Marvel Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Usually, I'll just make them a .doc or .jpg extension and make a note to change it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avguytx Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 Do all three columns of information get put into a single text file and converted or is each column done separately? I emailed Erik and will see if I get a reply as well. Is the final information supposed to be printable from a plotter and give the layout that's needed for cuts and the tractrix curve I'm assuming? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avguytx Posted July 22, 2016 Author Share Posted July 22, 2016 What is the output in AutoCAD supposed to ultimately look like? My friend is questioning whether or not he's seeing the right thing. All I've done is fill in the four areas in red, as stipulated, and taken the information from the 3 columns and moved it to notepad, changed the extension to .scr, and ran it as a script in AutoCAD. But, me personally, I don't know what I'm supposed to be looking for and he's asking me what is supposed to be there. He has the printer to print those kind of things out with on blueprint paper, etc. Will it show the triangle pieces (for lack of better term) that are the top and bottom then show the Tractrix pattern curve? I emailed the person on the website a few days ago but no response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 (edited) I have some my son cut out that I can take pictures of, to give you an idea, but I'm stuck at the auto shop for a while yet today. The script will generate a curve, that will be for the left and right edge of the top and bottom pieces of the horn. An angle is generated for cutting the side pieces. I think th third is the angle that the top and bottom are places so you bend the side pieces to fit. I'm sure that's clear as mud... Bruce Edited July 22, 2016 by Marvel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avguytx Posted July 22, 2016 Author Share Posted July 22, 2016 No, actually, that makes it make more sense now. I see on the spreadsheet it makes the 3 different lines/curves for the tractrix expansion so the straight line will be that "triangle" section that gives you the angle for the top and bottom pieces of the horn. Then, the tractrix curve is duplicated for both sides and both of those are in relation to the throat size (1" in this case...give or take) to the exit end. Ok, that may not make sense on your end but I'm not as familiar with all the indepth techie part. ha. But I see how I can take this info and draw it out on graph paper and convert it to wood. I think I'm getting there. But those pics would be great as your time allows. Most appreciated! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 What is the output in AutoCAD supposed to ultimately look like? My friend is questioning whether or not he's seeing the right thing. All I've done is fill in the four areas in red, as stipulated, and taken the information from the 3 columns and moved it to notepad, changed the extension to .scr, and ran it as a script in AutoCAD. But, me personally, I don't know what I'm supposed to be looking for and he's asking me what is supposed to be there. He has the printer to print those kind of things out with on blueprint paper, etc. Will it show the triangle pieces (for lack of better term) that are the top and bottom then show the Tractrix pattern curve? I emailed the person on the website a few days ago but no response. I looked at the xcel spreadsheet. The script uses a pline to create a 2D straight line from the first point to the second point starting at the 0,0 coordinates. Each new cell and each space is considered an 'Enter' in Acad, so every time you see either, you would get the same as an 'enter' (repeat last command which is pline). Therefore, and without seeing the output you are talking about, you should see a single Tractrix curve for each column of the script. The round horn script will give a single line that would have to be duplicated on a 3D circle with the diameter RT you entered above. The rect horn gives a seperate column (script) for 3 different lines all starting from absolute coordinate 0,0, which I think looks wrong. This means they should be run seperately, so you can move them between each. Otherwise you would have an RT of 0. You get a center tractrix curve, a sidewall tractrix curve, and a frontview tractrix curve. Arash did this, and I found his thread showing those 3 profiles: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Contact Arash. He lives in the middle east, so keep in mind his time zone way later than here. I think it's like 8pm there now. He is making horns with cnc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 I think the curved side are also stretched (in the calculation), so the the pieces are long enough to fit when curved and connected to the top and bottom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avguytx Posted July 22, 2016 Author Share Posted July 22, 2016 On the center, sidewall and front view in the attachment above, the far left is at the throat, I understand. Why does it flare slightly up instead of starting at a "0" point at the throat? Do I come out to the "flat" point for