Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.

net
Accurate model for the push-pull electrostatic loudspeaker.
Patrick De Visschere
University of Gent
Department of Electronics and Information Systems,
St. Pietersnieuwstraat 41, B-9000 Gent, Belgium.
pdv@elis.rug.ac.be
Abstract
A model is developed for the electrostatic loudspeaker, which incorporates
simultaneously the mechanical, the acoustical and the electrical behaviour
of the diaphragm. The non-linear model can be solved fairly accurate in
steady-state and is used for calculating the frequency- and level-dependent
sensitivity and distortion for an infinite strip push-pull electrostatic
loudspeaker. The results are compared with previously published and new
improved small-signal approximations.
1 Introduction.
The push-pull electrostatic loudspeaker (pp-ESLS) is known as a highquality loudspeaker. The basic characteristics of this transducer have been
studied by Hunt[1]. In this monograph, which was first published in 1954, a
one-dimensional model for the pp-ESLS (as well as for the single-sided
ESLS) is worked out. To handle the inherent non-linear behaviour of the
ESLS Hunt performed a harmonic analysis and by neglecting higher order
harmonics was able to calculate these harmonics consecutively. The radiation loading was incorporated by means of a mechanical impedance.
Although probably all relevant properties could be addressed in this way a
more accurate and more general model for the ESLS should at least be twodimensional in order to describe the vibration of the diaphragm properly.
Such an analysis must cope with two complications. Since the vibration of
the diaphragm is to a large extent determined by the air-reaction, the mechanical problem of the vibrating diaphragm must be solved together with
the radiation equation. This was done by Streng[2,3] for a circular membrane. In a subsequent paper the same author addressed the second complication[4], namely the dependence of the diaphragm-charge distribution on
the diaphragm-vibration. This effect is due to the finite diaphragm
resistivity and is responsible for a level-dependent sensitivity and for the
harmonic distortion. The analysis given was restricted to small-signals
however and focused mainly on the sensitivity question.

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net 1

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

In the present paper we develop a global two-dimensional model for a
pp-ESLS, in which the three coupled sub-models (mechanical, acoustical
and electrical) are solved together. Our current analysis is restricted to an
idealised pp-ESLS, which is described in section 2, together with the basic
equations for the three sub-models. In section 3 the perfect pp-ESLS is
considered. In this perfect pp-ESLS the diaphragm charge is supposed to be
fixed and consequently the transducer is linear. Solving the coupled
mechanical/acoustical models enables us to calculate the response
characteristic. The solution of this (mathematical) problem will be published
elsewhere[6]. In section 4 a small signal analysis is given for a more
realistic device, with a finite diaphragm resistivity, and in section 5 the
harmonic analysis applied originally by Hunt in his one-dimensional model,
is given for our two-dimensional model. Some concluding remarks are
given in the last section. Although most of the material presented is equally
valid for a circular diaphragm, numerical results will be shown for an
infinite strip only.
2 Basic equations.
2.1 Physical model.
The idealised physical model for the pp-ESLS is shown in Fig. 1. A
stretched diaphragm, with tension T [kg/s 2] and surface density [kg/m 2],
is placed exactly in the middle between two static electrodes. The wave velocity in the diaphragm is denoted by c = T . The static electrodes, which
are assumed to be electrically uniform but acoustically transparent, are a
distance 2 r apart and are connected to signal voltages va and -va. The
diaphragm is fixed around its perimeter, has a surface conductivity [-1]
and carries a local surface charge density q [C/m2] whereas its local potential is denoted by v. By convention we denote the side where the signal voltage va is applied as the frontside.
2.2 Electrical model.
Since the maximum deflection of the diaphragm r is much smaller than
the lateral dimensions of the diaphragm a quasi one-dimensional approach is
justified for calculating the electric field distribution. It follows that the
electric field is directed everywhere approximately normal to the static
electrodes and its strength in the front and at the back of the diaphragm are
simply given by :

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net 2

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

vv
E f = a ;
r

v+v
Eb = + a ,
r

(1)

where is the local deflection of the diaphragm. The discontinuity of the

electric field at the diaphragm is due to the surface charge q :
q = (E f Eb) ,

(2)

where = 8.85 10-12 F/m is the dielectric permittivity of air. Using (1) we
find q in terms of the local deflection and the local potential :
q = 2

v r va

r2 2

(3)

