PDA

View Full Version : Critique the Box



acreature
05-01-2012, 10:22 PM
Overall Dimensions:
(w)23-5/8" x (h)12" x (d)14-3/4"

1 cu ft for Diamond Audio D310D4
46-1/8" port length @ 2"x10.5"

Should be tuned between 32-33hz
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v602/acreature/Box/PortedFusionBoxD310D4.jpg

Close? Or no cigar?

Buck
05-01-2012, 10:57 PM
Seems like a pretty long port what's the total cubic footage of the box?

Kangaroux
05-01-2012, 10:58 PM
Seems like a pretty long port what's the total cubic footage of the box?

It's 1 cube. OP, I would make the port 1.75" wide, that should cut down your length a good bit.

hispls
05-01-2012, 10:58 PM
Seems like a pretty long port what's the total cubic footage of the box?

He said 1 cube.
I don't like a port with that many bends in it, but whatever. Should function better than prefab.

Buck
05-01-2012, 11:01 PM
Apparently I can't read. It looks alright to me, may want to cut down on the port area some.

acreature
05-01-2012, 11:09 PM
1cu ft

I figured the cu ft plus driver displacement, then calculated the port at 2" wide x 10.5 tall, and worked the port around the original 1cu ft box.

I wanted a wider slot (2") than the 1.5". The 1.5" had me at about 33-36 inches in length. Can't recall exactly, but the narrower the slot, the shorter the port.

Hope I am not confusing.

Per the 12volt "Slot Port Length Calculator":
port width @ 2", port height @ 10.5", box cu ft @ 1, @ 33hz = 48 inches of port.

Per carstereo "Calculate Your Vent Length":

Same specs as above = 47 inches of port.

I could not get WinISD to save what specs I had for the D310D4, so didn't use it.


edit, just saw that you saw, ha!

acreature
05-01-2012, 11:13 PM
He said 1 cube.
I don't like a port with that many bends in it, but whatever. Should function better than prefab.

Agreed.

I didn't want to risk a smaller width port and gain port noise. At 1.5", I would still have at least two corners. Unless I widened the box and lessened the depth, I see no alternative.

Ideas?

acreature
05-01-2012, 11:15 PM
It's 1 cube. OP, I would make the port 1.75" wide, that should cut down your length a good bit.I'll try to work that out. I reckon killing off that last choke point front left (speaker side) and opening it up would make a noticeable difference?

hispls
05-01-2012, 11:15 PM
Agreed.

I didn't want to risk a smaller width port and gain port noise. At 1.5", I would still have at least two corners. Unless I widened the box and lessened the depth, I see no alternative.

Ideas?

Passive radiator?

Buck
05-01-2012, 11:20 PM
Dude the turns in the box aren't going to make that much of a difference plus he bent them in the right way. All he needs to do imo is bring down the port area a little.

acreature
05-01-2012, 11:21 PM
Passive radiator?I have never messed with that idea. Not sure if I want to after doing a quick read. Above my pay grade and skill level. :emb:

acreature
05-01-2012, 11:25 PM
All he needs to do imo is bring down the port area a little.

Slimming the port to 1.75 drops me to 41-42 in of port.

Buck
05-01-2012, 11:30 PM
The length of the port is to achieve tuning. The port isn't too long, just too much port area. You see what I'm saying? You're dropping square inches, not port length.

Kangaroux
05-01-2012, 11:34 PM
The general rule of thumb for port area is 12-16 sqin. per cubic foot. You have 1 cube, so you need 12 - 16 sqin. of port. With a 1.75" wide port, you have roughly 19 in^2 of port area -- which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Ideally for smaller boxes you want to keep the port ratio to 1:8. The minimum port width I would do with a port that's 10.5" tall is ~1.25".

acreature
05-01-2012, 11:38 PM
The length of the port is to achieve tuning. The port isn't too long, just too much port area. You see what I'm saying? You're dropping square inches, not port length.Lord. My head hurts. I'll keep my day job.

Buck
05-01-2012, 11:41 PM
Lord. My head hurts. I'll keep my day job.

