Bracing More Important than Thickness?

[Kyblack76]

19 hours ago, Cardboardcat15 said:

Interesting. This makes me think that maybe resonant frequency of the panels of the box could also have something to do with this.. If the panels are thin, wouldn't that technically have a higher res. freq. and cause some nasty sounds?

 

That's really odd. Only the vertical bracing removal saw an increase in scores. I wonder if that could possibly do with air flow within the box. Was it a flat wall? Or was it an internally baffled box like a 4th/6th?

Burban. 4th order. Internal bracing, i do know,  in the lanes, burp cars, want some resonance. You look in their car, and there is patches of sound dampening here, and there, but not there and here. And if it's there, or not there with them, it's for a reason lol (score)  

 It's like some vibration or resonance helps on the meter. You know what I mean? Maybe it was buggering up air flow. But in all our testing, it was same or hurt. Pulled it all out. 

[k58.cross]

This is a really interesting question. Like others pointed out, thickness serves double duty on the baffle to make the sub hang stronger and add rigidity. But for the rest of the box, maybe we can get away with smart use of bracing. I made a 1x12 box recently though where the sub is single baffle mounted on the top wall and there are four dowel braces vertically mounted surrounding it. I put sideways dowels in also to brace the other walls. It sounds pretty damn good through the range. I also really like an idea Triticum pointed out in one of his threads - using "ledge" braces to kill flex.

I think the only way to know this answer is to setup an experiment to do a direct comparison though.

[Triticum Agricolam]

1 hour ago, k58.cross said:

This is a really interesting question. Like others pointed out, thickness serves double duty on the baffle to make the sub hang stronger and add rigidity. But for the rest of the box, maybe we can get away with smart use of bracing. I made a 1x12 box recently though where the sub is single baffle mounted on the top wall and there are four dowel braces vertically mounted surrounding it. I put sideways dowels in also to brace the other walls. It sounds pretty damn good through the range. I also really like an idea Triticum pointed out in one of his threads - using "ledge" braces to kill flex.

I think the only way to know this answer is to setup an experiment to do a direct comparison though.

I've done some experiments with different bracing strategies.  Its not super comprehensive, but its something: 

 

[k58.cross]

Oh most definitely, that's where the shelf brace I was talking about came from  Good way to add strength and not take up very much space.

[SnowDrifter]

From a purely structural perspective, without going to either extreme: Bracing > thickness

I'd take a dual layer braced with 2x4s over a 4 layer un-braced box. There's more strength to be gained given the same size when you're working with enclosure volumes and displacement. Blabla square cube law blabla

[mothra]

just from my perspective over the years I feel that one is not better than the other, it's all application dependent. I feel that one is not better than the other as long as the purpose is achieved. when I build for larger subs I want a good solid mounting baffle for the subs so I'll at least double baffle then use parallel wall bracing every X number of inches. when I build for smaller subs I'll usually use triangle bracing points and maybe a parallel wall bracing. for larger subs you'll have a longer baffle with very little continuous structure so I feel that you do need to add more structure from adding another layer but I also want to have something help support it so I'll add a parallel wall bracing.