In Reply to: Re: From Wayne Parham - Re: Patentable claim posted by Mark Seaton on July 6, 2002 at 18:26:34:
Hi Mark!You wrote:
> > In the 16.5" horn the midranges are loaded from about 300Hz well
> > past 900Hz(three octaves) where the driver rolls off in the 1.2kHz
> > range.A 1/4 wavelength of 1.2Khz is 2.8 inches. Are the distances between midrange diaphragms smaller than this? Is the distance between the midrange cluster and the compression driver shorter than this? Is the diameter of each individual diaphragms smaller than this? And not center-to-center, but furthest radiating surfaces - are they within 2.8 inches?
That is a mighty small area to try to keep stuff packed into, trying to establish a 1/4 wavelength maximum distance for the coupling that is claimed.
> > What we find is that if we extend the the mouth of the horn out
> > further, as we move further from the apex past the midrange loading
> > point, we will find a location where the expansion rate will co-incide
> > with what is required to load the octaves below the midrange's low
> > end cuttoff. This process continues out to however large we want
> > to make the horn.I know that you must realize the implications of what you are saying. You are saying that an infinitely large horn will provide loading of the entire audio range, in fact, above and below it.
What I'm saying is that this cannot be the case. The only scenareo where the horn meets the conditions of the Webster equation is when the diaphragm is loaded at the horn's apex. I'm not saying that the device has no merit if the diaphragms are installed somewhere else, but I'm saying it doesn't fit the model anymore and it has been shown to reduce efficiency.
The further out the drivers are placed towards the mouth, the more of a rapid transition you have from diaphragm to open space. The larger the rapid discontinuity is, the more the diaphragm acts as if it were driving into free space. This, in turn, reduces impedance matching and effectiveness of the horn as an impedance transformer.
Wayne
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: From Wayne Parham - Re: Patentable claim - Wayne Parham 07/7/0201:39:22 07/7/02 (0)