Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive

Daniel R. Probst 508-869-0506 dprobst@wpi.edu Massachusetts Academy of Math and Science at WPI February 18, 2010 Mr. Ellis

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Table of Contents Abstract Introduction Literature Review Research Plan Methodology Results Conclusion Limitations and Assumptions Applications and Future Extensions Literature Cited Acknowledgements 2 3 5 16 18 21 24 25 26 27 28

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Abstract A speaker drive system was investigated that can provide higher excursion levels at low frequency outputs, especially in the infrasonic range. Specifically designed for application as a subwoofer in a home audio system, this drive system involves two iron-core electromagnets, one above and one below the center of the speaker diaphragm. These electromagnets are each wound to an impedance of eight ohms and are wired together in parallel to obtain a final impedance of four ohms to represent a standard load to an amplifier. A large neodymium permanent magnet is mounted on the diaphragm between these two electromagnets. This permanent magnet is pushed and pulled by the two electromagnets in a pattern determined by the current level of the signal being sent through the coils, so as to produce sound. Also mounted on the diaphragm are sets of smaller permanent magnets arranged in a ring around the center of the diaphragm. These magnets have opposing magnets mounted on the frame above and below them which provide a reactionary force and a way of keeping the diaphragm centered between the electromagnets when there is no input signal as well as to prevent the attraction of the centered permanent magnet and the electromagnet cores from causing them to come together at any time.

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Introduction There are many different types of speaker systems, ranging vastly in purpose, performance, and cost, but most of which rely on one property that enables their operation. That property is the property of magnets with changing field direction and strength to move other magnets in a pattern determined by this changing field. An electrical sound signal is sent through a coil of wire, producing a magnetic field which acts upon the magnetic field of a permanent magnet, causing the coil and everything attached to it to move back and forth as the signal level changes. Because most systems are based on this same principle, what sets some systems apart as being better than other systems? There are three unofficial qualities of an audio system that will set it aside as being a good or exceptional system: 1. A frequency range that extends throughout the entirety of the audible range from just inside the infrasonic range on the low frequency end to just inside the ultrasonic range on the high frequency end, with a smooth response curve along the entirety of this range. 2. A realistic soundstage that extends beyond the extent of a humans peripheral vision to both the left and the right. Different instruments are placed in specific places while being recorded so as to capture the best placement of combined frequencies. Speakers with a good soundstage will reproduce this individual instrument placement as accurately as possible. 3. A good bass response. This is very important because it makes the sound fuller and more rich sounding, and can make a recording sound more impressive. A system without a good bass response will sound empty and shrill. For movies, sound content reaches well into the infrasonic range, but these frequencies are very difficult to produce. All three of the items on the above list represent somewhat of a challenge to manufacturers of speaker drivers. All three of these items cannot exist in a single speaker driver. However, two of the three can be solved rather easily when multiple speakers are used. To obtain a good frequency range, multiple drivers covering different frequency ranges can be used together to cover the entire range. For a good soundstage, multiple channels of audio sent to different speakers can provide precise sound placement. However, to produce a good bass response, the combination of multiple drivers will only make the output louder and will not result in a lowfrequency performance gain. To obtain better low-frequency performance, a driver itself must be altered some to be able to physically move more air, and drastically for infrasonic response.

