colterphoto1 Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 I will always remember sitting across from Roy at lunch during the Hope Pilgrimage in 2005 as he explained 'the bubble'. Then it all made sense. [] Still does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodcaw boy Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 I am reading up on things and noticed that a Tractrix flare is not considered a CD (constant directivity) horn. However Roy refers to "his" tractrixes as being CD but he is also careful to refer to those flares as being a "modified' tractrix. actually, i say that our tractrix horns are constant coverage. the reason i say that is because if a horn that has both a constant coverage horizontal and a constant coverage vertical will have a constant directivity value. but a horn that has a constant directivity value will not always have a constant coverage horizontal or a constant coverage vertical. i say modified tractrix because, one part (that i am able to talk about and the others i can't, sorry.) is that all area expansion equations that i know of dictate area expansion and not what x and y should be. my equation does state x and y. How do they work the magic? I assume it is done near the throat end since (as I understand things) with a more rapid flare the smaller wavelengths will no longer "cling" to the walls of the horn and therefore make the dispersion more beamy (there are probably other factors about the loading also). So my assumption is that the flare is more gradual towards the throat end than the more "standard" tractrix. At the mouth end the flare is certainly not gradual (especially in a tractrix) and geometry would have more to do with the longer wavelengths i would like to say that no magic is involved; just good old scientific, engineering...... I have no idea whether this is common knowledge or whether this is propriatary to Klipsch Inc. I have seen no discussion of this when Brice Edgar writes about CD flares. I also understand there may be a justified reluctance to discuss the particulars. Thoughts? -Tom have a blessed day, roy delgado Roy, Thanks for getting back to me with some of the design perspective. I wasn't being glib when I referred to it as magic and I also understand that this is intellectual property. I imagine you waded through a good number of math simulations and built many physical prototypes. -Tom hey tom, i knew you weren't being glib. some math.....lots of horns.....i think in one year, one our techs fabricated about 40 horns for me... have a blessed day, roy delgado Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 Did he smooth out the bumps for you too? [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodcaw boy Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 that's funny that you remember that doc! i just the other day, had to tell a vendor that no, those were not mistakes; i really want those bumps in there!! have a blessed day, roy delgado Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 It makes perfect sense of course. I mean, horns have those nice smooth surfaces and such bumpy responses -- so throw a bunch a bumps in there and out comes this nice smooth response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodcaw boy Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 heeeeeeeeyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.....who told.....you that? that ain't funny man... have a blessed day, roy delgado Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.