Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Electrodynamic" data-source="post: 7636367" data-attributes="member: 548723">Once again you are wrong. Flat out, wrong. Let me demonstrate. You said literally “Does using a shorter coil winding(less xmax) given all else is the same = more motor force, and thus a lower Qts? Yup!” Here are two FEA graphs demonstrating two coils of exactly the same winding width, or winding height:First up we have a driver with a 20mm winding width and a 26mm tall top plate, and a BL of 12.6. Xmax is 17.8mm.<img src="http://www.stereointegrity.com/images/Obsidian/BLcropped.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" />Second we have a driver with a 18mm winding width and the same 26mm tall top plate (entire gap width is the same as above). Xmax is down to 17.32mm and BL is down to 11.8. This shorter coil actually has less Xmax and less BL than the longer coil.<img src="http://www.stereointegrity.com/images/Obsidian/BLcroppedShortC.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" />You wrote “Btw: Motor force is the most important, hate to break it to the people who repeat lines like: if only motor force was everything.” …in your previous post.The example you just provided and the two semi-apologies contradict everything you said in your prior post. The XXX example is a good one about short coils being utilized for small boxes but not so much on low Qts being good for everything as you have previously eluded to.Saying one thing and meaning another are difficult, if not impossible, to read into…especially on the internet. You did say Not all small motors are “weak.” I did read the whole thing. You were on your soap box about very strong motors (ie, low Qts) being the focal point of woofer design. You said</blockquote>

Verification

Top

What's new

Forum list