Speakerplans.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > General > Advanced Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - If Xmax shouldn't be exceeded, why have a Xlim?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

If Xmax shouldn't be exceeded, why have a Xlim?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>
Author
Message
Elliot Thompson View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 02 April 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5054
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Elliot Thompson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 January 2011 at 1:06pm
Those who are constantly concerning them selves about xmax don’t have enough loudspeakers to begin with. These individuals are trying to extract every bit of SPL using 1 – 4 bins in a large environment long-term. If you are toting 8 bins and above, xmax is not a big concern for you have enough surface area to get the job done with very little cone movement.

I am not concerned about xmax for I use more than enough bass bins to ensure I have enough headroom. Id rather have a 9 mm xmax driver with high efficency, than a 15 mm xmax driver with low efficency.

X-mechanical Limit relates to the spider, and surround than the voice coil. If anyone had the pleasure to destroy a speaker based on exceeding the x-mechanical limit, you will discover the cone, spider, and/or surround is the root of the failure. The coil is not damaged due to not exceeding the long-term thermal limit but the short-term mechanical limit.   

Best Regards,
Elliot Thompson
Back to Top
audiomik View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 06 April 2010
Location: Bath, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 2962
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote audiomik Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 January 2011 at 1:51pm
Here are a couple of results I obtained this morning using a two tone sine wave signal source and then looking at the current frequency spectrum feeding a 'speaker which was driven a little over it's Xmax:
1) Twin input Frequency spectrum for reference purposes, 75Hz at +15dB and 330Hz at -5dB, cursor on the 330Hz fundamental signal:

2) (above) showing the spectrum of the Amplifier Output Current into the test 'speaker with 25volts RMS output which is well below any Amplifier clipping but exceeds the rated power of the test 'speaker and thus it's Xmax..Note the 'massive' amount of spurious current components which are both harmonic distortion products of the two input sine waves as well as numerous Intermodulation products; since the current drawn from the Amplifier by the 'speaker is not linear when Xmax is exceeded due to the change in impedance when the coil leaves the magnet gap....... sounded 'nasty'!

3) A 'reference' spectrum with 10volts RMS output from the Amplifier is below, cursor over the first Harmonic of the 75Hz sine wave (Edit: due to Amplifier crossover distortion) but noticeably reduced other distortion products. (please be aware of the scaling of this result)


Anyway, interesting results as to what happens when Xmax is exceeded in terms of high levels of distortion appearing in the current being delivered to or reflected back by the 'speaker's voice coil. It should be remembered that the Current is the actual 'driving force' for the coil and that this is directly proportional to the distortion of the sound output from the 'speaker.

Now to try and answer the point regarding having Xlim as well as Xmax; this could be obvious from the above as the tested 'speaker shows substantial increase in distortion above Xmax which might be taken as 'acceptable' up to a limit of Xlim.
IE: the acceptable (??) distortion limit is Xlim whereas the onset of distortion should be considered best as Xmax.
A useful link in fairly simple terms at:Xmax and Xlim

So there you are - with spectrum analysis pics to demonstrate what happens
Mik

Edited by audiomik - 13 January 2011 at 12:46am
Warning! May contain Nuts
plus springs, washers, screws, etc, etc.
Back to Top
Elliot Thompson View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 02 April 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5054
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Elliot Thompson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 January 2011 at 2:20pm
Your test is nice.

However, the variabilities are endless when we are talking x-mechanical limits. Unless we are all using the same loudspeakers and cabinets your results are more of an estimate and not guaranteed.

Best Regards,
Elliot Thompson
Back to Top
rich_gale View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 18 February 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 2697
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rich_gale Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 January 2011 at 2:20pm
thanks for all the good replies:)  and cheers MIK for doing the analysis.  I'll properly look at it when im out of work later on.  
REFLEX ALL THE WAY.... (however, im playing with horns again...) That ok Mister Valiant? :)
Back to Top
audiomik View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 06 April 2010
Location: Bath, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 2962
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote audiomik Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 January 2011 at 2:41pm
Originally posted by Elliot Thompson Elliot Thompson wrote:

Your test is nice. However, the variabilities are endless when we are talking x-mechanical limits. Unless we are all using the same loudspeakers and cabinets your results are more of an estimate and not guaranteed. Best Regards,

Elliot
fully agree with what you state; but for the purpose of demonstration the results have value as they are restricted to well below any X-mechanical limits yet show substantial issues which occur.
Incidentally the 10volt test returns a current distortion near to 2% which is not bad for the 'speaker used!