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Literature Review Solving the Problem There are two ways of increasing the amount of air that a speaker can move: 1. Increase the diameter of the cone. This is the easier of the two methods because it is simply up-scaling the entire design, and is therefore the most often taken of these two solutions. 2. Increase the distance that the diaphragm can move back in forth. This way there will be more air moved per unit of surface area, and the diaphragm can be a smaller diameter if needed. Both of these methods are perfectly legitimate and will work, even if slightly differently so. However, traditional speaker design does not allow for a particularly large travel distance, especially in small speakers. A typical 15 cm diameter woofer might have a maximum excursion of 5mm, and a good one might have a maximum of maybe 8mm. The maximum I have ever seen on a small speaker was that of a 16.5 cm Tang Band subwoofer with an excursion of 13mm, which is excellent; however, this speaker requires a rather large cabinet compared to the size of itself to return a good response curve, because it was built using traditional design parameters. On the other hand, a typical 38 cm subwoofer will have a maximum excursion of 15mm, and a good one will accommodate 20mm. To increase the limit of a speaker excursion, a design far different than the traditional one must be used. A traditional speaker has a diaphragm, usually round but sometimes square or oval shaped, that has the form of an inverted cone or dome. Centered and mounted on the back of the diaphragm there is a tubular extension that fits loosely around but should not touch a thick disc shaped magnet which is attached to the speaker frame. Wrapped around this extension is a coil of wire called the voice coil, usually made of copper or aluminum, which produces a magnetic field when electric current is sent through it. This coil is what drives the speaker; the magnetic field it produces reacts with the magnetic field of the permanent disc magnet and moves the diaphragm back and forth to produce sound pressure. The edge of the diaphragm is connected by a flexible rubber rolling edge called the surround that holds the entire diaphragm in place and creates an air-tight seal between the front and back of the speaker.

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Traditional Speaker Design

Figure 1: Layout of a common configuration loudspeaker driver. The voice coil sits in a circular gap in the magnet, and could leave the gap if the input signal is too high (Understanding Binaural Beats, 2006, para.10). There are several parts of the traditional design that limit the excursion capabilities of a speaker. The first of these is the size of the voice coil and disc magnet. The limited size of the magnet makes it possible for the voice coil to jump out of the gap around the magnet if the input amplitude is too high. When the voice coil leaves the gap it is no longer under the control of the magnet and may not come straight back down into the gap. Second, the rolling capability of the surround is limited, and though this helps reduce the last problem of leaving the gap, those speakers that do have very large surrounds will require a large cabinet volume to allow them to move controllably, like the Tang Band subwoofer discussed earlier. Finally, the strain on the surround and the voice coil leads and the heat released at such high excursions can eventually lead to damage to the speaker itself. What needs to be done is to enlarge the surround and all eliminate the electrical connections to the diaphragm. If the diaphragm were levitated between pairs of electromagnets with small, very strong permanent magnets mounted on itself to support this, all of the issues discussed previously could be avoided or solved. The electromagnets could be placed several inches apart if wanted, allowing the diaphragm an excursion of as many inches as they are spaced apart, because nothing else will be constraining the diaphragm. Finally, there would be no moving electrical parts, and therefore better reliability and longer speaker life.

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Configurations Putting aside the advantages to a speaker design involving a levitated diaphragm, there are also several engineering problems that will need to be addressed before it can work properly. Foremost among these problems is the placement of the many permanent and electro magnets that are involved in the design of this speaker. There are several configurations that could be used, each of which have their advantages and disadvantages. The simplest of these designs comprises a single pair of electromagnets, one above and one below the center of the diaphragm, with a single magnet mounted on the diaphragm between them. The edge of the diaphragm is supported by multiple permanent magnets above, below, and around the outside of the diaphragm with facing magnets on the top, bottom, and very edge of the diaphragm to support and balance itself. The advantage here is that it will have excellent balance because the effect of the edge magnets on the diaphragm is similar to that of a surround. However, this same effect causes its disadvantage of having similar physical strain as a typical speaker driver. This means that it will take a considerable amount of power to do more than what a typical design could do. The second configuration that could be used has multiple pairs of electromagnets above and below the edge of the diaphragm, with no permanent or electro magnets in the center of the diaphragm at all. There would still be permanent magnets facing outwards along the edge of the diaphragm to provide horizontal support. The advantage with this design is that there is more power going into actually moving the diaphragm and less power being wasted in overcoming the support force of a surround or of permanent magnets. However, this design does have the disadvantage of being very difficult to keep balanced, especially when it is turned off and nothing is supporting it at all. The third, final, and best configuration is a cross between the first two. This configuration involves multiple pairs of electromagnets facing each other from above and below the edge of the diaphragm, just like the previous configuration does. However, it also has permanent magnets above and below the edge, like in the first configuration. There is nothing on, above, or below the center of the diaphragm as well. The outward facing magnets are present as in both the first and second configurations. Here the advantage is that this configuration has the balance and inactive mode control of the first configuration, but will have multiple sets of driving electromagnets, making it far easier to arrive at the desired excursion levels. Another problem that must be addressed is the weight of the diaphragm. Any of the above configurations would result in an exceptionally heavy diaphragm due to the magnets mounted on the cone. Traditional speaker designs often utilize as light of a diaphragm as possible to increase power efficiency. A way of easily getting around the weight problem is to use as light of a diaphragm material as possible so that we will be able to use smaller magnets to support the diaphragm and make it even lighter. However, in order to simplify construction, the design calls for a flat diaphragm, meaning that a stronger material must be used to overcome bending strain between the center of the diaphragm and the edges, so a heavier material must be used. The only way to lessen the effect of this problem is to use the strongest magnets available so they can be kept small, lightweight, and efficient. A third design problem that must be addressed is the physical design of the device besides the mechanical parts; that is, the frame. Since the best configuration does not involve any connection to the middle of the diaphragm, no rear frame is required or wanted as in a typical speaker design. However, the entire circumference of the diaphragm is has magnets mounted on

