1 alma 2003 winter symposium world cone symposium world cone symposium a simple approach to improve...
TRANSCRIPT
1
ALMA 2003 Winter SymposiumALMA 2003 Winter Symposium
“ “World Cone SymposiumWorld Cone Symposium””
A Simple Approach to Improve Sensitivity ofA Simple Approach to Improve Sensitivity of
Quality Control Procedures of LoudspeakersQuality Control Procedures of Loudspeakers
Presented byPresented by
Mauro BigiMauro Bigi
Maurizio JacchiaMaurizio Jacchia
Audiomatica Srl - ItalyAudiomatica Srl - Italy
Imperial Palace, Las Vegas - January 8, 2003
2
THE AUTHORS INVESTIGATE THE APPLICATIONS OF ONE CAPABILITY OF THE CLIO SYSTEM:
ADDING A DC COMPONENT TO THE EXCITATION SIGNAL.
WHILE THE IMPLICATIONS SPAN FROM R&D TO PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT IN GENERAL,
THE AUTHORS FOCUS ON QUALITY CONTROL ENVIRONMENTS.
AN ENGINEERING REPORT COMPARES SEVERAL QUALITY CONTROL TEST METHODS
WITH AND WITHOUT THIS STRESSING TECHNIQUE.
ABSTRACTABSTRACT
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
3
INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION
• WE WOULD LIKE TO GIVE FIRST THE GUIDELINESWE FOLLOWED WHILE DEVELOPING
THE QUALITY CONTROL PART OF OUR MEASURING SYSTEM,
AS THESE ARE CONSISTENT WITH OUR PRESENTATION HERE
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
4
INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION
• “HOW IS AN EFFECTIVE QC MEASUREMENT SYSTEM DEVELOPED?”
• “MERGING WELL ESTABLISHED AND DOCUMENTED MEASURING TECHNIQUES WITH REQUESTS COMING
FROM EXPERIENCED QC ENGINEERS”
• 10 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE TELL US THAT THE “QUALITY” OF A QUALITY CONTROL ENVIRONMENT
IS MORE DEPENDENT ON THE SKILL OFTHE QC ENGINEER(S) RATHER THAN ON
THE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM ITSELF
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
5
• THE WORD “QUALITY” STAYS FOR THE FINAL RESULT, I.E. AVOIDING SHIPPING DEFECTIVE LOUDSPEAKERS
TO CUSTOMERS;THEY SHOULD ALSO BE AS CLOSE TO THE REFERENCE
AS POSSIBLE
www.cliowin.com
INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION
• THE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM MUST HOWEVERBE FLEXIBLE, ACCURATE AND RELIABLE;
IT SHOULD SPEED UP, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE,ANY OPERATION INVOLVED
• WE ADDRESS PROBLEMSGIVING POWERFUL TOOLS TO ENGINEERS,NO WIZARDS OR UNIQUE MAGIC NUMBERS
WHAT WE PRESENT HERE IS JUST ONE MORE TOOL
www.audiomatica.com
6
R&D ENGINEERS
PRODUCTION LINES
QC ENGINEERS
CRITICAL TIME CONSUMING ITEMS ARE:
A) USER’S LEARNING CURVEB) QC PROCEDURES DEVELOPMENTC) EASY FITTING IN EXISTING PRODUCTION LINESD) STATISTICS AND RESULT REPORTINGE) FEEDBACK TO TOLERANCE MASKS
INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION
YOUR COMPANY
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
7
• THE STRESSING METHOD WE ARE PRESENTING APPLIES, AS AN ADD-ON,
TO VIRTUALLY ANY WELL ESTABLISHED MEASURING TECHNIQUE AUGMENTING
ITS “GOOD-TO-BAD” SPREAD
• OUR ENGINEERING REPORT WILL COVER TWO DIFFERENT CASES
ADDRESSING RUB&BUZZ DETECTION:
INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION
• SWEEP WITH RESPONSE ANDDISTORTION VS. FREQUENCY ANALYSIS
• SINGLE FREQUENCY THD
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
8
• GENERIC TERM MEANING AN ACOUSTIC DEFECTWITH IMPULSIVE (LOW ENERGY) CHARACTERISTICS
MORE EASILY DETECTED BY THE END USERTHAN LINEAR AND NON LINEARCONVENTIONAL DISTORTIONS
• IT IS THEREFORE THE “BLACK BEAST” OF ANY QC ENGINEER, AS LACK OF ITS DETECTION
HAS GREAT IMPACT ON COMPANY’S IMAGE
RUB&BUZZRUB&BUZZ
• IT IS CAUSED, DURING PARTS ASSEMBLY,BY SEVERAL DIFFERENT REASONS RANGING
FROM DEFECTIVE PARTS TO PRODUCTION TOLERANCES
• IT CAN BE INTERMITTENT
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
9
• STILL IN MANY ENVIRONMENTS AN HEARINGTEST PRECEDES AN AUTOMATED QC TEST
• ITS INTENSITY RANGES FROM MACROSCOPIC - DETECTABLE BY ANY MEASUREMENT, I.E. LEVEL -
TO VERY LITTLE - REQUIRING A QUITE ENVIRONMENTTO BE HEARD
RUB&BUZZRUB&BUZZ
• THE FIRST CASE OF STUDYADDRESSES THE LATTER SITUATION
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
10
BLOCK DIAGRAMBLOCK DIAGRAM
ISense
From CLIOIn 1
D.U.T.