The electric force (towards the frontside) on the diaphragm is given by :

fe = 1 q. E f + Eb .
2

(4)

Again using (1) we find :

fe = q

v va r

(5).

r2 2

A more useful expression is found by eliminating the potential in (1) and (4)
using (3) :
Ef,b =

va

q
,
1

r
r 2

fe =

qva
q2
,
+
r 2 r

(6)

where the +signs holds for the frontside and the -signs for the backside.
These expressions have a straightforward interpretation. The first contribution to the fields and the force are due to the homogeneous field set up between the static electrodes by the signal voltages va and -va. The remaining
contributions are due to the image-charges induced by q in the static electrodes. These induced charges are easily found using Ramos theorem [5]

q
and are given by : q f ,b = 1 . With this the contributions to the
2
r
electric fields and to the electric force are easily found. The image force in
(6) corresponds with a negative stiffness for the diaphragm.
Due to the surface conductivity of the diaphragm, potential differences
will cause surface charge density variations according to :

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net 3

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

2v =

q
.
t

(7)

This equation must be completed with a suitable boundary condition, which,

in its simplest form, becomes v = -Vo along the perimeter of the diaphragm,
this being the bias voltage A more complicated boundary condition is
needed when the bias voltage -Vo is applied through a series resistor Ro.
2.3 Mechanical model.
The deflection of the diaphragm satisfies the classical equation for a
stretched diaphragm :
2

+ fe 2 p ,
2 = T 2 R
t
t

(8)

where p is the acoustical pressure at the frontside and where the term
involving R [kg/m2 /s = Rayl] is an optional damping term. Around the
perimeter of the diaphragm the boundary condition = 0 applies.
2.4 Acoustical model.
The pressure, which is anti-symmetrical with respect to the plane of the diaphragm, satisfies the wave equation :
2 p
1
p 2 2 = 0,
co t
2

(9)

with boundary condition on the diaphragm :

2
p
,
2 = z
t

(10)

where z is the direction normal to the diaphragm (see Fig.1). In these equations o is the density of air (1.18 kg/m3) and c 0 is the wave velocity in air
(343 m/s).
3 The perfect pp-ESLS.
Ideally the conductivity of the diaphragm should be zero and the charge
2V
density should be fixed (and usually uniform) q = Q0 = 0 . In that
r
case, the electric force (see eq. (6)) becomes linear in the deflection and the
applied voltage :
Q02
Q0
.
v +
fe =
r a 2 r

(11)

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net 4

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

In the remainder of the paper we will use normalised quantities. To avoid
any ambiguity however normalised quantities will be indicated with a tilde
(~). The reference quantities used for normalising are shown in Table 1. In
normalised form eq. (11) then reads as :
fe = va + .

(12)

For a sinusoidal signal va = Va cos ( t) , the mechanical equation can now

be written as :
j R + 2i 1 = p1 2e Va
2

c 2
= c0 2 + 2e,
2
i

2 V02 a2
=
3r T

(13)

2
e

where = k a = c a and a represents a typical dimension, the radius for a

0
circular diaphragm and half the width for an infinite strip. Except for the
signal voltage the complex representations are denoted by an index 1.
This equation must be solved with the boundary condition 1 = 0 along the
perimeter of the diaphragm, and together with the wave equation (9) and its
boundary condition (10), which become :
+ 2 p1 = 0,
2

p1
=
m
z

2m =

1,

T
.
2 a 0 c02

(14)

A method for solving this problem, is published elsewhere [6]. We just want
to mention that we do not assume, as was done in [2], that the tangential
p
p
derivative of the pressure (
for an infinite strip or
for a circular
r
x
diaphragm) vanishes along the perimeter. Furthermore the pressure on the
diaphragm p1 and the diaphragm deflection 1 are obtained as
developments into suitable base-functions or modes :

p1 = Va

k=0

1,k k(x)

1 = Va

k=0

1,k

k(x) ,

(15)

where the k(x) are the eigenfunctions of the diaphragm. In what follows
numerical results will only be presented for the strip and the base-functions are then given by :
k(x) = T2 k + 1

1 x2 ,

(16)

where Tn(x) are the Chebychev polynomials, and by :

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net 5

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

k(x) = cos k x

k = (2 k + 1) .
2

(17)

In addition the numerical calculations are restricted to the parameter values

shown in Table 2. The absolute values of the first three coefficients
P1,k, H 1,k , occurring in (15), are shown in fig.2 as a function of the
normalised frequency . The damping factor R has been chosen somewhat
arbitrarily and does not correspond with critical damping of the lowest
resonance. It can be shown that the far-field pressure p 1(r, ) is determined
by the mean pressure on the diaphragm ( being the angle with the vertical
on the diaphragm and r the distance from the central axis of the
diaphragm) :
p1(r,) =

1 + j r T e j k r
cos ()
r
2 a3 2

p1(x) d x .