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive it, and around the diaphragm are many permanent and electro magnets. To support this configuration the frame would have to surround the diaphragm and overlap the front and rear faces of the diaphragm just as much as the electromagnets do. The result would be a frame shaped very much like a donut, with a disc (the diaphragm) blocking the hole. The entire device could be thin enough to not intrude into a small room very much at all and at the same time have a typical excursion of several inches and therefore an excellent low-frequency extension.

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Engineering Design A discussion was held with a professional audio driver designer, Mr. Paul Apollonio. It was held to review various aspects of the engineering design. As a result of this discussion, it was realized that there were several problems with the design which must be addressed. Any free air or completely floating designs could not be used because the air separation distance between the front and back of the speaker must be at least as long as the wavelength of the lowest frequencies to be produced. In this case, 10hz sound was to be produced, so the following separation is needed: 340m/s * 1/10s = 34m! Only sealed cabinets could feasibly be used in a final design, but free air conditions may be used for some if not all of the testing. Another design parameter that was changed as a result of the discussion with Mr. Apollonio. A ring of neodymium magnets on the outer edge of the cone could not feasibly be used because the weight would be too great for any but the most powerful amplifiers. Also, the strain pressure between the center of the cone and the edges would be great enough so as to possibly damage the cone itself. Instead of a ring magnets, several magnets placed just around the main driving magnet in the center will be used. Their opposing magnets will be placed around the two electromagnets above and below them driving the system.

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Past Patents United States patent number 5,216,723 (year 1993) involves permanent magnet transducing in applications such as speakers. The methods used in their speaker design are similar to my design in that there are no moving electronics, however; their design still has a surround. Basically, their design has the same structural design as a traditional speaker, but the permanent magnet is attached to the extension on the back of the diaphragm and the voice coil is on a round iron core which has the shape of a rounded rectangular ring. The ends of this rectangle are separated by a small gap, which is where the diaphragm extension with the magnet is located. This magnet is mounted with each pole just outside either end of the gap such that it moves up and down perpendicularly to the iron core (U.S. patent 5,216,723). The success of this patent proves that a speaker can be driven with the permanent magnet on the diaphragm and the electromagnet on the frame. As I said above, the patent describes a device that moves the diaphragm perpendicularly to the direction of the electromagnet and its magnetic field. My design will move the diaphragm in a direction parallel to the direction of the electromagnets and their magnetic fields. Also, their design still has a surround and therefore the ability to utilize sealed cabinet designs, but as a result has the same excursion limits of a traditional speaker design (U.S. patent 5,216,723). United States patent number 5,809,157 (year 1998) involves an electromagnetic linear drive for loudspeakers and various other applications using methods very similar to those used in this project. This patent involves electromagnets in various configurations around the diaphragm and permanent magnets on the diaphragm also in various configurations. One of the configurations is that of an electromagnet on either side of the center of the diaphragm with a permanent magnet on the diaphragm between them. Another of the applications was a in a double-ended loudspeaker, where two electromagnets were set in between the two ends of the speaker with the permanent magnet between them and a shaft extending from it to both diaphragms of the speaker. Several other loudspeaker applications were listed, however; the principle difference that they all featured is in the design and placement of the balancing magnets to hold the diaphragm centered between the two electromagnets. Grumazescu, the author of the patent, had them placed on the back of the electromagnet directly on the metal of the cores to reduce mobile weight. He also uses much smaller magnets for the required mobile magnets to reduce weight even further (U.S. patent 5,809,157).

