How low will this basstrap absorb?

[bwo]

Does anyone know how deep a superchunk basstrap with triangles cut in 60 x 60 x 83.5 cm and height of 120 cm will absorb?

Material will be rockwool and density can be 65 kg/m3, 55 kg/m3 or 30 kg/m3. And what density is preferable? Can probably find other density too and fiberglass is also an option. Whatever absorbs low bass freq. best, the deeper the deeper.

[Jens Eklund]

You can make an educated guess using this tool:

Porous Absorber Calculator V1.56


Sincerely Jens Eklund

[Glenn Kuras]

I would say it is going to get down to 50hz pretty well.

[bwo]

Originally Posted by Jens Eklund

You can make an educated guess using this tool:

Porous Absorber Calculator V1.56


Sincerely Jens Eklund

I can't get it to work. I'm using Microsoft Office 2000 and downloaded the 97/2003 version. I've enabled macros. When I change something, the graph just becomes flat. Am I missing out on something here?
Are there any calcultators for triangles?

[bwo]

Originally Posted by Glenn Kuras

I would say it is going to get down to 50hz pretty well.

Not matter what density of rockwool?

[Steab]

Go for 55kg since your chunks are gonna be phat. 65kg would work too.

[Jens Eklund]

Originally Posted by bwo

I can't get it to work. I'm using Microsoft Office 2000 and downloaded the 97/2003 version. I've enabled macros. When I change something, the graph just becomes flat. Am I missing out on something here?
Are there any calcultators for triangles?

The complex formulations are language specific so you need to either translate the formulas (since your Excel is in Norwegian) or use a translation add on.

[Glenn Kuras]

Originally Posted by bwo

Not matter what density of rockwool?

There seems to be discussion about less dense for filling the corner and from the testing I have seen it seems to be true.

[bwo]

Originally Posted by Glenn Kuras

There seems to be discussion about less dense for filling the corner and from the testing I have seen it seems to be true.

But I assume that's only with large triangles. With triangles cut in 30 x 30 x 43 cm, what would be the optimal density? And what about 43 x 43 x 66 cm?

[avare]

Originally Posted by bwo

But I assume that's only with large triangles. With triangles cut in 30 x 30 x 43 cm, what would be the optimal density? And what about 43 x 43 x 66 cm?

With full fillling, as Superchunks are, around 10-20 kg/m^3. It is not critical.

Andre

[Nordenstam]

It's a bit hard to predict with the spreadsheet calculator, as the triangle shape doesn't readily translate into a single depth figure. It seems the very smallest triangles you suggest may benefit from denser rockwool. Maybe.. For the rest, I assume it's pretty safe to go with light density. If in doubt, use the lighter stuff. It's also half the price!


FWIW: my room is having some rather serious amounts of rockwool. No superchunking, but close to it in some places. Many corners are straddled with 10-20cm thick pieces and in some places the depth to wall is half a meter or so with several layers of absorbers. Looking at the resulting modal response, most everything is absorbed down to about 100Hz. There's some pretty useful aborption below that, but it's not enough to make me entirely satisfied. Going to build some tuned traps for the area below 100Hz!

[Jens Eklund]

Originally Posted by Lupo

Going to build some tuned traps for the area below 100Hz!

Sounds good!

/Jens

[bwo]

Originally Posted by Lupo

Going to build some tuned traps for the area below 100Hz!

Let us know!
I'm considering moving on to pressure based traps soon. Modex Plate from RPG looks nice, but it would be cheaper to build something. Just not sure how yet....