(18)

Using (15) and (16) it can then be shown that the mean pressure depends on
the first pressure coefficient P1,0 only, namely :
p1(r,) = 1 + j

V r T e j k r cos () P .
1,0
r
8 a a3 2

(19)

Apart from the 1/2 factor in (19) the frequency response of the perfect
pp-ESLS is thus given by P1,0 .
In a more realistic pp-ESLS the diaphragm will possess some conductivity
0, and then q will not longer be remain fixed but will instead adapt to
the vibration of the diaphragm. Mathematically this means that, in addition
to the previous equations, eq.(7) and its boundary condition, and relation (3)
must now be taken into account to. The main difficulty arises from the nonlinearity of relation (3) and (6) and a general solution seems unattainable.
However there are two possible simplifications we can make. In section 5
we again consider a sinusoidal regime and perform a harmonic development
of the quantities involved, as has been done by Hunt[1] for a simple onedimensional model. Since this is a steady-state model all information
regarding the temporal behaviour of the system is lost however. Therefore
we consider in section 4 a small-signal analysis, where that information is
retained.
First we consider the static stability of the diaphragm assuming a fixed di2 V
aphragm charge density Q0 = 0 0 . It is easily verified with eq. (8) and
r
(11) that the equilibrium position (va = 0, p = 0, = 0) is stable only if :
P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net 6

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

2 0 V02
< T 2min, or
3r

e < min ,

(20)

where min is the smallest diaphragm-eigenvalue. This condition ensures

that for all eigenmodes the net stiffness is positive. For the infinite strip this
means e < /2.
4 Small-Signal analysis.
The problems associated with the non-linearity of eq.(3) can be avoided by
considering only small excursions of the diaphragm[4]. Using normalised
quantities eq.(3) is rewritten as :
q=

va v
.
1 2

(21)

It is tempting to neglect the 2 term and then we find v = q + va [4].

Note however that the last term in this expression is also of the 2nd order
and therefore this is not a consistent approximation. If we introduce the
charge variation, then eq.(21) can be written as :
q 1 1 2 = v 1 + 2 + v a ,

(22)

and now the third order term on the left q 1 2 can be neglected with respect to all other terms, leading to :
q = v + 2 + v a .

(23)

Substituting this in eq. (7) leads to :

v

2
v = 2 + va
t
t

r
.
4 a c0

(24)

This equation enables us to calculate the modified charge distribution if the

deflection is known. Neglecting second order terms in (6) leads to the ideal
eq. (12) and therefore, in eq. (24), we can use the ideal deflection, calculated
in the previous section. Equation (24) can be solved for an arbitrary signal.
However in order to compare with the results of the following section we
consider a sinusoidal excitation. The driving term in (24), 2 + va , then
contains a DC-term and a 2nd harmonic term and gives rise to corresponding terms for the potential and the charge density. The DC-parts v0, q0
are found from :

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net 7

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

v0

2
v0(0) = 1 1 + Va Re 1
2

v0 = 0,
2

2
q0 = v0 + 1 1 + Va Re 1
2

(25)

Eventually the potential variation v0 will become zero again and the
charge density variation will become equal to :
q0 =

2
1
1 + Va Re (1) .
2

(26)

In order to find the time dependence of v0, q0 , we expand v0(0) (and

v 0 ) with the eigenfunctions k(x) . For low frequencies the deflection is
dominated by the lowest eigen-function :

1 = Va H 1,0 cos ( x)
2

(27)

and we then find the following solution :

2

q0 = Va

k=0

0,k

(1 e

k t

) cos (k x) ,

(28)

where the first two coefficients are given by :

8

Q0,0 = 12 3 H1,0 + Re (H1,0)