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Parameters Defined Several measurable speaker parameters such as frequency response and resonance point were mentioned earlier. These and many other speaker parameters will be explained. What they mean and whether I will be testing for them in existing speaker designs and in the final design are included. During most of these tests the speaker is driven either with a series of pure tones or a sinusoidal sweep across a frequency range that extends well into the infrasonic and ultrasonic ends of the audible spectrum. Frequency range is a measurement that determines which frequencies a speaker is capable of producing. It is usually given as a min/max assuming everything in between the two numbers can be produced. Frequency response is a measurement of the relative sound output level a speaker can produce across its frequency range. This is usually measured at a distance of one meter from the speaker with an input power of one watt, and given as a result in decibels for any given frequency and easily read as a frequency/decibel graph. This measurement is definitely necessary for this project. Total harmonic distortion, or THD, is a measurement of the percentage of the final sound level that was introduced into the main signal at any point during the signals route starting with initial recording. This distortion can be introduced at any point along the signal path, including during recording, mixing, conversion, storage, amplification, and final sound production through a speaker. The measurement is given as a percentage and/or decibel reading at any given frequency and power output. THD will be tested for (Everest, 2001, p.109; Nachbaur, 2004, para.1). Intermodulation distortion, or IMD, is the sound produced by unwanted combinations of simultaneous frequencies, and is often caused by various electronic components being nonlinear. Negative feedback will also cause this problem. The greater the frequency range a speaker produces, the more IMD there will be. Also, and unfortunately, the greater the excursion of the speaker, the more IMD there will be. IMD will be tested (Pro Audio, 2009, para.26). Noise is simply humming caused by other unintentional input sources such as 60hz hum from a power supply or white noise from broadband radio signals picked up at some point along the audio path. Noise does not need to be tested (Everest, 2001, p.108). Crosstalk is caused by stray inductance between multiple input signals, such as between two inputs in a stereo line, and will reduce the soundstage because the multiple signals will contain more similar content than they should. Measure is given in decibels and the higher the number the better. Crosstalk does not need to be tested. The common-mode rejection ratio, or CMRR, of a system component is a measure of its ability to ignore the interference caused by a difference between the input levels and the receivers unapparent equivalent voltage level. The result is given in decibels, the bigger the number the better. CMRR does not need to be tested. Transient response is a measure of how quickly an audio component (amplifier or speaker) can respond to fast changes in output level. This is very important in low-frequency speakers because it may be difficult for a large or heavy diaphragm to respond very quickly, but it is important that it does. Transient response is very difficult to measure, and so will not be tested for unless a feasible method of doing so is found.