I saw the post before you edited and you were right for the most part man.

acreature
05-01-2012, 11:43 PM
The general rule of thumb for port area is 12-16 sqin. per cubic foot. You have 1 cube, so you need 12 - 16 sqin. of port. With a 1.75" wide port, you have roughly 19 in^2 of port area -- which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Ideally for smaller boxes you want to keep the port ratio to 1:8. The minimum port width I would do with a port that's 10.5" tall is ~1.25".So, 1.5" would be ideal = 15.75 in^2

Kangaroux
05-01-2012, 11:48 PM
So, 1.5" would be ideal = 15.75 in^2

Yeah pretty much. The more port you have the peakier it will be so if you want something with a flatter response go with the 1.5"

acreature
05-01-2012, 11:49 PM
Aiight. Appreciate the patience and advice.

hispls
05-01-2012, 11:53 PM
I have never messed with that idea. Not sure if I want to after doing a quick read. Above my pay grade and skill level. :emb:

Just expensive. Buy one of the TC sounds ones from Parts express and you can add and remove mass in guess and test fashion until you acheive desired tuning.

acreature
05-02-2012, 12:02 AM
My have to play with that idea. On a one month staycation, so I will be wasting a lot of time in the tool shed.

Kangaroux
05-02-2012, 12:07 AM
My have to play with that idea. On a one month staycation, so I will be wasting a lot of time in the tool shed.

You can also try playing around with an aero port if you want. The problem with small boxes is the port takes up a ton of space compared to the actual box size itself which is why most people end up doing an external port.

Moble Enclosurs
05-02-2012, 09:26 AM
Do nt go by general rules of port area, because they do not take into consideration power requirements or port velocity (indirect parameter). There are two possible errors with lowering port area.
1. Increased potential of port noise
2. Decreased efficiency and coupling capabilities

So, if you want to challenge yourself with those two possible factors of decreasing port area, make sure you know what you are dealing with as far as power. A balance between the two needs to be met to get the most out of the design if you do not plan to increase dimensional volume.

In this scenario, the ideal layout is great that you have. Just have to make sure it works in all aspects of the design.

I can tell visually right now, that it was correct to say the port may be quite long. BUT this can also increase the low output NOT FROM TUNING, but from correct phasing. SO, in reality, if you want more out of a design, (listen up all), do not give port area a limitation, and do not give port length a limitation UNLESS you are limited physically in dimensions and space. Then those factors need more controlled attention.

acreature
05-02-2012, 10:17 AM
You can also try playing around with an aero port if you want. The problem with small boxes is the port takes up a ton of space compared to the actual box size itself which is why most people end up doing an external port.I will. I will build the slot vent first, then play with other ideas.... including the aero and passive radiator.

Here is where I am with the 1.5" port width
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v602/acreature/Box/PortedFusionBoxD310D415.jpg

It is 35.25" port length. I am going to have to block the inside a bit to get the cubes back down to 1.

acreature
05-02-2012, 10:22 AM
Do nt go by general rules of port area, because they do not take into consideration power requirements or port velocity (indirect parameter). There are two possible errors with lowering port area.
1. Increased potential of port noise
2. Decreased efficiency and coupling capabilities

So, if you want to challenge yourself with those two possible factors of decreasing port area, make sure you know what you are dealing with as far as power. A balance between the two needs to be met to get the most out of the design if you do not plan to increase dimensional volume.

In this scenario, the ideal layout is great that you have. Just have to make sure it works in all aspects of the design.

I can tell visually right now, that it was correct to say the port may be quite long. BUT this can also increase the low output NOT FROM TUNING, but from correct phasing. SO, in reality, if you want more out of a design, (listen up all), do not give port area a limitation, and do not give port length a limitation UNLESS you are limited physically in dimensions and space. Then those factors need more controlled attention.

No one can make this easy for an occasional hobbyist, ha!

Moble Enclosurs
05-02-2012, 10:41 AM
:crazy:

acreature
05-02-2012, 10:49 AM
Just for shitz-n-gigglz, what if I wanted a dual slot port for the 1cu. (Just for the look) A slot on left and right sides of the woofer. Is there a way to figure that with no more or less than a 1.5" x 10.5" slot dimension for each port? Or would the ports be so long as to make the enclosure too huge for a measly 1cu?

The woofer is only going to have 400w (rms rating) going to it.

Kangaroux
05-02-2012, 11:07 AM
I will. I will build the slot vent first, then play with other ideas.... including the aero and passive radiator.

Here is where I am with the 1.5" port width
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v602/acreature/Box/PortedFusionBoxD310D415.jpg

It is 35.25" port length. I am going to have to block the inside a bit to get the cubes back down to 1.

I would remove that little piece at the end of the port and just extend that back piece so it's 1.5" from the side. That small of a difference in length isn't going to yield much audible difference, and it's just a pain if anything

acreature
05-02-2012, 11:20 AM
Agreed.