I also agree with your post earlier on using sufficient hardware for the 'job in hand' instead of trying to squeeze the last ounce of SPL, with disregard to distortion, from a system and then expecting it to perform reliably again!

Mik



Edited by audiomik - 11 January 2011 at 2:57pm
Warning! May contain Nuts
plus springs, washers, screws, etc, etc.
Back to Top
airbell View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 11 June 2009
Location: Berlin, Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 278
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote airbell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 January 2011 at 3:06pm
someone in another forum wrote that its written in aes 2 standard 1984, that xmax is if the speaker still has so much cone control, that the distortion is not more than 10%...
dont know if its reliable, but wanted to let you know.


Edited by airbell - 11 January 2011 at 3:06pm
Back to Top
S DeXter View Drop Down
Young Croc
Young Croc
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2008
Location: Moon
Status: Offline
Points: 1268
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote S DeXter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 January 2011 at 9:22pm
Originally posted by Elliot Thompson Elliot Thompson wrote:

Those who are constantly concerning them selves about xmax don’t have enough loudspeakers to begin with. These individuals are trying to extract every bit of SPL using 1 – 4 bins in a large environment long-term. If you are toting 8 bins and above, xmax is not a big concern for you have enough surface area to get the job done with very little cone movement.

I am not concerned about xmax for I use more than enough bass bins to ensure I have enough headroom. Id rather have a 9 mm xmax driver with high efficency, than a 15 mm xmax driver with low efficency.

Best Regards,


In an ideal world more is better. Alot of time, space is limited. Both at venues and transportation. Why take 2 vans full, when you can take 1?

If you can 'extract' another 3dbs, you can take half the amount of bins which means alot less backwork! Thats why....

My point is, the majority of people are driving past xmax without even knowing it (i.e. its not percievable).

Especially with modern high power drivers - (Look at the newer beymas for example) you will run out of xmax before you hit their rated power.

In a closed box or open baffle (1/2 space 1m), a driver such as a PD 1850 will achieve

111.6db @ 40Hz
118.6db @ 60Hz
123.6db @ 80Hz

before reaching xmax.

Now I know drivers are seldom loaded in infinite baffle or cb, but it is still quite easily possible to drive a reflex out of its xmax while staying well within the power rating of a driver.


Enjoy your self...... It's later than you think.......
Back to Top
S DeXter View Drop Down
Young Croc
Young Croc
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2008
Location: Moon
Status: Offline
Points: 1268
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote S DeXter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 January 2011 at 9:40pm
Also, if you trust hornresp for displacement (which I think should be fairly accurate for BR).

A Beyma 18SW1600 has an xmax of 5.5mm (regular measurement (Lvc - Hag)/2).

In a 185 litre 31Hz box hornresp has the beyma hitting its xmax @ 170W 45Hz

Even at Beymas 10mm quoted figure (Lvc - Hag)/2 + Hag/3.5), it will reach its xmax @ 600W 45Hz.
Enjoy your self...... It's later than you think.......
Back to Top
daywalk3r View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 12 August 2010
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 180
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote daywalk3r Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 January 2011 at 11:49pm
Originally posted by S DeXter S DeXter wrote:

Also, if you trust hornresp for displacement (which I think should be fairly accurate for BR).

A Beyma 18SW1600 has an xmax of 5.5mm (regular measurement (Lvc - Hag)/2).

In a 185 litre 31Hz box hornresp has the beyma hitting its xmax @ 170W 45Hz

Even at Beymas 10mm quoted figure (Lvc - Hag)/2 + Hag/3.5), it will reach its xmax @ 600W 45Hz.

