1/4/2023 0 Comments Response peak unibox![]() ![]()
Normally a value of 4 ohms would have been used for this driver. Note: We had to examine your images to discover that you used a Z of 3.926 ohms because you did not list its value in your post. RESPONSE PEAK UNIBOX PROWhen you entered an "Input Power" of 500 watts, BassBox Pro used Z = 3.926 ohms to calculate the input voltage to be 44.31 V ( 500 / sqr( 500 / 3.926 ) and this is why you got an excursion close to 18 mm. This is reasonably closed to the results produced by the other programs and we'd have to examine the underlying assumptions of the equations of each program to identify why they vary by as much as 1 mm. As for the peak excursion, repeat the test with an input voltage of 57.21 V (which is 40.45 / 0.707) and BassBox Pro will display a max cone displacement of 23.2 mm at 10 Hz. RESPONSE PEAK UNIBOX MANUALSFrom this it seems clear that BassBox Pro is displaying an RMS excursion and we'll have to correct the typo in our manuals which states that it is a peak excursion. ![]() With an input voltage of 40.45 V, BassBox Pro will display a max cone displacement of 16.4 mm at 10 Hz. By the way, you can force BassBox Pro to always accept "Input Voltage" with the Preferences window of the program. RESPONSE PEAK UNIBOX SOFTWAREThen you could have entered the voltage as you did for your other software and we believe your questions would have been answered. What you should have done was click on the "Input Power" label to the left of the input box in the upper right of the graph and the input box would have changed to "Input Voltage". As we explained earlier, our program actually uses voltage for the Cone Displacement graph simulation so it must convert the power to volts and it does this based on the driver's net nominal impedance (Z). The first thing we observed was that you did not specify the "Input Voltage" directly in the BassBox Pro simulation and this produced an "apples to oranges" comparison. We read your post (if your user name on Linearteam's forum is "SubDevo") as well as your link to your images. RESPONSE PEAK UNIBOX UPGRADEWe're sorry for the delay in responding-we're in the middle of upgrading to new security software across our network and it has slowed our response time until the upgrade is complete. I welcome any and all comments regarding this test. If anything is confusing or unclear, feel free to ask! Hopefully, you will be able to understand my post! ( I did repeat myself a few times) If using BB6P, you MUST enter PEAK input power (2*Pe RMS) in order for the results to be relevant. RESPONSE PEAK UNIBOX DRIVERIf harristech specifies that the graphs are PEAK, then why are they so different? I believe BB6P is giving a user a false impression that a driver will not exceed xmax in their simulations. The other 4 simulation softwares assume input power is RMS and scales graphs correctly as PEAK. Now, this excursion graph is similar to BB6P, but in BB6P it does not show excursion limiting! If WinISD is changed to RMS, you will note that Xmax line changes and the project is still excursion limited. With this assumption, BB6P graphs are inline with PEAK values (and correct excursion limiting), ONLY if input power is PEAK (2*Pe RMS).īB6P assumes input power is PEAK (2*Pe RMS) then excursion graphs are realistic(PEAK), and results are similar to other simulations. 432 difference is then probably due to rounding.īB6P only shows excursion limiting with 1000w input, leading me to believe that BB6P is assuming input power is PEAK not RMS. So Vin = sqr(Pe*Znom).īB6P computed Znom = 3.92628 ohms (1.2*Re) for this driver. ![]() I figured out the small differences are mainly attributable to the way BB6P converts Power to equivalent Voltage. I can't account for these small differences. IMO, something strange is going on in BB6P. You need to double the power input for BB6P to bring it inline with the other simulations.Īnd even then, excursion is 1.85mm greater than PEAK avg 500w. (The last image on this page is an animated gif, with the PEAK excursion graphs scaled and overlayed. I own this Driver.Ĭlick link below to view an html page of more images from test. These are measured parameters, not manufacturer specs. NOTE: Subwoofer Simulator only accepts Voltage.Įquation used: Vin = sqr(Pe*Re) = 40.447 Volts Unlined, All Losses set to 10,000 (infinite/lossless) These are the steps taken to help ensure these comparisons are valid.Īll softwares used in this test were set to the following parameters: LSD (Loudspeaker System Design - my own software - unreleased) ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |