slot vs aero for space

[fatryan]

which would be better when space is limited? im thinking aero would take up less.

[yunvme666]

yea you can do it for space reasons,, but after i did that i wound up using them external anyways so space wasnt much of a problem, just didnt want an 11-12cf gross box either tho....

[hoxie08]

aero does take up MUCH less space.

[arizona]

I asked the same question and got a pretty lengthy debate on it...its a good read though.

http://www.caraudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=320207

[bumpin buick]

aero does take up MUCH less space.

only if they are used internally but it seems like half the people use them external

[yunvme666]

yea it looks weird every ones just like wow wtf, and get this big smile...lol.... but i like aeros they were the easyest db gain i baught...lol....

[fatryan]

well i think that settles it lol. anyone wanna design me a box for my 2 Fi Q's?

[PV Audio]

which would be better when space is limited? im thinking aero would take up less.

It entirely depends. Aeros, in general, do take up less space. The caveat is this: a 6" aero has 28.27 sq in of port area, while a 6" square has 36" of port area. With a 20" long port each, the 6" aero takes up 565.5 cubic inches, and using .75" MDF, the rectangular takes up 1125 sq in of port volume. Looks good for the aero, right? Not necessarily. While it may not seem that great, the difference in port area makes an astounding difference. This is why: the port tuning formula is based on port area, port length and enclosure volume. A 15x25x15 enclosure with 56.5sq in of port area via aeros is tuned to 57.58hz, with a net internal volume of ~1.7-1.8 cubes. However, if you use a normal slot port, a 13.5x4" port gives you 54 sqin of port area, nets you over 1.8 cubes, and tunes at 56.8hz.

Let's look at a more significant example:
18x35x18 enclosure
3" wide slot port gives you 49.5 sq in of port, 35hz tune, and 4.5-4.6 cubes.

4 4" aeros gives you 50sq in of port, 35hz tune, and a bit under 4.5 cubes.

Essentially, there is very little difference. If you put the port externally, you net a great advantage for the aero. By physics alone, aeros are louder as well, BUT, slot ports are effectively free and the benefits of an aero are only there if the port is flared. You can gain similar advantages, again, for free, by bending the port. It comes down to the budget, goals and personal preference. If going for sheer output, aeros are your friends. For daily, slot port is almost always the best choice.

[PV Audio]

I wouldn't doubt if some of my numbers are off because I'm tired as ****, but they're ball park numbers that do the job just fine after rudimentary calculations.

[DBDesignsElite]

I wouldn't doubt if some of my numbers are off because I'm tired as ****, but they're ball park numbers that do the job just fine after rudimentary calculations.

We all are off a little bit sometimes. lol. Point has been made though.

Its all in application here.

[fatryan]

It entirely depends. Aeros, in general, do take up less space. The caveat is this: a 6" aero has 28.27 sq in of port area, while a 6" square has 36" of port area. With a 20" long port each, the 6" aero takes up 565.5 cubic inches, and using .75" MDF, the rectangular takes up 1125 sq in of port volume. Looks good for the aero, right? Not necessarily. While it may not seem that great, the difference in port area makes an astounding difference. This is why: the port tuning formula is based on port area, port length and enclosure volume. A 15x25x15 enclosure with 56.5sq in of port area via aeros is tuned to 57.58hz, with a net internal volume of ~1.7-1.8 cubes. However, if you use a normal slot port, a 13.5x4" port gives you 54 sqin of port area, nets you over 1.8 cubes, and tunes at 56.8hz.

Let's look at a more significant example:
18x35x18 enclosure
3" wide slot port gives you 49.5 sq in of port, 35hz tune, and 4.5-4.6 cubes.

4 4" aeros gives you 50sq in of port, 35hz tune, and a bit under 4.5 cubes.

Essentially, there is very little difference. If you put the port externally, you net a great advantage for the aero. By physics alone, aeros are louder as well, BUT, slot ports are effectively free and the benefits of an aero are only there if the port is flared. You can gain similar advantages, again, for free, by bending the port. It comes down to the budget, goals and personal preference. If going for sheer output, aeros are your friends. For daily, slot port is almost always the best choice.

well this IS for daily. will aeros f*ck up the SQ? they sure sound like theyll be better. and theres a possibility that i could do external. depends on design.

[PV Audio]

We all are off a little bit sometimes. lol. Point has been made though.

Its all in application here.

[PV Audio]

well this IS for daily. will aeros f*ck up the SQ? they sure sound like theyll be better. and theres a possibility that i could do external. depends on design.

No, aeros don't **** up the SQ, they allow you to get louder. That's what I meant. Round aka cylindrical passages are inherently more efficient than any other shape. It's merely simple fluids. Rectangles naturally cause compression which lowers the efficiency of the port, aka, you end up with less output. There's a reason why people don't use rectangular plumbing or rectangular exhausts; smooth flowing passages always allow for better performance. All the flare does is allows you to taper off the resistance (this following statement is as unscientific as it gets, so don't bash me for it) so that the air exiting the port isn't "shocked" when it emerges and causes chuffling aka port noise. The flare allows you to disperse any compression smoothly, thus eliminating or reducing port noise, which consequently allows you to use a smaller port cross section which THEN gives you a gain in net volume.

[BrianChia]

Also aero ports have thinner walls.

[PV Audio]

Also aero ports have thinner walls.

Douche! I mean touche