|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.192.238.193
In Reply to: RE: DIY rack design posted by mcguirek on February 25, 2012 at 07:10:33
Well, since space between shelves is usually an issue one would have to think about how to integrate mass on spring systems and or roller bearing type systems into the rack construction. The Springs themselves could be real steel springs or rubber/elastomer balls of appropriate spring rate. Spring rate circa 15 - 20 lb/inch is about right. The Mass is the combined mass of the component + top plate, the plate supported by the springs. The springs or balls would rest directly on the rack shelf OR on a bottom plate which in turn rests on cones on the rack shelf. When you add up all the plates and cones/feet it's easy to run out of space between shelves if not predesigned. Then one comes back to the idea, well, maybe it's going to be easier and better (sonically) in the end to forget the rack and mount everything directly on the floor.
Edits: 02/25/12Follow Ups:
I believe - though I may be wrong - that in recent years visco-elastic materials have replaced metal springs in many/most vibration damping situations. I have obtained some Sylomer - a special PUR Elastomer material - to use on my equipment rack. Sylomer is used as an elastic interlayer like a spring.
What's the spring rate? :-)
Wow, Geof, something about which we can sort of agree.
yes, most people spike 'em down without regards to the other modes of vibration racks are prone to. Hi mass may just resonate at a lower frequency. not necesssarily a 'better' one.
Mass on spring was one system advocted in a Sterophile article.....give me a minute and I'll try to find it!
HIGHLY recommended article::
Too much is never enough
Yup, high mass and even high rigidity only get you so far.
The author of the article you linked to,Bad Vibes, gave me a design feature of my first product.
Article got ME thinking, too.
However, my construction skills are not advanced enough to build what I want, which is very complex.
Even with me not disclosing all the design features, a local woodshop bid over 3000$ for my idea.
I told 'em about 1/2 of what I wanted to do,
2nd source materials would run another 500$ to 1000$ and even needed some parts custom manufactured.
Complex? Yes.
Wanna talk? PM me and maybe we can do some business.
Too much is never enough
You think that's complex? My sub hertz platform is so complex It cannot be copied.
:-)
That is quite a claim.
If patent is the issue, the deepest pockets will generally prevail, IF someone decides to copy it.
If you think it can't be copied, that's another matter. I can't off hand think of something which can't be reverse engineered and thereby copied.
Too much is never enough
I can think of a lot of things that cannot be reversed engineered. The trouble with patents is you have to give too much away. :-)
I looked at the Promethean table and sure, it could be reverse engineered.
Easy? maybe not.
The key is the piston / bladder arrangement which I see has the 'Firestone' label......That's where I'd start.
IF you have the entire production of the cylinder tied up...legally and such, that could be a problem. Otherwise?
Materials. Measure. Characterize. No secrets, which I know you thrive on.
.....cheers........
Can I have an example of something which can't be reverse engineered....besides your claim for the iso platform?
Too much is never enough
Actually, it was the Nimbus platform. The Promthean is quite simple in design. WRT the Nimbus things are not always what they seem. The shun mood mpingo disc is a good example of something that is quite difficult to reverse engineer, although it appears easy to knock off.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: