Menu
Forum
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Classifieds Member Feedback
SHOP
Shop Head Units
Shop Amplifiers
Shop Speakers
Shop Subwoofers
Shop eBay Car Audio
Log in / Register
Forum
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Log in / Join
What’s new
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Menu
Reply to thread
Forum
Car Audio Discussion
Subwoofers
lms coil question
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Kyle_Keating" data-source="post: 4439597" data-attributes="member: 582385"><p>Correct, my mistake, there is defiantly a strong <strong>conservation</strong> of flux density that that migrates to the two(or more) gaps from where its removed. It still is not <strong>as</strong> efficient if the steel was not removed because steel is not a lossless magnetic conductor, but I will admit it’s much less lossy than just throwing it away in as is the case with the LMS design (L is thrown away) and it makes sense that XBL^2 designs tend to be more efficient with a given motor diameter than LMS designs.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure, higher moving mass (well.. the sicko is a 5” vc so its not quite apples to apples) but your argument could have well be made with any diameter vc. But I agree //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif</p><p></p><p>If sensitivity was the same, I could of course make the power compression argument.. there are advantages to overhung vc’s too you know….thermal compression is a major reason why planars sound so **** good at high volume. Subwoofers have indeed a long way to go to match planars lol…</p><p></p><p></p><p>My point is who cares about the transient behavior of anything, with mass/energy, everything that changes velocity/direction has a transient time. What does that really mean? .....</p><p></p><p>Ya I read that, and this is also a great paper on inductance <a href="http://users.ece.gatech.edu/~mleach/papers/vcinduc.pdf" target="_blank">http://users.ece.gatech.edu/~mleach/papers/vcinduc.pdf</a></p><p></p><p>The response affects the frequency domain and that is what you really hear. You can’t hear the current lag effects, much the same way you can’t tell something is out of phase expect when the SPL drops because of cancellation. But you can defiantly hear the affects when the lag prevents otherwise full amplitude within one period as is the case when the frequencies get higher and higher… ~first order low pass filter… that’s a direct SPL reduction and that’s why inductance sucks as you know. None the less a simple FR response can indeed show exactly the adverse effects of the inductive filter in a motor.</p><p></p><p>Keep I mind, I worked on the induction motor when I was at TCS… the design has since been patented and sold but I can’t talk about that… still being licensed and sold off to larger companies for major dollars and I’m under an NDA… when that gets finalized, I would love to talk more about the interesting lossy inductive properties of a motor, I studied that stuff for 2 years!</p><p></p><p>I look forward to the new mag and sicko for that matter… I’ll be for sure buying one of your mags //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif I do like the design and I think it’s great for the community and headed in the right direction. Honestly , I can’t give you enough credit.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Kyle_Keating, post: 4439597, member: 582385"] Correct, my mistake, there is defiantly a strong [B]conservation[/B] of flux density that that migrates to the two(or more) gaps from where its removed. It still is not [B]as[/B] efficient if the steel was not removed because steel is not a lossless magnetic conductor, but I will admit it’s much less lossy than just throwing it away in as is the case with the LMS design (L is thrown away) and it makes sense that XBL^2 designs tend to be more efficient with a given motor diameter than LMS designs. Sure, higher moving mass (well.. the sicko is a 5” vc so its not quite apples to apples) but your argument could have well be made with any diameter vc. But I agree [IMG]//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif[/IMG] If sensitivity was the same, I could of course make the power compression argument.. there are advantages to overhung vc’s too you know….thermal compression is a major reason why planars sound so **** good at high volume. Subwoofers have indeed a long way to go to match planars lol… My point is who cares about the transient behavior of anything, with mass/energy, everything that changes velocity/direction has a transient time. What does that really mean? ..... Ya I read that, and this is also a great paper on inductance [URL="http://users.ece.gatech.edu/~mleach/papers/vcinduc.pdf"]http://users.ece.gatech.edu/~mleach/papers/vcinduc.pdf[/URL] The response affects the frequency domain and that is what you really hear. You can’t hear the current lag effects, much the same way you can’t tell something is out of phase expect when the SPL drops because of cancellation. But you can defiantly hear the affects when the lag prevents otherwise full amplitude within one period as is the case when the frequencies get higher and higher… ~first order low pass filter… that’s a direct SPL reduction and that’s why inductance sucks as you know. None the less a simple FR response can indeed show exactly the adverse effects of the inductive filter in a motor. Keep I mind, I worked on the induction motor when I was at TCS… the design has since been patented and sold but I can’t talk about that… still being licensed and sold off to larger companies for major dollars and I’m under an NDA… when that gets finalized, I would love to talk more about the interesting lossy inductive properties of a motor, I studied that stuff for 2 years! I look forward to the new mag and sicko for that matter… I’ll be for sure buying one of your mags [IMG]//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif[/IMG] I do like the design and I think it’s great for the community and headed in the right direction. Honestly , I can’t give you enough credit. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forum
Car Audio Discussion
Subwoofers
lms coil question
Top
Menu
What's new
Forum list