So, lets dissect those things one after another..

Found those numbers a bit odd so simmed it myself (185L/31Hz reflex) and I'm getting 5.5mm@260W and 10mm@860W for that particular driver, which is somewhat higher than what you got, but nothing excessively signifficant.. Nothing excessively surprising either though, as explained bellow..

What I found more odd is - why did you sim that driver in a box with a volume almost equaling its VAS, tuned it below its free air resonance (Fs), and then wonder what the heck is up with the power/excursion figures? Smile Could work if you added some mass to the cone, but otherwise those reflex enclosure parameters just seem not very ideal for that particular driver. You either need to reduce the box volume or tune it higher to make it work "as intended"..

But back to topic:
I believe the specified (some also call it "bloated") X-max figures, which most of the respected brands publish for their drivers nowadays are not necessarily just about marketing. Some of the brands (Beyma including) are not just getting those numbers out of thin air or by inventing random X-max formula (+Hag/x), but from measurements following certain AES standards, which set an upper limit on the allowed distortion of the reproduced signal (5 or 10%), and also a limit on the BL figure (=>70%).

What I wanted to point out with this is, that the X-max figures usually seen on driver spec-sheets nowadays are allready taking into account that "extra headroom before bad things happen", so it's usually a good idea to stick to them when designing enclosures..

Howgh Smile
Back to Top
audiomik View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 06 April 2010
Location: Bath, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 2962
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote audiomik Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 January 2011 at 11:55pm
Re: "Now I know drivers are seldom loaded in infinite baffle or cb, but it is still quite easily possible to drive a reflex out of its xmax while staying well within the power rating of a driver."

thought I'd shown this rather conclusively in the current spectra displays above.

Suggest you look at getting some current sensing circuitry which differences the Amplifier input signal to drive a limiter using it's external side-chain input.
Problem solved....
Mik
Warning! May contain Nuts
plus springs, washers, screws, etc, etc.
Back to Top
S DeXter View Drop Down
Young Croc
Young Croc
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2008
Location: Moon
Status: Offline
Points: 1268
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote S DeXter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 January 2011 at 9:38am

Originally posted by daywalk3r daywalk3r wrote:


So, lets dissect those things one after another..

Found those numbers a bit odd so simmed it myself (185L/31Hz reflex) and I'm getting 5.5mm@260W and 10mm@860W for that particular driver, which is somewhat higher than what you got, but nothing excessively signifficant.. Nothing excessively surprising either though, as explained bellow..

What I found more odd is - why did you sim that driver in a box with a volume almost equaling its VAS, tuned it below its free air resonance (Fs), and then wonder what the heck is up with the power/excursion figures?  Could work if you added some mass to the cone, but otherwise those reflex enclosure parameters just seem not very ideal for that particular driver. You either need to reduce the box volume or tune it higher to make it work "as intended"..

But back to topic:
I believe the specified (some also call it "bloated") X-max figures, which most of the respected brands publish for their drivers nowadays are not necessarily just about marketing. Some of the brands (Beyma including) are not just getting those numbers out of thin air or by inventing random X-max formula (+Hag/x), but from measurements following certain AES standards, which set an upper limit on the allowed distortion of the reproduced signal (5 or 10%), and also a limit on the BL figure (=>70%).

What I wanted to point out with this is, that the X-max figures usually seen on driver spec-sheets nowadays are allready taking into account that "extra headroom before bad things happen", so it's usually a good idea to stick to them when designing enclosures..

Howgh

OK, i forgot that everything in speakerplans is disected with a tooth comb.... Yes that box is a bit low tuned, you are correct. However the power figures are correct for the sim....

Anyway the first point to mention from your post is that at Beymas quoted xmax, the driver is already distorting, you said it yourself - dont forget this is the point I am making and that is why I chose not to use the stated figure.

 I also read somewhere, but do not quote me, (i will try to find it) that 70% BL requires double  power for same SPL....

The example I simmed was a worst case scenario but not totally unrealistic. So I have simmed the B & C Sub 18 with a 18NW100.