8
Q0,1 = 30 H1,0 ,

(29)

These are shown in Fig.3 in full lines (for comparison the dashed curve
shows Q0,0 when the quadratic term in the deflection is neglected). Note that
Q0,0 vanishes for 0.1 . For this particular frequency the 2nd mode dominates the charge variation. The charge density variations build up with a
typical time constant for each mode. For the infinite strip the eigenvalues
are given by (17), and with -1 = 1000 M, the lowest time-constant equals
31.1 ms, corresponding with a cut-off frequency of 5.1 Hz. The cut-off frequencies for the higher modes are then 46 Hz, 128 Hz, 250 Hz, . For a
circular diaphragm (radius a) they are given by n = j0 n (n = 1, 2, ),
where j 0 n are the zeros of the Bessel function Jo(z) (j01 = 2.40, j02 = 5.52,
j 03 = 8.65, j 04 = 11.8,). For a circular diaphragm with diameter
2a = 50 cm (which has nearly the same area as the previous strip with a
height of 1 meter) the frequencies are 1.9 Hz, 10 Hz, 25 Hz, 46 Hz, . On
the strip with its poor aspect ratio charge does not have to travel so far in
order to reach equilibrium, which explains the faster response. This is also
the reason why the higher modes build-up much faster.

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net 8

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

The (complex representation of the) 2nd harmonics v2, q2 can be found
from :

2
1
v2 = 12 + Va 1

2
.
1 2
q2 = v2 + 1 + Va 1
2
v2 + j

(30)

With the low-frequency expression for the deflection (27) the solution is
easily found. For < < , this solution is given by :

2 2 H1,0

2
cos ( x) + H1,0 h(x)
q2 = j Va

2
2
4
.
h(x) = cos ( x) + exp (1 + j)

(31)

/ 2 (1 x )

The second contribution, which is due to the quadratic terms in (30), can
again not be neglected and has a somewhat peculiar behaviour ( h(x) is
almost everywhere equal to cos ( x) except near x = 1 , where it drops to
zero; this transition occurs more abrupt if becomes smaller). Note also
that with -1 = 1000 M ( = 1.9 10-3), and for = 0.05, q2 is of the order of 4 % at the maximum drive level. We can expect third harmonic distortion components for the deflection and the pressure being of the same order.
5 Steady-state analysis.
5.1 General theory
We consider a sinusoidal signal voltage :
e j t + e j t
.
va = Va
2

(32a)

Due to the non-linear terms in eq.(3) and (6) all relevant quantities (q, v, ,
fe , p) will contain higher order harmonic components. However the diaphragm charge density (q) and the diaphragm voltage (v) will only show
even harmonics :
1

u=2

j2n t
,
u2n e j2n t + u2n
e

(32b)

n=0

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net 9

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

where u stands for q or v and were denotes the complex conjugate; for the
DC-component we have u0 = u0 ; the electric force (fe), the deflection of the
diaphragm (), and consequently the pressure (p) will only show odd harmonics :
1

u=2

j[2n + 1] t
u2n + 1 e j[2n + 1] t + u2n
,
+ 1e

(32c)

n=0

where u now stands for fe , or p (the coefficients of fe will be denoted as

f2n+1 however). Substituting these developments into the basic equations
and equating the harmonic components of like order leads to a set of equations for the coefficients. The details of this calculation can be found in the
Appendix A. A considerable simplification occurs if, as was done by
Hunt[1], higher order harmonics are neglected with respect to lower order
ones. We then find the following (simplified) expression for the fundamental force term :
2

f1 = q0 Va +q0 1 ,

(33)

and for its third harmonic :

2

f3 = q2 Va +q0 3 + q0 q2 1 .

(34)

For the DC-component of the charge density we find :

q0 = v0 +

Va

( 1 + 1 ) +

2
1
1 q0 ,
2

(35)

and for its 2nd harmonic :

q2 = v2 +

2
1
1 2
1
Va 1 + 2 1 q2 + 2 1 q0 .
2

(36)

5.2 Fundamental frequency

With these approximate expressions the harmonics can now be calculated
consecutively. Starting point is eq. (A1) for n = 0, with the obvious solution
v0 = 1 . From eq.(35) we then find the DC charge distribution in terms of
the fundamental of the deflection and the applied voltage :
1 + 1 Va Re ( 1)
2
q0 =
.
2
1 1 1
2

(37a)

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net10

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

Writing q0 = 1 + q0 , we find :
Va Re ( 1) + 1
.
q0 = 1
2
2
1 1 1
2
2

(37b)

This should be compared with the small-signal result (26). The fundamental
of the electric force (33) can then be written as :
f1 = Va + 1 + f1 ,

(38a)

with :

f1 = q0 Va + 1 2 + q0 .