Ampli/SwitchBoxCLIOQC
OUTPUT ACLIO
INPUT A
OUTPUT B
INPUT B
To CLIO
Mic
Speaker
AC OUTPUT WITH DC CAPABILITY (± 2.5V)
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
CURRENT SENSING OUTPUT
DC COUPLED AMPLIFIER (WITH 10 dB GAIN)
11
• 8” P.A. WOOFER
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
• ACOUSTICALLY (BY EAR) THE BAD UNIT EMITSA VERY LOW LEVEL CLICKING NOISE
WHEN THE SWEEP REACHES THE RESONANCE REGION WHICH IS BETTER HEARD BELOW RESONANCE
Fs 80 Hz Re 5.2 OhmBl 12.44 TmCms 0.15 mm/N
Qes 0.45
Qms 3.51
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
12
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
• BELOW RESONANCE THE PROPER SOUND EMISSION DECREASES WHILE DISPLACEMENT CONTINUES
TO INCREASE OR REMAINS THE SAME UNTIL DC (0 Hz)
• OBTAINING DISPLACEMENT IS THE FIRST REQUIREMENT TO UNDERLINE RUB & BUZZ
• IN RARE CASES DISPLACEMENT ALONEIS NOT SUFFICIENT AND A CONTEMPORANEOUS
HIGHER FREQUENCY TONE IS REQUIRED
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
13
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
• THE LATTER OBSERVATION SUGGESTS THATWHEN THE CONE BEHAVES AS A RIGID PISTON
(LOW FREQUENCY - HIGH DISPLACEMENT)IS ABLE TO REDUCE SOME HOW THE RUB & BUZZ
• ADDING A HIGHER FREQUENCY TONE BREAKS CONE PISTON BEHAVIOUR MAKING RUB & BUZZ
MORE EVIDENT
• ALL THIS YIELDS TO THE POSSIBLE USEOF A TWO TONE SIGNAL FOR THE TEST LOOKING
FOR THD AND IMD COMPONENTS BY FFT ANALYSIS
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
14
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
• UNFORTUNATELY THE CHOICE OFTHE FREQUENCY OF THE ADDED TONE IS NOT EASYTO BE DETERMINED ASIDE FROM EMPIRICAL BASIS
• WHILE THESE KIND OF TESTS ARE VERY FASTAND CAN THEREFORE BE REPEATED
FOR MANY SECOND TONE FREQUENCIES, THEY DO NOT ALLOW SIMULTANEOUS
FREQUENCY RESPONSE CHECK
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
15
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
• THE BASIC IDEA FOR THIS EXAMPLEIS TO PERFORM A SWEEP TEST WITH FREQUENCY
RESPONSE AND HARMONIC CHECKAND OBTAINING DISPLACEMENT AT ANY FREQUENCY
DURING THE SWEEP BY ADDING A DC COMPONENTTO THE TEST SIGNAL.
