Post by redrum on Jun 1, 2017 17:26:09 GMT
Hello!
I have a question about the specs over time of your membrane traps.
You’ve suggested numerous times that the thin membrane itself is glued to the fiberglass panel, but that you are not 100% sure (as far as I was able to find online) as to why the membrane actually extends the low end absorption.
I have two theories (my actual questions are beneath):
A. The non-air-transparent thin membrane “bonds” together the entire surface of the fiberglass panel, turning the fiberglass into (in part) a panel absorber. Here the weight of the whole device becomes an important factor. Also, the panel shouldn’t be squeezed by the supporting frame. Or,
B. The glue and the fiberglass become the “spring” system, which applies opposing force to the movement of the membrane. This would make the operation more similar to a limp mass absorber. In this case the depth of the fiberglass panel, and how tight the frame is are not very critical factors.
Question(s) -
1. A or B?
2. 1. If the system is closer in operation to the B theory, wouldn’t the stability over time of the glue be very critical? Have you tested it say, 5 years after production?
3. If it’s closer to my A theory, wouldn’t the surface size and weight of the panel (and mounting) be critical? I see you have different sizes on offer (e.g. MiniTrap), but the absorption measurements are the same AFAIK.
4. What’s most confusing is that (after watching your MiniTrap production video), it seems to me that the thin membrane is not glued to the fiberglass panel at all, but only to the cover fabric - which rests freely on top of the fiberglass panel.
I hope I am not being too annoying, I’ve been exploring acoustics for the past 6 months and it’s completely taken over my life Thank you!
I have a question about the specs over time of your membrane traps.
You’ve suggested numerous times that the thin membrane itself is glued to the fiberglass panel, but that you are not 100% sure (as far as I was able to find online) as to why the membrane actually extends the low end absorption.
I have two theories (my actual questions are beneath):
A. The non-air-transparent thin membrane “bonds” together the entire surface of the fiberglass panel, turning the fiberglass into (in part) a panel absorber. Here the weight of the whole device becomes an important factor. Also, the panel shouldn’t be squeezed by the supporting frame. Or,
B. The glue and the fiberglass become the “spring” system, which applies opposing force to the movement of the membrane. This would make the operation more similar to a limp mass absorber. In this case the depth of the fiberglass panel, and how tight the frame is are not very critical factors.
Question(s) -
1. A or B?
2. 1. If the system is closer in operation to the B theory, wouldn’t the stability over time of the glue be very critical? Have you tested it say, 5 years after production?
3. If it’s closer to my A theory, wouldn’t the surface size and weight of the panel (and mounting) be critical? I see you have different sizes on offer (e.g. MiniTrap), but the absorption measurements are the same AFAIK.
4. What’s most confusing is that (after watching your MiniTrap production video), it seems to me that the thin membrane is not glued to the fiberglass panel at all, but only to the cover fabric - which rests freely on top of the fiberglass panel.
I hope I am not being too annoying, I’ve been exploring acoustics for the past 6 months and it’s completely taken over my life
Thank you! 