(38b)

The first two contributions in (38a) correspond with the perfect case
considered in section 3. Finally the first order equation (A2) reduces to :
2
j R + 2i 1 = p1 2e Va + f1 ,

(39)

which, apart from the non-linear force correction f1 , is equivalent with the
ideal equation (13) (eq. (14) remains unchanged). These equations can be
solved by iteration. We can still use developments (15), but should keep in
mind that the coefficients P1,k, H 1,k do now depend on Va , due to the nonlinearity. Fig.4 shows this dependence for the absolute value of the first
pressure coefficient for a number of frequencies. Below the first resonance
the response increases with the driving level, above the first resonance it decreases slightly. Note also that for = 0.05 run away occurs for an excitation beyond Va 0.75 . The coresponding DC charge variations are shown
in Fig.3 with the dash-dotted lines for two drive levels. As for the smallsignal approximations shown in the same figure, the DC charge variation is
expanded into the diaphragm modes :
2

q0 = Va

k=0

0,k

cos (k x) .

(40)

The discrepancy manifested in the upper frequency region in Fig.3b, between the accurate curves and the small-signal approximations is due to the
higher order deflection modes becoming important (see Fig.2b). These have
not been taken into account by the small-signal analysis.

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net11

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

5.3 Harmonic distortion
The third harmonic can be treated in a similar way. The force component
(34) is written as :
f3 = 3 + f3 ,

(41a)

with :
f3 = q0 (q0 + 2) 3 +

1
V + q0 1
2 a

q2 .

(41b)

Substituting this in (A2) with n = 1, gives the equation for the third order
deflection :
j 3 R + 2i,3 3 = p3 2e f 3
2

c 2
= c0 23 + 2e,

(42a)

3 = 3

2
i,3

and the wave equation (A3) becomes :

p3
= 3
m
z

+ 23 p3 = 0,
2

3 .

(42b)

The 2nd order charge density in (41b) is found from (36) and (A1, n = 1) :
1

1 2 1

q2 = j

q2 = v2 + 2 1 (Va + q0 1) ,

2
v2 ,

(43a)

(43b)

with boundary condition v2 = 0 . The potential then satisfies the equation :

j

2
v2 +

v2
1

1 2 1

1 1 (Va + q0 1)
.
2
1
2
1 2 1

(43c)

With 1 and q0 known from the fundamental analysis, eq.(43c) can be

solved for v2 . The second order charge density q2 , given by (43a) then
serves as the driving factor for the third harmonic components p3 and 3
according to (41b) and (42). The parameter determining the third harmonic
distortion is the resistivity of the diaphragm through the parameter in
(43c). The third harmonic distortion of the pressure in the radiation field is
shown in Fig.5 for a resistivity of 1000 M. Shown is the amplitude of the
P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net12

