Homemade Super-Neo Woofer: THE CHEVELLE RESTORATION IS DONE, dampener recommendations??

[CleanSierra]

The total depth of the coil/former and fear of smacking the back plate is the reasoning for wanting to add onto the top plate right?

You kind of have an unknown Alan. No one is sure how much the spider pack you choose is going to control linear movement or if you'll have so much motor force that the coil and cone assembly are going to explode through the stroke. It's hard for you to guess, purely based on X measurement(x not denoting anything, only used to demonstrate a variable) that you'll need to compensate or add to it.

I know this isn't great advice, or probably what you want to hear, but I say build WITHOUT the spacer and see what happens. I realize that's at the cost of a coil former and all soft parts involved. I would say KEEPING the coil in the magnetic gap as long as possible will not only help linearity, it should also keep the coil in check thoroughly the stroke on the top and bottom and AID in the former not smashing the bottom plate.

If NOT smacking the bottom plate is the concern, then I've misinterpreted wharf you're after and your reason behind wanting to add the spacer.

[CleanSierra]

***disclaimer*** I have not slept in like 24 hours. Pardon if my logic or response isn't coherent

[fox_racin4]

Well, depending on where and what size he decided to build He can very build the cone assy for 40-80$ depending, Which realisticly is fairly cheap

[jbarnes3123]

Good to see the argument has ceased. Now just glue shit together. Make it look like a Frankenstein woofer. Fuck it. I just wanna see it move.

[CleanSierra]

What would you do Fox, if this were your build and judging by what you've seen? Would you rock the setup as is and see what would happen, or would you start messing with top plate and spacing?

[Tecomah]

It's ok Alan, I still like you lol.

[Dwn4BassAlan]

If you move the coil up, it will leave the gap sooner.

Fix one issue, causes another.

Yeah, but I mean to only move it up so much as to let the coil have the longest amount of available distance on both ends. Right now, the coil in the center still reaches down the magnet pole too far. And I'm pretty sure it will be difficult for the coil to leave the gap completely, the distance to the bottom plate is less then the remaining amount of coil above the top plate so it would bottom out and smash before leaving downwards, and the amount of coil hanging down is long enough to give me just over 52mm upward excursion before it would be on the very upwards edge of the gap.

So I was thinking, it I make the gap a little longer, then I will be able to have more of the coil in the gap for an even longer duration. If anything this would only make it even more difficult to leave the gap, because it would increase the top end of the gap, which is the only place in risk of "leaving" right now, if that makes sense?

Or is the idea just sorta random lol?

Is this a 4" coil? I'm sure it's been said before but I can't remember and am too lazy to look it up.

3" diameter, 6" former, and the wind height of the coil is about 3.15" tall

[Dwn4BassAlan]

The total depth of the coil/former and fear of smacking the back plate is the reasoning for wanting to add onto the top plate right?

You kind of have an unknown Alan. No one is sure how much the spider pack you choose is going to control linear movement or if you'll have so much motor force that the coil and cone assembly are going to explode through the stroke. It's hard for you to guess, purely based on X measurement(x not denoting anything, only used to demonstrate a variable) that you'll need to compensate or add to it.

I know this isn't great advice, or probably what you want to hear, but I say build WITHOUT the spacer and see what happens. I realize that's at the cost of a coil former and all soft parts involved. I would say KEEPING the coil in the magnetic gap as long as possible will not only help linearity, it should also keep the coil in check thoroughly the stroke on the top and bottom and AID in the former not smashing the bottom plate.

If NOT smacking the bottom plate is the concern, then I've misinterpreted wharf you're after and your reason behind wanting to add the spacer.

Yeah that's part of it, basically it's the amount of magnetic loss and stray field I have still leaving the top plate, and the way the coil sits. And I see what you're saying, but wouldn't increasing the top plate height keep more of the coil in the gap even longer? I mean, that's kind of what I've been trying to get at, unless I have been imagining it wrong lol. I'm not so concerned with the soft parts, I'm using 4 very stiff 8" spiders and single 9" spider with the leads, I think they're going to be more rigid than most set-ups, but even then I think with the power of the magnets and the coil, it could push the former down far enough to still bottom out.

I was thinking that: increasing the gap would let more of the coil be in the gap more of the time, help direct more flux and reduce over-saturated loss and stray field, giving me greater output and efficiency as well as longer linear travel and an increased xmech that could come in handy due to the cone area that is less than usual because of the wide surround.

The spacer ring is also for a means of cooling, since I want to keep the temps down as much as possible, and the cooling ring could be incredible helpful.

If that is incorrect thinking I would be interested in an explanation from someone who knows a little more about it possibly?

[CortezDTV]

Why are you using 2 different size spiders?

I don't know of that will work

[iball1804]

I honestly think the only way to truly know what's gonna work and what's not is by trial and error. Albeit a very expensive trial and error... Of course we can guess of what's SUPPOSED to happen, or what has worked in the past, but you also have the strongest motor ever built so all bets are off.

Just my .02