Home » Audio » Speaker » 1:1 throat area
1:1 throat area [message #19107] Tue, 20 February 2007 15:20 Go to next message
DMoore is currently offline  DMoore
Messages: 58
Registered: May 2009
Location: Seattle
Baron
I think one consideration is the size of the diaphragm being employed in a 1:1 throat area.

It is conceivable that a relatively small cone in a low Fc horn with a proper mouth size would provide enough pathway length to achieve a considerable amount of acoustic resistance applied to the cone.

As the cone diameter and the corresponding throat size increase, the horn pathway would shorten for a given Fc and mouthsize, and the acoustic resistance would be reduced as a matter of course. The resulting response due to increased impedance/reaactance caused by a too-short-horn would be more "peaky" in such a case. The typical design response is to raise the Fc of the horn in question.

The matter seems to be related to overall pathway length, mouth size, and Fc, and the diaphragm/throat size is subjective in relation to that consideration.

DM

Re: 1:1 throat area [message #19108 is a reply to message #19107] Tue, 20 February 2007 15:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DMoore is currently offline  DMoore
Messages: 58
Registered: May 2009
Location: Seattle
Baron
Sorry. meant to be a response to horn questions thread below...
Re: 1:1 throat area [message #19109 is a reply to message #19108] Tue, 20 February 2007 23:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Cuppa Joe is currently offline  Cuppa Joe
Messages: 103
Registered: May 2009
Viscount
I'm considering a 10" driver (again) for this application, as opposed to a 12" as used in the MSL-4. I'd also consider a pair of stacked 8" drivers (for power handling) if necessary, to get a longer horn for the mouth size. It's all just a clump of ideas for now!

Re: 1:1 throat area [message #19110 is a reply to message #19109] Wed, 21 February 2007 09:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18784
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

There's also the matter of front and rear chamber volume. Front chamber area plays a big part in upper frequency response and ripple, acting something like an acoustic low-pass filter.

I really like using Hornresp, it does a great job and lets you compare several designs before making and testing a physical model.

Re: 1:1 throat area [message #19111 is a reply to message #19110] Wed, 21 February 2007 14:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DMoore is currently offline  DMoore
Messages: 58
Registered: May 2009
Location: Seattle
Baron
The front chamber MIGHT be a moot point in a 1:1 throat ratio, seems to me. Although I suppose one could add one to limit the higher frequency bandpass as needed. An appropriately targeted crossover point would accomplish the same thing, but then there are numerous other considerations that come into play.

If employed in a less-than 1:1 diaphragm-to-throat ratio, the front chamber would act as a low-pass filter by attenuating higher frequencies. In essence, the front chamber is an acoustic filter by its physical dimensions and could give a -6db rolloff on the upper frequency bandpass.

A horn that lacks a front-chamber (1:1) PER SE would be limited in its upper band pass as a result of foldings (if any), and the mass rolloff, electrical impedance, etc., of the driver, amongst other considerations.

DM

Re: 1:1 throat area [message #19112 is a reply to message #19111] Wed, 21 February 2007 20:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18784
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

The front chamber is absolutely a mute point when the driver isn't necked down by the throat. The front chamber volume is zero. And, yes, I agree, one could make something that had a front chamber that then had an opening that was equal to diaphragm area. Then there would be a front chamber volume, but I don't think that's what you or CuppaJoe were talking about. I really just brought it up because the front chamber volume is a parameter to be configured when designing a horn. When the throat area equals the diaphragm area and there is no front chamber, the characteristics are different than the same horn with a compression chamber of some size. It's all configurable, like setting the values of capacitance, inductance and resistance in a reactive circuit.


Re: 1:1 throat area [message #19113 is a reply to message #19112] Wed, 21 February 2007 22:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Cuppa Joe is currently offline  Cuppa Joe
Messages: 103
Registered: May 2009
Viscount
I was knocking around some ideas for a low-compression throat section which would mount over the driver from the front of the horn. I imagine it to be more of a smoothing transitional guide intended to reduce reflections of higher frequencies. Maybe it will cover only the driver's frame, maybe it will encompass the surround, as well. Is there any real harm if the throat expansion is a wider angle than that of the horn walls?

Re: 1:1 throat area [message #19115 is a reply to message #19113] Thu, 22 February 2007 10:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18784
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

Generally, the closer to the diaphragm, the more impact flare changes make. I would not want the throat expansion rate to be greater than the rest of the flare, unless the area where this happened was small in relation to wavelength through the bandwidth of the device. On the other hand, there may be cases where this kind of shape smooths the response curve or does something otherwise beneficial. I'd sure check it with Hornresp to see what effect that short section at the throat entrance will have.

Re: 1:1 throat area [message #19117 is a reply to message #19115] Thu, 22 February 2007 11:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DMoore is currently offline  DMoore
Messages: 58
Registered: May 2009
Location: Seattle
Baron
That example would be a multiple-flare horn or a "rubber throat". Not typical of a "straight" horn, though. Better used in a longer folded type bass horn to reduce throat impedance.

On the other hand, though, the 1978 EV midrange horn (Keele) US patent # 4,071,112 has 3 separate flare rates for purposes of bandwidth and coverage pattern. So there is no real limitation as to what you can do if you can achieve a balance of all the variables involved to arrive at your particular goals.

DM

Re: 1:1 throat area [message #19118 is a reply to message #19117] Thu, 22 February 2007 11:49 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18784
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

Klipsch's rubber throat does that, you're right. But as you've said, it was done on undersized basshorns (smaller than 1/4λ) having compression and a front chamber. Might be useful on a smaller scale for a midhorn though, so I think it was worth noting. Good call.

The use of changing wall angle to increase uniformity of a constant directivity horn is a different matter, because it addresses the loss of pattern control. What CuppaJoe is talking about is widening a very small area near the throat. This will not widen or narrow the pattern at any frequency. It might cause a reflection at high frequency, hopefully, out of band. But the pattern would not be set by this feature because the rest of the wall angle constricts radiation to a narrower pattern.


Previous Topic: comb filter distorsion
Next Topic: Adding Tweeter to Full Range Driver
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Nov 18 23:11:45 CST 2024

Sponsoring Organizations

DIY Audio Projects
DIY Audio Projects
OddWatt Audio
OddWatt Audio
Pi Speakers
Pi Speakers
Prosound Shootout
Prosound Shootout
Miller Audio
Miller Audio
Tubes For Amps
TubesForAmps.com

Lone Star Audiofest