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

first mode of the third harmonic of the pressure relative to the same value
for the fundamental of the pressure. Modes (i = 0, 2, 4) are shown in Fig.6
as a function of frequency for Va = 0.75 . For higher frequencies the higher
modes become dominant. These modes are not radiated but will be present
in the near-field. It is also apparent from these results that the R = 50 Rayl
damping is not sufficient for damping the higher resonances.
Whereas the DC charge density needs some time to adapt to an applied
driving voltage, as shown in section 4, the third harmonic distortion manifests itself immediately. The results shown in Fig.5 and Fig.6 are steadystate values, which are manifested if the charge density has equilibrated. In
Fig.7 this steady-state value is compared with the immediate value for the
distortion. The latter is found by using q0 = 1 (or q0 = 0 ) and the corresponding (ideal) value for the deflection 1 in (43c, 43a, 41b).
6 Discussion
In a not perfect pp-ESLS the finite resistivity has two effects, a level dependent sensitivity and non-linear distortion. In steady-state the sensitivity
changes become noticeable below the first resonance (see Fig.4) and in the
worst case even instability does occur. These sensitivity changes are independent of the diaphragm resistivity. However the time required for their
manifestation does depend on the resistivity. With a resistivity -1 = 109 ,
we have found a time-constant around 30 ms for the strip considered,
which is probably not acceptable. A resistivity 1012 seems therefore more
appropriate, but note that driving this hypothetical loudspeaker at = 0.05
(with the parameters shown in Table 2 this corresponds with a frequency of
27 Hz) and at a (normalised) level higher than 0.75 would still result in
instability after a multiple of 30 s.
Since the harmonic distortion is to a first approximation proportional with
the resistivity, increasing the resistivity from 10 9 to 1012 , will reduce
the distortions, shown in Fig.5-7, with a factor 1000. Even for very low frequencies the distortion then does not exceed 0.05 %. With -1 = 109 and
restricting the frequency range to > 0.05, the worst case distortion equals
nearly 7 % however.
Well-known commercial designs like the famous Quad ESL 63 are reported
in the popular literature as having resistivities in the order of 1012 [7].
Other commercial designs are mentioned with a much lower resistivity of

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net13

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

only 100 k and these designs then rely on a series resistor. In Hunts onedimensional model [1] the resistivity of the diaphragm is irrelevant and the
role of the diaphragm resistivity is taken over by the series resistor through
which the diaphragm is biased. I wonder whether Hunts model may have
spurred the use of a fairly conductive diaphragm together with a series
resistor. Anyway it remains interesting to analyse to what extent the role of
the diaphragm resistivity can be taken over by a series resistor. To answer
this question we must replace the boundary condition for eq.(7) with a more
complicated one involving the series resistor and this is beyond the scope of
the present paper. However we can anticipate that as long as the charge
variations are dominated by the lowest mode, they can only be established
by a variation of the net charge on the diaphragm. In that case a series
resistor will be nearly as effective. However if higher order modes come
into play then some of the charge variations can be established by a mere
redistribution of the diaphragm charge and a series resistor will not be able
to suppress these variations. We believe therefore that a series resistor will
not be able to reduce the harmonic distortion at the high end of the
considered frequency range.
In this paper we have attempted to predict the distortion characteristics of an
ideal pp-ESLS. In addition to the mentioned incorporation of a series resistor, another useful generalisation to be considered is the introduction of
asymmetry in the structure. In that case the neat distinction between quantities with even and odd harmonics will disappear. We hope to address these
topics in the future.

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net14

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

References
[1]

F. V. Hunt, Electroacoustics : The Analysis of Transduction, and its

Historical Background, 2nd edition, Acoustical Society of America,
1982, pp. 173-212. (Except for a list of errata this edition is identical
with the original edition from 1954.)

[2]

J.H. Streng, Calculation of the surface pressure on a vibrating circular diaphragm in free space, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 82 (2), August
1987, pp. 679-686.

[3]

J. H. Streng, Calculation of integrals which occur in the analysis of

circular stretched diaphragm sound radiation, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 83
(3), March 1988, pp. 1183-1185.

[4]

J. H. Streng, Charge Movements on the Stretched Diaphragm in a

Circular Electrostatic Push-Pull Loudspeaker, J. Audio Eng. Soc.,
Vol. 38, No. 5, May 1990, pp. 331-339.

[5]

P. De Visschere, The validity of Ramos theorem, Solid-State

Electronics, 33, pp.455-459, 1990.

[6]

P. De Visschere, Calculation of the surface pressure on the

diaphragm of a perfect push-pull electrostatic loudspeaker, to be
published.

[7]

E. Fikier, Elektrostatische luidsprekers, zelf bouwen of zelf kopen,

Elektuur BV, 1993, pp.77-92 and pp.122-132.

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net15

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

Appendix A
Substituting the developments (32) into the basic equations and equating the
harmonic components of like order leads to a set of equations for the
harmonic coefficients. The linear equations (7-10) lead to similar equations
for the corresponding coefficients :
j

2
v2n = n q2n ,

(A1a)

with boundary conditions :

v2n = 0, (n 0)

v0 = 1 .