VisceralSound
05-02-2012, 11:31 AM
Do nt go by general rules of port area, because they do not take into consideration power requirements or port velocity (indirect parameter). There are two possible errors with lowering port area.
1. Increased potential of port noise
2. Decreased efficiency and coupling capabilities

So, if you want to challenge yourself with those two possible factors of decreasing port area, make sure you know what you are dealing with as far as power. A balance between the two needs to be met to get the most out of the design if you do not plan to increase dimensional volume.

In this scenario, the ideal layout is great that you have. Just have to make sure it works in all aspects of the design.

I can tell visually right now, that it was correct to say the port may be quite long. BUT this can also increase the low output NOT FROM TUNING, but from correct phasing. SO, in reality, if you want more out of a design, (listen up all), do not give port area a limitation, and do not give port length a limitation UNLESS you are limited physically in dimensions and space. Then those factors need more controlled attention.

Yeah Jason way to make **** complex ;)

Don't worry your design is better than anything I could make by myself.

acreature
05-02-2012, 09:19 PM
Reworked the design a bit so I wouldn't have to load the box with scrap to get it down to 1 cu ft. Will be finished tomorrow.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v602/acreature/Box/478537_3544433542366_1618336760_2883745_673246954_ o.jpg

Appreciate the critiques.

wenn_du_weinst
05-02-2012, 09:24 PM
Do nt go by general rules of port area, because they do not take into consideration power requirements or port velocity (indirect parameter). There are two possible errors with lowering port area.
1. Increased potential of port noise
2. Decreased efficiency and coupling capabilities

So, if you want to challenge yourself with those two possible factors of decreasing port area, make sure you know what you are dealing with as far as power. A balance between the two needs to be met to get the most out of the design if you do not plan to increase dimensional volume.

In this scenario, the ideal layout is great that you have. Just have to make sure it works in all aspects of the design.

I can tell visually right now, that it was correct to say the port may be quite long. BUT this can also increase the low output NOT FROM TUNING, but from correct phasing. SO, in reality, if you want more out of a design, (listen up all), do not give port area a limitation, and do not give port length a limitation UNLESS you are limited physically in dimensions and space. Then those factors need more controlled attention.
I'm glad some one said that, I hate that stupid "rule."

kushy_dreams
05-02-2012, 09:30 PM
What made you go with a slot port over a round port?

acreature
05-02-2012, 09:38 PM
What made you go with a slot port over a round port?
Creature of habit. I like the looks of a slot over a round. I will try the aero port next, though.

kushy_dreams
05-02-2012, 09:42 PM
Fair enough. A single 3in aero port would have been sufficient and in 1 cube it would have only needed to be 16.25inches end to end to achieve 33hz tuning.

I love round ports due to their efficiency but depending on the design, they can be unfeasible.

Moble Enclosurs
05-02-2012, 10:11 PM
Lookin great man!

acreature
05-02-2012, 11:20 PM
Question... with the aero port, I can mount that on the outside, correct? With it being 16+ inches in length... could that be placed through (flush) the rear deck, or would that be a waste with the sub in the trunk?

kushy_dreams
05-03-2012, 12:02 AM
Question... with the aero port, I can mount that on the outside, correct? With it being 16+ inches in length... could that be placed through (flush) the rear deck, or would that be a waste with the sub in the trunk?

Yes you can mount them on the outside of the box, here's an example:
http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/3/109/1749/25270874038_medium.jpg

If you can fold your back seats down, thats the best way to get bass from your trunk into the cabin, but it is possible to have your port fire up through the rear deck

Moble Enclosurs
05-03-2012, 01:00 AM
Yes you can mount them on the outside of the box, here's an example:
http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/3/109/1749/25270874038_medium.jpg

If you can fold your back seats down, thats the best way to get bass from your trunk into the cabin, but it is possible to have your port fire up through the rear deck

Yes Yes Yes. Best way to couple the box with the cabin by far.

acreature
05-03-2012, 10:30 AM
It's getting there

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v602/acreature/Box/box.jpg

acreature
05-03-2012, 10:34 AM
Anyone who has had a box wrapped in Vinyl; what was the cost?

This box is approx 12x18x15

acreature
05-03-2012, 01:11 PM
In the trunk
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v602/acreature/Box/2012-05-03112812.jpg

Vid: Don't mind the crap phone mic. She don't sound like that.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v602/acreature/Box/th_video-2012-05-03-11-47-10.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v602/acreature/Box/?action=view&current=video-2012-05-03-11-47-10.mp4)