starting the graph? Does that make sense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 I think you are meaning it looks like the throat gets smaller and then opens up... It's because the top and bottom are flat pieces and don't curve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avguytx Posted July 22, 2016 Author Share Posted July 22, 2016 (edited) Yep...that's it....just wasn't wording it correctly. So it doesn't need to be "pinched in" right after the throat, right? I didn't see it done that way in Edgar's paper on Tractrix. That's going to drop to a small opening since the throat on the adapter is 7/8". Edited July 22, 2016 by avguytx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 (edited) Yep...that's it....just wasn't wording it correctly. So it doesn't need to be "pinched in" right after the throat, right? I didn't see it done that way in Edgar's paper on Tractrix. That's going to drop to a small opening since the throat on the adapter is 7/8". That was a screenshot from Arash and I don't know what program he used. Is that how yours plotted too? You are correct it does look like it has a venturi. I will go look at the x,y, but I would think both values would always be getting larger than before, and if so, your plot would not look like the above. Edited July 22, 2016 by mustang guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 (edited) Nope, the spreadsheet values go up for both x and y in the calculations and the results. I did a quick chart and screengrabbed it. Here is what the x,y looks like for the round "Your Tractrix". Edited July 22, 2016 by mustang guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 Of course, the round tractrix continues to expand. The rectangular will pinch in slightly to maintain the proper tractrix expansion. The flat top and bottom are expanding too rapidly close to the throat, so the curved sides curve in (pinch) slightly. The horn crosssectional area is always getting larger. Al K. realized this when Martinelli was making his horns. I'm sure the ones from Dave Harris also do the same. Bruce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avguytx Posted July 23, 2016 Author Share Posted July 23, 2016 Well, I was going to work on these some today but it's about 115 degrees in the garage even with fans going. Too dang hot. I went by the local office supply place to get some engineering graph paper to draw out the layout but they done have 1" engineering graph paper with .10 inch increments. Crud... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avguytx Posted July 23, 2016 Author Share Posted July 23, 2016 I switched from using Open Office on my server/desktop to Office 2010 as I was missing some stuff and it was showing errors. So, here is what it's showing me which looks correct. I figure that's a good horn size for the Belle. Just debating on putting a tweeter off to the side or keeping it above in the top hat and making it taller. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 Here is the way Greg at Volti did it: http://www.klipschupgrades.com/vtrac.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avguytx Posted July 24, 2016 Author Share Posted July 24, 2016 Yep. I've looked those over a lot and really like that look. I wonder how much different the tweeter sounds beside the mid versus above it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted July 24, 2016 Share Posted July 24, 2016 (edited) ... And with the smaller tractrix width there is a narrower horizonal coverage if that matters. With the networks in these the slope is gradual making a lot of overlap between the midrange and tweeter, so there is going to be suckout. Having the horns vertically arranged makes the lobes vertical whereas having the horns beside one-another makes them horizonal. There has been some experimentation done with vertical and horizonal placed speakers which indicates that having the vertical comb filtering is less bad than horizonal. Here is that experiment: http://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/vertical-vs-horizontal-speaker-designs I would hypothesize that the vertical placement would result in a better response in the overlapped frequencies of the tweeter and squawker, but I am sure there are studies which could tell you for sure. One thing that most folks seem to agree on is that the tweeter should be placed at listener ear level since it beams the highest frequencies. Frankly, I think it comes down to aesthetics as much as FR in the overlap. Belle Klipsches are the most attractive Heritage line, IMO. Placing a tweeter horn on a stand above them seems like Heresy, and that name is already taken in the line. Edited July 24, 2016 by mustang guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avguytx Posted July 24, 2016 Author Share Posted July 24, 2016 (edited) I may have to change the horn height as to get a tweeter, like the CT120/125 above the mid. Aesthetically, I'd rather have them look more like Belle's with not too tall of a top hat to make them look odd. I believe inside height is 8-3/4" but maybe 10" wouldn't look too odd. Edited July 24, 2016 by avguytx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.JPG.e865cb9742a8f1a873e5b238842d7c3f.JPG)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.