10

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Research Plan There are cases when a small speaker is required in a situation demanding good lowfrequency (bass) output in little available space. There are not very many speakers that can provide both of these requirements well. This is mainly because small speakers do not usually have a very long excursion (distance the cone moves back and forth), due to large amounts of distortion occurring at long excursion with small surrounds. However, if a small speaker had no surround at all and had a very long excursion, this problem should be overcome, and the speaker should be able to produce a much stronger bass output at considerably lower distortion. The goal of my project is to design a speaker that can produce stronger bass output than a comparably sized speaker, and have lower distortion levels than usual by eliminating the surround and drastically increasing the excursion limits. There are several specific magnetic configurations that generalize all of the possible configurations, each of which has its advantages and disadvantages. The configuration that seems the most promising at this point has a flat magnet mounted on the center of the cone, with the driving electromagnets positioned above and below the center of the cone. The edge of the cone is lined with small permanent magnets. Each of the edge magnets has magnet above, below, and to the outside of the cone relative to itself. This system levitates the entire cone between the two driving electromagnets. An alternative to that design is to have no driving assembly in the center of the cone at all. The outer magnets would each be driven from above and below by electromagnets, and the cone would still have horizontal support through the help of the permanent magnets outside of the cones perimeter. This design would be more expensive and more difficult to control, but would result in even longer cone excursion and better response. There are many factors which affect the overall quality of the final sound that emerges from a speaker. These factors are introduced at any of the stages of the electronic audio path. This includes the stages of recording, ADC/DAC conversion, effects editing, amplification, and finally the in the actual reproduction of the sound in the speaker driver. Any change to the signal that is unintentional and unwanted is known as distortion. Although distortion can be introduced at any stage in the audio path, there are two main sources of distortion. The first and most problematic is noise from the power supply. This is either a 60hz hum from the background electromagnetic field of a power supply transformer, or normal line noise that was not properly filtered out at the power supply. Another source of distortion is at the speaker itself, where physical limits reduce the speakers ability to produce sound that is identical to the input signal.

11

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Methodology Three distinct sections of the speaker were built and then assembled together to result in the the full speaker. The first of these sections was the electromagnetic coil assemblies. An 8.9 x 8.9 x 30.5 cm block of wood was cut with a standard circular saw to result in 2 blocks of wood 8.9 x 8.9 x 7.6 cm in size. A 4.4 cm diameter hole was then drilled down the center from one end to the other of each of these two pieces of wood with a drill press (Craftsman brand). In this case, the ends are the sides with size 8.9 x 8.9 cm. Next, a 1.6 cm diameter hole was drilled 1.9 cm measured diagonally from each corner on the front end of each of the two pieces of wood to a depth of 6.4 mm, resulting in a total of eight holes drilled at this size. In each of these holes was placed a grade n52 neodymium disc magnet with a 1.6 cm diameter and 6.4 mm height. In one of the pieces of wood all four of these magnets were placed with their South magnetic pole facing outward, and in the other piece, the North poles were facing outward. These magnets were glued in place with super glue (Gorilla brand). Two 8.8 x 8.8 cm square pieces of aluminum were cut out of a 15.2 x 45.7 cm piece of 1 mm thick aluminum sheet using standard metal cutting pliers. 3.6 mm holes were drilled centered 1.2 cm from all four edges on both pieces of aluminum. Screws with size #10 and a length of 3.8 cm were then used to fasten each piece of aluminum onto the front of each of the wooden blocks of wood. A 7.6 cm long by 3.2 cm diameter piece of 1018 steel round bar was used as the electromagnet core material. Two of these were each wound with about 100 meters of 24 gauge solid copper magnet wire. To do this, one end of the wire was placed close to one end and was tightly wound around the iron as it moved up the side. When the other end was reached, electrical tape was wrapped around that end in one layer, the winding process continues until 100 meters of wire has been wound on. The process is repeated for the second electromagnet. About 50 cm of excess wore was left twisted together on each end of the winding for terminals. An electromagnet was placed in the 4.4 cm hole in one of the blocks of wood and glued up against the aluminum. A rubber stopper was glued onto the other end of the electromagnet for use as pressure compensation for later steps. This process was repeated for the second electromagnet and second block of wood. The second section in need of construction was the diaphragm assembly. The 1 mm thick piece of aluminum used in part one is also used on part two. Two 12.7 cm diameter circles are cut out of the aluminum. A 25.4 cm diameter subwoofer diaphragm is taken from an existing speaker by cutting it out of an existing speaker. Four more neodymium magnets with the same dimensions as the ones used in part one are now glued onto one the pieces of aluminum. The other sides of these magnets are glued to the center of the speaker diaphragm. On the other side of the diaphragm at the exact spot where each of the four magnets are located are now glued four more magnets. Four holes are drilled in the aluminum in a circle just barely outside of the 3.8 cm mark. A 3.8 cm by 1.3 cm grade n52 neodymium magnet is glued to the very center of the piece of the aluminum just inside my ring of holes. The second ring of aluminum was bolted on through these holes as well as being help in place by super glue. The third section was the cabinet for the speaker itself. There are two main pieces of wood that were used in the design. The first was a 81.3 cm by 121.9 cm piece of 12.7mm thick birch plywood. This was cut into six pieces for a speaker cabinet using a DeWalt brand handheld circular saw. Two of the pieces were 33 x 33 cm for the top and bottom. Another two pieces were cut to a size of 33 x 30.5 cm for the front and back panels. The last two pieces were 30.5 x

