Port Calculator Discrepencies??? Who Is Right???

Trixter
10+ year member

Keepin it Simple
I have used WinISD to do most of my box building. I have heard that it is not that accurate and to try using this:

http://www.loudspeakers101.com/VentCal1.htm

Between loudspeakers101 and WInISD the numbers are pretty different. Another thing I don't understand about the loudspeakers101 calculator, is the slot and square option. I know the difference. But look at the JL web site. (http://www.loudspeakers101.com/VentCal1.htm) It says to add 1/2 the port's width to it's length for the correction factor and loudspeaker101's calculator subtracts 1/2 of the port's width from it's length when the slot option is selected.

So, between these three resources, who is correct?? Am I better off to stop using calculators and go back to using the the formula, pencil, and paper??

 
Well, on paper, I have found out that loudspeakers101 is correct as far as their port length claculator goes.

Now, who is correct about the correction factor?? I also think that loudspeakers101 is...after talking to a few people...you DO subtract for correction factor and DO NOT add like jlaudio says.

I know that there are people out there that know a lot more about box building than me. Where are you guys??

 
It would make sense to subtract rather than to add the correction factor. JL Audio explains that it is because one wall of the port is usually a wall of the box, "effectively adding length to the port". So since having it on the wall adds length, it would only make sense to correct that by subtracting 1/2 of h from the length of the port.

 
Well, after all this I am using loudspeakers101's calc. I tried to use the calc. on bcae but I always got an error message. But whichever, if I have one that works, I'll stick with it.

It not good to see how many people are reffered to the jl site and to see it be incorrect.

 
well, I don't think the people who programmed winISD would make such a blatant mistake in such a good program... or why a reputable company like JL would give faulty advice? I'd like to hear what someone like Donn has to say about this.

example: box that is 1.5 cubes AFTER displacement tuned with a slot port to 30 hz with the port dimensions being 2"X10"

WinISD gives a port length of 34.75

paper and pencil gives a length of 36.2003

dont know what the other program comes up with or BCAE because I dont have the program and don't know how to use BCAE's calc, so why is there the discrepency?

lets just keep bumping up this post till someone knowledgable answers it.

 
Using loudspeakers101's calc:

For 8 cu/ft after displacement, 35Hz tuning, 100 sq/in of port area: I came up with a length of 14.25".

That sound about right? I keep coming up with low 20"s with WINisd.

Bill T.

 
Here is the calc. that I used that is dead on with loudspeakers101:

Lv = [(1.463 x 10^7 x R^2) / (Fb^2 x Vb)] - 1.463 x R

If using a square or slot vent then R = sq.rt. (A / Pi)

They also subtract 1/2 the port's width when choosing the slot port option.

I have not yet figured out the exact difference between WinISD and loudspeakers101's calcs. And I also do not know, and con not prove, what formula WinISD uses.

 
I had much sucess building my first slot port with WINisd. I would recommend using the newest release 50a7. The loudspeaker101 site works but you dont see the gain. But if you know exactly what you want, thats the calculator to use. I typed in my box on loudspeaker101s and WINisd a7.. my actual length is 27", loudspeaker came up with 26" and WINisd came up with 27.5". I had my numbers checked by RE and they said it gains 3.5db at 33Hz. Bingo, WINisd is nearly right.

Whats the relation between net volume and vent gain? Just messing around and accidently typed in 10 cu/ft for a single XXX15" and it was gaining 9db @ 42Hz.

Also, whats the 1st port resonance mean?

Bill T.

 
well, it sounds like the two programs are using completely different equations, I got a copy of Loudspeaker Design Cookbook by Vance Dickason coming in soon, that's the equation I'll trust.

Bill, net volume and gain on the low end are related, as the box gets bigger you gain low end but it lowers power handling and can cause a "boomy" sound. No clue what 1st port resonance means. might be because you can use winISD for 6th order bandpass, so the tuning frequency for the other chamber would be labeled as "second port resonance" but I am probably wrong.

 
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...
Old Thread: Please note, there have been no replies in this thread for over 3 years!
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.

Similar threads

Use to be a popular setup in the s10 trucks used in competition....most were well over 150dbs ....
4
589
Yeah, saw that too, was like ??? wtf! They do know there stuff, I usually just roll with it!
13
1K
You could try to make the port longer, but there might be other reasons with the box won't extend lower, or even the sub. You'd have to reverse...
3
1K
While that program is pretty neat, it assumes you know the values. I was just recapping the numbers you provided. RS recommends the following...
4
1K
Whoa, that will be one skinny port. The width of the back wall ports will be 1.08" wide (27.5mm), but the front port will be shared by 2 subs so...
5
1K

About this thread

Trixter

10+ year member
Keepin it Simple
Thread starter
Trixter
Joined
Location
Colorado Springs, CO
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
17
Views
1,371
Last reply date
Last reply from
Bill T.
IMG_1914.jpeg

AnthonyO

    Sep 7, 2024
  • 0
  • 0
IMG_1913.jpeg

AnthonyO

    Sep 7, 2024
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top