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

Software Tools SPICE, PCB CAD, speaker design and measurement software, calculators

vent length not given in WINISD means?
vent length not given in WINISD means?
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 12th October 2019, 12:04 AM   #21
cT equals piD is offline cT equals piD  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Maine, Bangor-area
I did have the impression that for a given driver and type of alignment that the box size and tuning frequency were pretty much etched in stone. Of the three books that I have referred to for designing a vented system, none of them suggest that you can stray from how the alignment is supposed to be. However working with a freq. response simulator, as Tim showed, can show to what extent you can fiddle with those two parameters without substantially degrading the response. That is good to know.

Thanks to all for your replies,
Pete
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th October 2019, 10:24 AM   #22
LightBit is offline LightBit  Slovenia
diyAudio Member
 
LightBit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Alignments were made in days when simulation was not easy. You would just select alignment and check in table and you knew what you will get.
Today alignments are still useful as starting point.
__________________
SpeakerSim - cross platform open source speaker simulation software
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th October 2019, 10:36 AM   #23
kimmosto is offline kimmosto  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
kimmosto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kuopio
Quote:
Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
Alignments were made in days when simulation was not easy...
and crossovers were passive and drivers had high(er) Qe. Now we have very low Qe drivers and half of diy-systems are active so table alignments have lost 90% of their significance. Tuning has whole new targets different than just certain shape of frequency response to half space.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2019, 01:13 AM   #24
cT equals piD is offline cT equals piD  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Maine, Bangor-area
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmosto View Post
and crossovers were passive and drivers had high(er) Qe. Now we have very low Qe drivers and half of diy-systems are active so table alignments have lost 90% of their significance. Tuning has whole new targets different than just certain shape of frequency response to half space.
Isn't it the case that what has happened is that the physics and math (developed by Thiele and Small) behind the table alignments has now been applied to computer simulation? So this means that the computer simulation has supplanted the tables because the simulation is simpler and easier to use than the tables, and allows for greater flexibility in developing an alignment according to what one wants. However, even in computer simulation, what Thiele and Small discovered and developed is still being applied (I would think).

To my understanding, low Qe and an active vs passive crossover (assuming a well-designed passive one), does not affect the operation of a vented system at all. One of the parameters of an alignment table is Qt, which can be quite low corresponding to low Qe.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2019, 08:25 AM   #25
kimmosto is offline kimmosto  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
kimmosto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kuopio
Quote:
Originally Posted by cT equals piD View Post
To my understanding, low Qe and an active vs passive crossover (assuming a well-designed passive one), does not affect the operation of a vented system at all. One of the parameters of an alignment table is Qt, which can be quite low corresponding to low Qe.
Yes, but very low Qe probably leads to very small box volume and high f3 with alignment tables because alignment target was (decades ago) just certain response shape due to restrictions of passive XO which was de facto standard.
Today we can maintain large volume and low tuning also with very low Qe drivers and make certain response shape with active filter. Modern target of alignment could be low tuning to reduce GD or smaller excursion at low bass or whatever except certain response shape.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2019, 09:17 AM   #26
Sven R is offline Sven R
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Default WINIsd - port size and location question (?)

Greetings,

When I calculate 1x12¨ vented speaker enclosure (to contain also one H.F. unit in a two-way speaker) with WINIsd new version (7 or something like that...),

1. I have a choice of round and rectangular vents. I choose rectangular, one vent.

2. I have a choice of a smaller or larger rectangular vent:

2.A - in this case a vent 0.102 x 0.047 meters, which is area of 0.0048 sqare meters, or 48 sq. centimeters - length of vent is 0.12 meters, 1st port resonance of 1,434 kHz - and

2.B a smaller vent 0.082 x 0.047 m, which is area of 0.0039 sq. meters or 39 sq. centimeters, with length of 0.091 meters, 1st port resonance 1.88 kHz

My questions are:

Q1: Is it OK to use smaller vent (my preferrence, makes a better-easier box design). Do I loose something? I also like higher port resonance since it is above the X-over point to H.F. unit, which is around 1.2 kHz.

Q2: Is it OK to place the rectangular vent at the BACK of the enclosure instead of the usual front placement. Is it OK to use the bottom of the speaker enclosure as one side of rectangular vent wood ¨box¨ that would be placed (carpentry work, of course)?

Any experienced, knowledgeable help is much appreciated. Thanks, Sven
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2019, 02:50 PM   #27
LightBit is offline LightBit  Slovenia
diyAudio Member
 
LightBit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Q1: Smaller (narrower) ports can/will create more noise (higher air speed).
Q2: Back is fine (if you have space behind). You can use bottom as part of vent, but it will change tuning a bit.


Round ports (preferably flared) are better than rectangular regarding noise.
__________________
SpeakerSim - cross platform open source speaker simulation software
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th October 2019, 03:04 PM   #28
Sven R is offline Sven R
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Thank you!
  Reply With Quote

Reply


vent length not given in WINISD means?Hide 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
WinISD & vent volume. SpirosZ Subwoofers 15 5th February 2013 04:23 PM
Vent length question DAMIC Multi-Way 4 20th September 2006 06:53 AM
Vent Length eag Subwoofers 3 26th February 2006 02:31 AM
Vent length in subwoofer simulator bobo1on1 Subwoofers 3 28th October 2005 05:11 PM
Vent Match term in WinISD blu_line Multi-Way 1 18th May 2003 02:09 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:45 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 15.00%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2019 diyAudio
Wiki