear elastic modulus in static analysis with nonlinear geometry enabled. I think this is a typical setting. I wonder actual stress-strain data of tensile test should be used to improve accuracy.
The assumptions made depend on the information you want from the simulations and the resources available. A general answer isn't really possible.

If you are studying the combined large deflection nonlinearities of the surround, spider and motor in order to maximise the linear region, smooth behaviour beyond xmax or something similar then it is likely appropriate subject to the soft parts not changing their properties substantially at relevant frequencies (likely lowest in the passband), extensions or, possibly, temperatures.

It is likely to be inappropriate when studying the forced response of a speaker driver over a frequency range. Given normal computing resources and the desire to vary quite a few driver parameters in order to work towards an optimum design this usually means some form of modal analysis. This normally assumes small deflections in the geometrically linear region and material properties that are linear or efficiently linearizable within a modal analysis.
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th October 2018, 12:19 PM   #30
andy19191 is offline andy19191  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: -
Any more progress this week?
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Finite-element analysis of a 6" wooferHide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FS: 8 Finite Element Ceraballs johnnyk9 Swap Meet 1 12th July 2012 10:21 AM
Finite Element Method Magnetics (FEMM) Edmond Stuart Software Tools 9 16th April 2012 07:19 AM
FS: 8 Finite Element Ceraballs johnnyk9 Swap Meet 1 16th December 2011 10:30 PM
Finite Element Methods + Matlab thadman Multi-Way 2 23rd January 2010 02:45 AM
Boundary element analysis software AndrewJ Multi-Way 6 15th December 2004 06:01 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:27 PM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 14.29%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2018 diyAudio
Wiki