![unibox speaker design unibox speaker design](http://www.danmarx.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Mini-J-Two-Ways-16.jpg)
and if it does, you can use the settings as a blueprint for the Purifi chassis. If your simulation program does not approximately reach the values of the real measurement, it is crap useless
UNIBOX SPEAKER DESIGN DRIVER
WF118WA-02 in seal box as midrange driver in 1.9L speaker enclosure with dense damping.
UNIBOX SPEAKER DESIGN SOFTWARE
If the simulation software gives roughly the same result, the simulation for the Purifi chassis should also be correct.Ĭlick to expand.This is the default in VituixCAD, but can be changed. The resonance frequency was 96Hz and Qtc about 1.05. The near field measurement of the woofer showed the following (near field measurement - green, target function Q 1.05 - red, measurement with baffle step correction 0.3x1m - yellow): The gross internal volume of the speaker enclosure was 3.5L with tight damping of the inner volume.įor the simulation I would not use the manufacturer TSP, but the one from a review magazine. I used the SB17NAC35-4 as midrange driver in a project. In order to find out how well the used simulation software approaches reality, its results should be compared with a real example. With 0.7Ohm series resistor f3 is about 77Hz and a slight hump. With VituixCAD I get about the same result. If the inner volume of the cabinet is less tightly stuffed with damping material, the virtual volume is reduced accordingly. With a series resistor of 0.7 ohms a slight hump results.ĭue to the assumed dense damping of the inner volume I calculated with 22% virtual volume increase. Thanks!Ĭompared your specifications with the software I use.Ĭome to slightly different values f3 is about 80Hz with a Qtc of 0.72 and the assumption that much damping material is used, without series resistor of 0.7 Ohm.
![unibox speaker design unibox speaker design](http://audio.claub.net/software/kougaard/images/ubvbg4.gif)
UNIBOX SPEAKER DESIGN VERIFICATION
I trust his judgement, but Unibox is old enough that would help to have independent verification of its results. I have seen a more sensible result from Bassbox when the driver EBP indicates the driver is suited for a closed box, but seems to not like to fully model a closed box for a driver that is more suited for vented box.Īt this point, if anyone has modeled this Purifi woofer and can replicate DDF’s design, would be useful to know. The most it will do is increase f3 when you would expect a decrease. Under the same conditions, Bassbox will not produce a result. With a roughly 6 liter tightly sealed box, Unibox manages an f3 in the upper 60s. The greater difference is in the box damping.
![unibox speaker design unibox speaker design](http://www.danmarx.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/crossoverimage.png)
Unibox‘s model lowers f3 much more than Bassbox for the same resistance. Bassbox uses value of 20 and it appears Unibox uses a value of 7.Īs I start to add back inline resistance, more differences appear. The difference in the models appears to have been the default for QL. This resulted in a 3.5 liter box with an f3 around 87 Hz. Using different approaches, we both are able to align Bassbox and Unibox for a basic box calc. He has a personal family matter to address, so thought I would share our progress. Just in case others might be interested, and I have been working on this offline.