12

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive 30.5 for the left and right panels. The second piece of wood used for the frame is a 3.8 cm by 8.9 cm by 243.8 cm. This was cut into the following pieces: ---3.8 x 4.4 x 30.5 cm, four of them for vertical wall reinforcement ---3.8 x 4.4 x 22.9 cm, four of them for horizontal wall placement ---3.8 x 8.9 x 34.3 cm, two of them for horizontal electromagnet support ---3.8 x 8.9 x 10.2 cm, two of them for vertical electromagnet support ---3.8 x 8.9 x 15.2 cm, two of them for underside vertical placement The four walls of the cabinet were arranged so that the external dimensions were 33 cm square. The vertical wall reinforcement pieces were screwed into the inside edges of the arranged walls. This wall was set aside. The top board piece was marked at the very center and at a point 11.7 cm away from the center. 3.6 cm holes were drilled in these locations to set the circle jig start points, and a 23.5 cm diameter hole was cut out of the top for the speaker to sit in. The vertical electromagnet support pieces were screwed onto the top surface on opposite corners just outside of the speaker. Across the tops of these was then screwed one of the horizontal electromagnet support pieces, and underneath this and centered directly over the speaker, was attached the upper magnet assembly. This same process was repeated for the underside of the speaker, except that the horizontal piece was directed between the two corners that were unused on the top-side. The entire top assembly with the speaker itself, the electromagnets, top panel and all support structure was lowered into the vertical frame set aside earlier and screwed straight into place. The wires from the two electromagnets were routed to one side of the speaker, and there a two holes were drilled for terminals. Two inch bolts of size 10-32 were placed in the holes. The electromagnet wires were wound around their respective terminal and fastened on with nuts matching the 10-32 bolts.

13

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Results/Data Analysis (All graphs are logarithmic on the frequency (horizontal) axis.)

Figure 1. Frequency response of the original KLH subwoofer. (Domain of 10hz to 700hz and a range of -12db to +24db) It has good response from 60hz (+13db) and higher, but it drops off rapidly below 60hz, and has a response of -1db at the target frequency of 20hz.

Figure 2. Frequency response of the final device operating in free air conditions. (Domain of 5hz to 250hz and Range of -16db to +19db.) It has a good response at frequencies of 25hz and lower, with a response of +8db at 20hz and peaking at 10hz with a relative response of +14db.

14

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive

Figure 4. Total harmonic distortion of the original KLH subwoofer. (Domain of 10hz to 700hz and a range of -94db to -56db) Peak in the 50-60hz range with a relative -68db level of distortion, with a semi-gradual drop off on either side.

Figure 5. Total harmonic distortion of the final device operating in free air conditions. (Domain of 5hz to 600hz and Range of -76db to -39db.) Distortion rapidly drops off as the frequency increases from 3 to 10hz, at which point there is -68db of distortion, which stays relatively constant until 100hz is reached.

15

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive

Figure1. Intermodulation distortion of the original KLH subwoofer. (Domain of 10hz to 700hz and a range of -84db to -12db) The massive peak at 60hz is ignorable as its source is 60hz line noise. Otherwise it still has a rise towards the jump at 60hz, suggesting a resonance point in that general area.

Figure 2. Intermodulation distortion of the final device operating in free air conditions. (Domain of 3hz to 200hz and Range of -87db to -15db.) The massive peak at 60hz is ignorable as its source is 60hz line noise. Otherwise the only jumps in distortion at low frequencies are below 10hz due to clipping, and a similar but minor effect at 20hz.