(A1b)

The mechanical equation (8) and the acoustical equation (9) become :
c 2
2
j 2 n + 1 R + c0 22 n + 1 2 n + 1 = p2 n + 1 2e f2 n + 1 ,

(A2)

and :
+ 22 n + 1 p2 n + 1 = 0 ,
2

(A3a)

where 2 n + 1 = (2 n + 1) and with boundary condition :

p2 n + 1
= 2n+1
m
z

2 n + 1 .

(A3b)

From the non-linear equations (3) and (6) we find :

q2n + v2n = va + q
2n

2
2n

(A4a)

+ q 2n + 1 .
f2n + 1 = q va
2n+1

(A4b)

The first contributions on the RHS are rather simple (in the remainder of
this appendix formulas are expressed with the original variables; it is easily
seen that normalised quantities obey the same relations) :
Va
( 2n 1 + 2n + 1)
2n 2
Va
va = ( 1 + 1)
0 4

va

(n 0)

(A5a)

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net16

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

V
q va 2 n + 1 = a q2 n + q2 n + 2
2
Va
2 q0 + q2
q va 1 =
2

(n 0)

(A5b)

The remaining contributions in(A4) however contain terms involving all the
harmonics of q and . This makes the resulting system of equations difficult
to solve. Fortunately higher order harmonics are supposed to be small with
respect to lower ones (|3| << |1|, |q2| << |q0| and so on). Following Hunt[1]
we retain only the dominant terms and (A5) then simplify :

va

2n

va =
0

Va

Va
4

2n 1

( 1 + 1

Va
q
2 2n
q va 1 = Va q0

q va 2 n + 1 =

(n 0)

(A6a)

(A6b)

(n 0)

The second contributions in the RHS of (A4) now become much simpler :
1

2 q 2n = 2

l=0

2 2l q2[n l] +

1
1 2
2
2n q0 + q2n 1 ,
4
2

(A7a)

with :
1

2 2n = 2

2 0 =

1
2

n1

2[n l] 1 2l + 1

(n 0)

l=0

(A7b)

and :
q2

n
1
1
2
q 2 2[n l] 2l + 1 ,

q
+
=
2n + 1 2 2n + 1 0 2
l=0

(A8a)

with :
1 n
q 2n = q2n q0 + q2[n l] q2l
2l = 0
2

q 2 0 = q0

(n 0)

(A8b)

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net17

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

Figure captions
Fig.1 Model for an idealised push-pull electrostatic loudspeaker.
Fig.2 The normalised response of an ideal strip pp-ESLS. Shown are the
absolute values of the first three modes for (a) the diaphragm
pressure, and for (b) the diaphragm deflection. Parameters values are
shown in Table 2.
Fig.3 The normalised (a) first and (b) second mode of the steady-state DC
charge density variation for sinusoidal excitation. Shown are two
small signal approximations (full lines and dashed lines) and exact
results for two drive voltage levels (dashed dotted lines).
Fig.4 The variation of the absolute value of the first mode of the
diaphragm pressure with the sinusoidal driving voltage level for
different frequencies.
Fig.5 Third harmonic distortion as a function of driving voltage level for
different frequencies and for a diaphragm resistivity of 1000 M.
Fig.6 The absolute value of the first, third and fifth mode of the third
harmonic diaphragm pressure normalised with the first mode of the
fundamental pressure as a function of frequency. Diaphragm
resistivity equals 1000 M.
Fig.7 Comparison between the steady-state (full line) and the immediate
(broken line) third harmonic distortion. The immediate value is
valid insofar as the DC charge density has not yet adapted to the
driving level. Diaphragm resistivity equals 1000 M.

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net18

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

Quantity normalised

with

voltage : v, va, Va

V0

charge density : q

Q0 =

2 V0
r

deflection :

cordinates : x,

time : t

a
2 c0

electric force : fe

2 V02
2r

electric field : E

V0
r

pressure : p

r T
2 a2

mechanical damping : R

T
a c0

Table 1 : quantities shown on the left are normalised

with the values shown on the right.

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net19

Example from "Loudspeaker Bibliography" www.shackman.reromanus.net

a
T

10 cm
100 N/m

0.02 kg/m2

V0

2000 V

2.3 mm

50 Rayl

109

c/c0

0.206

0.763

0.06

1.89 10-3

Table 2 : Parameter values used for the numerical

calculations. They reduce to 4 dimensionless parameters, which are also listed.

P.More
De Visschere
know-how on http://www.shackman.reromanus.net20