•THE TEST SHOULD BE REPEATED TWICE,TO ADDRESS BOTH DISPLACEMENT DIRECTIONS
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
16
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
CRITICAL CHOICES FOR THE TEST ARE:
•AC SIGNAL LEVEL•FREQUENCY RANGE
•DC SIGNAL LEVEL
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
17
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
•TEST LEVELS, AC AND DC, AFFECT BOTHVOICE COIL DISSIPATION AND DISPLACEMENT
•FOCUS SHOULD BE ON DISPLACEMENTAS THIS IS THE LIMITING FACTOR;
DISSIPATION LIMIT IS NOT AN ISSUE HERE
•THE FREQUENCY RANGE SHOULD BE EXTENDED AROUND 1 OCTAVE BELOW RESONANCE
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
18
0.1 1 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
• NORMALIZED EXCURSION VS. FREQUENCY FOR Q FROM 0.2 TO 1 IN 0.2 STEP FOR CONSTANT VOLTAGE DRIVE
0.2
0.40.6
0.8
1.0
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
19
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
•THIS GRAPH, DERIVED FROM SMALL’S EQUATIONS [1],HOLDS FOR SMALL SIGNALS
•IT SHOWS THAT FOR VOLTAGE DRIVE, AS WELL ASFOR Q<0.7, WHICH IS THE CASE HERE AND IN MOST
REAL LIFE APPLICATION, MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENT IS REACHED WELL BELOW
RESONANCE AND APPROACHES THE DC ONE
•THIS STATEMENT SHOULD BE TAKEN WITH CARE
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
20
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
•KLIPPEL [2], IN “ASSESSING VOICE COIL PEAK DISPLACEMENT”,
SHOWED INCREASED DISPLACEMENTAT RESONANCE DUE TO BL NON LINEARITYBEING DOMINANT OVER SUSPENSION LIMIT
•GANDER [3] GIVES THE FOLLOWING RELATIONSHIPFOR FORCE VS. VOLTAGE DRIVE AT RESONANCE
Bl
ZEF mt
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
21
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
•THE BL IN THE DENOMINATOR SHOWS THATBL REDUCTION, DUE TO HIGH DISPLACEMENT, INCREASES FORCE AND GIVES REASON FOR
THE EXPANSION EFFECT AT RESONANCE
•HOWEVER DURING QC TESTS GREAT OVERLOAD,I.E. GOING IN STRONG NON LINEAR AREA,
SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WITH CAREFOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
22
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
•QC HAPPENS, MOST OFTEN, JUST AT THE END OF THE ASSEMBLY PROCESS BEFORE PACKAGING;
IN THIS PHASE, GLUES AND CONE TREATMENTS SETTING MIGHT NOT BE COMPLETE
•QC DEFINES ITS PASS/FAIL LIMITS UPON A REFERENCEOR AN AVERAGE OF PRODUCTION.STRONG NON LINEARITY MAKES
LIMITS AMBIGUOUS AND THEREFORE DIFFICULT TO HANDLE
•NOISE POLLUTION IN GENERAL IS AN ISSUE BOTHFOR OPERATORS HEALTH AND INTERFERENCE BETWEEN LINES
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
23
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
•THE FOUNDATION OF THIS APPROACHIS TO ACHIEVE COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE
OF CONE’S DISPLACEMENT
•WE CHOSE AN AC LEVELFOR A MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENT CORRESPONDING
TO 3÷5% OF 3RD HARMONIC DISTORTION [3]WHICH HAPPENS AT THE LOWEST SWEEP
FREQUENCY (45Hz)
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
24
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
FROM THE FOLLOWING RELATIONSHIP [3],[4]
radiuspistona
C20atm
kg1.21air,ofdensityρ
2bypressurenearfieldp
where
afπ4ρ
px
0
peakN
220
peakNpeak
WE OBTAINED Xpeak=1.35mm=Xmax
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
25
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
• WE GAVE A QUICK METHOD TO DETERMINE MAXIMUM EXCURSION;
SHOULD YOU KNOW IT AS A TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION YOU MAY EASILY REVERT THE FORMULA
TO OBTAIN THE DESIRED SPL
• IF THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONCOMES FROM A COMMERCIAL BROCHURE,
WE WARMLY SUGGEST THE FIRST APPROACH!
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
26
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
• WE CHOSE A DC VALUE CORRESPONDING TO 1/3*Xmax=0.45mm
BlC
R
3
xV
ms
emaxDC
• TO MAINTAIN THE MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENT WITH DC, ON THE DC SIDE, AROUND THE SAME,
THE AC LEVEL HAS BEEN REDUCED BY 2dB