16

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Conclusions Based on the results as shown in the previous pages, it can be determined that this speaker design does in fact have a better frequency response and decreased distortion level than a speaker of traditional design and similar size and diaphragm type. However, there are also areas of performance where the original speaker was far better than the new design with the linear drive. The observed transient response of the new speaker was exceptionally slow to a point that would be certainly unacceptable in the loudspeaker manufacturing industry. This is undoubtedly caused by the exceptionally heavy diaphragm due to the many on-board magnets. Another problem with the design is its horizontal instability. There is some horizontal wobble because support in that direction is absent in order to reduce drag and distortion levels. However, as originally stated, this design did meet the criteria required and can produce a powerful sound at very low frequencies, especially those in the first octave of the infrasonic range.

17

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Limitations and Assumptions It was assumed that all magnets of the same dimensions had the exact same magnetic field strength. It was also assumed that the steel rod pieces that were used as electromagnet cores had the same iron content and therefore reacted in the same way to the other electric fields and permanent magnet fields. During testing, it was assumed that the signal strength from the amplifier was the same each time and did not fluctuate from line power levels. Error in test results may have come from some background noise and line noise, as well as the exact placement of the speaker and the microphone within the room. The speaker and microphone were placed in the same position relative to each other. For tests where the speaker was operating in free air conditions, it was assumed that the air was not restrained at all by the overhanging electromagnet assembly. For tests where the speaker was in a sealed cabinet, it was assumed that the cabinet was perfectly sealed.

18

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Applications and Future Extensions As stated in the conclusion on the previous page, there are many improvements that can be made to the design. The following is a list of some of the possible changes and improvements that could be made to the design. The electromagnets could be built to be more efficient by using a core of smaller diameter and steel end plates that extend outward from the core to form a bobbin for the wire. Multiple much longer lengths of a larger gauge wire could be used to provide a stronger magnetic field, higher current capability, and the same four ohm coil impedance. A much smaller magnet could be used on the diaphragm between the two electromagnets to reduce the mobile weight and improve transient response. The balancing magnets on the diaphragm could also be made much smaller to reduce mobile mass further. The facing balancing magnets should not need to be altered at all in size, but they could be moved slightly farther away from the diaphragm to reduce the efficiency loss of the speaker due to a high strength balancing field. The diaphragm should be balanced horizontally with a loudspeaker spider to reduce or eliminate any wobbling and therefore improve transient response even more. A low pass passive crossover network could be built into the speaker. With results as standing, a crossing point of 30 40 hz at a slope of 18db/octave would be a good point. However, adding changes such as those in this list may change response results, so a crossover point and slope requirements may change.

19

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive Literature Cited Froeschle, T. A., & Carreras, R. F. (1993). U.S. Patent No. 5,216,723. Washington D.C.: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Grumazescu, M. (1998). U.S. Patent No. 5,809,157. Washington D.C.: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Everest, F. A. (2001). The Master Handbook of Acoustics [4th ed.]. (PDF version), Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books Nachbaur, F. (2004). THD Measurement and Conversion. Retrieved from http://www.dogstar.dantimax.dk/tubestuf/thdconv.htm Tanabe, J.T. (2005). Iron Dominated Electromagnets: Design, Fabrication, Assembly, and Measurements (InfoTool), Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com/lib/wpi/edf.action Pro Audio Reference I. (2009). Retrieved from http://www.rane.com/par-i.html#IM Understanding Binaural Beats. (2006). Retrieved from http://www.soundonmind.com/binauralbeats

20

Speaker Diaphragm Levitation with an Electromagnetic Linear Drive

Acknowledgements The author would like to thank Mr. Ellis for providing (strict but excellent) guidance throughout the entire time working on this project. His extensive help with the formal side of project execution is greatly appreciated. The author would also like to thank Mr. Paul Apollonio for agreeing to take part in a discussion with the author and for providing his expert advice in the realm of speaker driver design. Last but not least, the author would like to thank his parents for allowing him to raid the fridge at 3 a.m. for a snack while working on this project.

21