Yep, that's a good idea. Or, you could consider the gas-powered equivalent, a free piston engine. Cheapest, though, would be a trained alligator (they have some sort of subsonic mating call).
- Vote on answer
- posted
13 years ago
Low frequency underwater speaker/transducer
Loading thread data ...
- Vote on answer
- posted
13 years ago
Obviously from first hand experience. Except that in your case, it was your lips that weighed a few kilograms... each, and Talking that was what moved them around at a few hUrtz...
Bwuahahahaha!
- Vote on answer
- posted
13 years ago
You would be surprised what an enclosed pocket of gas transfers to a flat membrane in a closed spaced, fired directly from a transducer. That bit of dampening is actually better than what you are after, but if that is what you want, you would then want a sub woofer driver with a super-light weight post glued in place of the coil cap that fires the membrane directly. Then, you can have a lower frequency device you are after.
The bullhorn works though. Think of how they can hear into office buildings using laser interferometry. Under water, it isn't even needed. One can hear the sound quite a distance away from very little input power. Your voice at the back of the bullhorn would do, much less (more?) electrical transducers.
Anyway,play a drum under water and you get sound projection at great distances. Easy to blow out transducers and listening gear if peaks are not kept chopped so that anomalies like small (or large) explosions do not destroy some segment of your gear. (your monitor speakers and your ears).
- Vote on answer
- posted
13 years ago
was
alking
Archie, Thanks for your help.
- Vote on answer
- posted
13 years ago
When I was doing sonobouy chips and towed arrays, the designs always had a single pole rising response in the spec. I assumed this was to compensate for the attenuation of the water, similar to equalizing a communications channel. Needless to say the specs never said why to do this, just do it. Anyway, that makes me wonder about the lubell going out to 20kHz.
- Vote on answer
- posted
13 years ago
A small polypropylene subwoofer from the auto parts section of a Kmart/Target/Kragen/Pep Boys/Walmart. $49 might even buy one with an amplifier rated "1000W".
-- I will not see posts or email from Google because I must filter them as spam
- Vote on answer
- posted
13 years ago
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Dan
Your concept of fairly large amplitude is a lot smaller than mine.
A DC motor and eccentric weight would probably do what you want to accomplish.
Dan
- Vote on answer
- posted
13 years ago
Motor, crank and diaphragm (or piston). A bit limited at higher frequencies, but pretty good amplitude.
-- Paul Hovnanian paul@hovnanian.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Have gnu, will travel.
- Vote on answer
- posted
13 years ago
Water's a lot denser than air (about 700 times) and also essentially incompressible.
A driver designed for frequencies above 7kHz in air will have the right force to displacement ratio. It looks like a piezo tweeter driver might be a good starting point.
-- ?? 100% natural --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
- Vote on answer
- posted
13 years ago
That's completely different attach a vibrator to the container, or embed it, the internet should have plenty of vendors.
-- ?? 100% natural --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
- Vote on answer
- posted
13 years ago
Actuator attached to the container might be sufficient
-- Dirk http://www.neopax.com/technomage/ - My new book - Magick and Technology
- Vote on answer
- posted
13 years ago
=20
Water or jelly is a much different substance than air. I would have gone with a 1 inch aluminum dome tweeter and about 200 W to drive it. A real shaker and amplifier might be had used for US$ 2000.