• WHILE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DC CURRENT AND DISPLACEMENTIS FAR FROM BEING LINEAR [5],
WE CONSIDER THE ERROR ACCEPTABLEFOR OUR PURPOSES
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
27
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION OF LEVELS AT VERY LOW FREQUENCIES
AC+VDC
AC ONLY
AC-VDC
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
28
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
CONSIDERATIONS ON THE RESULTS:
• THE LEFT SIDE GRAPHS SHOW VERY LITTLE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BAD AND GOOD UNITS IN THE LOWEST HARMONICS,
NOT USABLE TO ESTABLISH RELIABLE QC LIMITS
• HIGHER HARMONICS, BELOW RESONANCE,SHOW AN APPRECIABLE BUT STILL SMALL DIFFERENCE,
WHICH DOESN’T CORRELATE WITH THE HEARD PHENOMENON
• THE RIGHT SIDE GRAPHS SHOW A MUCH INCREASEDDIFFERENCE BETWEEN BAD AND GOOD,
EVEN IN LOW HARMONICS,FOR A WELL EXTENDED FREQUENCY RANGE
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
29
2ND HARMONIC - NO DC 2ND HARMONIC - WITH DC
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
3RD HARMONIC - NO DC 3RD HARMONIC - WITH DC
FUNDAMENTAL
GOOD UNIT
BAD UNIT
30
4TH HARMONIC - NO DC 4TH HARMONIC - WITH DC
EXAMPLE “A”EXAMPLE “A”
5TH HARMONIC - NO DC 5TH HARMONIC - WITH DC
FUNDAMENTAL
GOOD UNIT
BAD UNIT
31
• 8” P.A. WOOFER
EXAMPLE “B”EXAMPLE “B”
• THE SAME MODEL OF THE PREVIOUS EXAMPLE WITH A BAD SAMPLE SHOWING MORE EVIDENT
RUB&BUZZ DEPENDENT ON DISPLACEMENT ONLY
Fs 80 Hz Re 5.2 OhmBl 12.44 TmCms 0.15 mm/N
Qes 0.45
Qms 3.51
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
32
EXAMPLE “B”EXAMPLE “B”
• AS CLEARLY POINTED OUT BY TEMME [6],THD IS NOT ABLE TO RELIABLY DETECT RUB&BUZZ
• THIS MAINLY HAS TWO REASONS;RUB&BUZZ CREATES
IMPULSIVE LOW ENERGY DISTORTIONWHILE LOUDSPEAKERS SHOW RELATIVELY
HIGH ENERGY LOW ORDER HARMONICS
• NEVERTHELESS CLASSICAL THD MEASUREMENTIS VERY ATTRACTIVE DUE TO ITS ONE VALUE
RESULT AND, WHEN PERFORMED WITHACTUAL DSP SYSTEMS,
TAKES A FRACTION OF A SECOND TO EXECUTE
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
33
EXAMPLE “B”EXAMPLE “B”
• OUR APPROACH HERE IS TO REDUCE SUBSTANTIALLY THE AC TEST LEVEL
DEALING THEREFORE WITHA MUCH MORE LINEAR DEVICE
• AND, MOST IMPORTANT FOR THE QC ENGINEER, A SINGLE VALUE RESULT MEANS A SINGLE VALUE
LIMIT MASK
• THE AC LEVEL WAS INTENTIONALLY“OVER REDUCED”, IN THE DC CASE, BY 15dB
• THE DC LEVEL WAS SET TO OBTAIN HALF XMAX AS DETERMINED IN PREVIOUS EXAMPLE
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
34
EXAMPLE “B”EXAMPLE “B”
• THE RESULTS ARE SPECTACULAR IN TERMSOF BAD TO GOOD DETECTION IN THE DC CASE
DUE TO THE LOW AC LEVEL
• THE TEST FREQUENCY WAS SETAT THE DEVICE RESONANCE
• THE SPEED OF THE TEST PERMITSITS REPETITION AT DIFFERENT DC LEVELS
TO COVER FULL EXCURSION
• THE AC REDUCTION LEVEL TO THE NUMBEROF DC STEPS REQUIRED TO COVER
THE ENTIRE EXCURSION IS LEFT TO QC ENGINEER’S NEED
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
35
GOOD UNIT - NO DC
EXAMPLE “B”EXAMPLE “B”
BAD UNIT - NO DC
THD 5.13%
THD 3.65%
GOOD UNIT - WITH DC BAD UNIT - WITH DC
THD 23.7%
THD 0.63%
36
CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com
THE SIMPLE TECHNIQUE PROPOSEDHAS PROVEN TO BE EFFECTIVE
IN AUGMENTING GOOD-TO-BAD SPREADIN QUALITY CONTROL TESTS
IT CAN BE EASILY ADDED TO ANY MEASUREMENT SYSTEM AS AN EXTERNAL ADD-ON, TYPICALLY
INCLUDED IN THE POWER AMPLIFIER.
37
• [3] M.R.GANDER “MOVING-COIL LOUDSPEAKER TOPOLOGY AS AN INDICATOR OF LINEAR EXCURSION CAPABILITY” - JAES V29, No1/2, JAN/FEB 1981
BIBLIOGRAPHYBIBLIOGRAPHY
• [4] D.B.KEELE, JR. “LOW FREQUENCY MEASUREMENT OF LOUDSPEAKER BY THE NEAR-FIELD SOUND PRESSURE TECHNIQUE” - PREPRINT No909, 45TH AES CONVENTION, 1973
• [6] S.F.TEMME “ARE YOU SHIPPING DEFECTIVE LOUDSPEAKERS TO YOUR CUSTOMERS?” - LISTEN, INC.
• [2] W.KLIPPEL “ASSESSING VOICE COIL PEAK DISPLACEMENT” - 112TH AES CONVENTION, 2002
• [5] J.SCOTT, J.KELLY, G.LEEMBRUGGEN “NEW METHOD OF CHARACTERIZING DRIVER LINEARITY ” - JAES V44, No4, APR 1996
• [1] R.H.SMALL “CLOSED BOX LOUDSPEAKERS SYSTEMS PART 1: ANALYSIS ” - AES LOUDSPEAKERS ANTHOLOGY V1-V25 (1953-1977)
www.cliowin.comwww.audiomatica.com