Now there can be alot of dispute as to where we should draw the power figures for this. Again B & C appear to quote the xmax to the 'bloated' figures. (Lvc-Hag)/2 = 6.5mm in this case - this is what I would term as linear travel.....

Hornresp comes up with these figures
 
At 700W has 10.6mm @ 48Hz
At 1200W has 13.9mm @ 48Hz
 
Even at these powers, you can see you are definitely out of the linear travel. This driver will take an amplifier substansially bigger thermally.... at 2000W (on peaks) you will be nearer 19mm.
 
 


Edited by S DeXter - 13 January 2011 at 12:00pm
Enjoy your self...... It's later than you think.......
Back to Top
IanD View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 17 January 2009
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 400
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote IanD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 January 2011 at 3:15pm
Once you exceed the real linear Xmax where the coil starts to leave the gap there's less force so the cone moves less additional distance for each amp of current -- of course this is why the distortion increases.

So if you take an example of a 24mm coil in a 12mm gap, the real linear Xmax is 6mm, the quoted Xmax from manufacturers could be 9mm (added Hg/4) or 10mm (added Hg/3), or something else if they use measured distortion.

Hornresp might say you need 60V (450W) to reach 6mm, 90V (1000W) to reach 9mm, 100V (1250W) to reach 10mm, 120V (1800W) to reach 12mm, but only the first one of these is likely to be true. The further you go past the linear Xmax travel, the bigger the difference between the actual travel and that predicted by Hornresp.

It's still not a good idea to drive beyond the rated Xmax if you want decent sound...

Ian


Originally posted by S DeXter S DeXter wrote:

Originally posted by daywalk3r daywalk3r wrote:


So, lets dissect those things one after another..

Found those numbers a bit odd so simmed it myself (185L/31Hz reflex) and I'm getting 5.5mm@260W and 10mm@860W for that particular driver, which is somewhat higher than what you got, but nothing excessively signifficant.. Nothing excessively surprising either though, as explained bellow..

What I found more odd is - why did you sim that driver in a box with a volume almost equaling its VAS, tuned it below its free air resonance (Fs), and then wonder what the heck is up with the power/excursion figures?  Could work if you added some mass to the cone, but otherwise those reflex enclosure parameters just seem not very ideal for that particular driver. You either need to reduce the box volume or tune it higher to make it work "as intended"..

But back to topic:
I believe the specified (some also call it "bloated") X-max figures, which most of the respected brands publish for their drivers nowadays are not necessarily just about marketing. Some of the brands (Beyma including) are not just getting those numbers out of thin air or by inventing random X-max formula (+Hag/x), but from measurements following certain AES standards, which set an upper limit on the allowed distortion of the reproduced signal (5 or 10%), and also a limit on the BL figure (=>70%).

What I wanted to point out with this is, that the X-max figures usually seen on driver spec-sheets nowadays are allready taking into account that "extra headroom before bad things happen", so it's usually a good idea to stick to them when designing enclosures..

Howgh

OK, i forgot that everything in speakerplans is disected with a tooth comb.... Yes that box is a bit low tuned, you are correct. However the power figures are correct for the sim....

Anyway the first point to mention from your post is that at Beymas quoted xmax, the driver is already distorting, you said it yourself - dont forget this is the point I am making and that is why I chose not to use the stated figure.

 I also read somewhere, but do not quote me, (i will try to find it) that 70% BL requires double  power for same SPL....

The example I simmed was a worst case scenario but not totally unrealistic. So I have simmed the B & C Sub 18 with a 18NW100.

Now there can be alot of dispute as to where we should draw the power figures for this. Again B & C appear to quote the xmax to the 'bloated' figures. (Lvc-Hag)/2 = 6.5mm in this case - this is what I would term as linear travel.....

Hornresp comes up with these figures
 
At 700W has 10.6mm @ 48Hz
At 1200W has 13.9mm @ 48Hz
 
Even at these powers, you can see you are definitely out of the linear travel. This driver will take an amplifier substansially bigger thermally.... at 2000W (on peaks) you will be nearer 19mm.
 
 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.05
Copyright ©2001-2022 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.