Build Plans, 18" Dayton Slot Port

[Haoleb]

Okay, So I know I have the build thread but for those who just want to know the specifics I wanted to create a separate thread now that I have actually built this design and it is finalized.

Here you will find relevant information needed to build these subwoofers. Since it seems many folks also build similar cabinets with either the Dayton RSS460HO-4 or the Stereo Integrity 18" driver interchangeably you could probably adapt this for that as well!

Here is a small preview of what this project is all about.

The total outside dimensions of the box are as follows.

24.5" Wide
27.5" Tall
34.5" Deep

Finished Weight- Approx 220lbs Each

Attached here is the BassBox specifications compliments Mark (TLS Guy)

Also attached is the Cabinet design in sketch-up. This is the final design I built. The only thing not in the design is the roundover's I put on everything... Which you can see in the photos. But all the dimensions are correct. There are however a couple items I would change which I will explain below.

Because I can't upload the sketchup file direct to the forum server I have hosted it on my personal server. Click the link to save the file.Or right click "save link as"

http://www.haoleb.com/subwoofer/Dayton HO Cabinet Rev 1.skp

 

[Haoleb]

This design will require the following materials to build one pair. This is how I built them. You can change the parts to suit your personal taste but keep in mind the sketchup file is designed with 1" MDF so a redesign would be needed to utilize any other material that is not 1" thick.

QTY 5- 1" MDF 4x8 sheet
QTY 2- Dayton Audio RS460HO-4 18" Subwoofer Driver
QTY 16-Type 316 Stainless Steel Socket Head Cap Screw, 1/4"-20 Thread, 1-1/4" Length (Mcmaster-Carr P/N 92185A544 (box of 10))
QTY 16-Zinc-Alloy Tapping Insert for Wood, Hex Drive, with Flange, 1/4"-20 Internal Thread, 63/64" L, (Mcmaster-Carr P/N 92105A300 It is a 50 pack so.. you need one.)
QTY 6-8 Standard size tubes of PL Premium Adhesive.
QTY 4-16Oz? Bottles of Titebond III wood glue (or get the big jug if available!)
QTY 1- Rockwool 60 or 80 2x4'x2 Inch Thickness.
QTY 2?-Yards Burlap fabric
QTY 2- Binding post pair
QTY 2- Binding post mounting plate
QTY 1- Tube 2 part Expoxy
QTY 2 Bags- Firmit Connecting Screw 7x50mm (ROCKLER P/N 42343)
QTY 1-Confirmat Screw Two-Piece Drill Bit 7x50mm (AMAZON P/N B003ASBBSE)
QTY 1- 3M Super 77 or Super 90 Spray Adhesive to attach the rockwool & burlap
QTY 1- Small can of Original Bondo. Personally I do not like the wood bondo.

Router Bits Required:

3/4" roundover bit
1/8" roundover bit
Flush Trim Bit
1/2" Straight cut or spiral upcut bit. Used for cutting dado and holes. Bigger size is more stable. But removes more material. More material removed=more dust.

The flush trim and straight bits need to be long enough to fully cut 1" material.

When it comes to router bits it is best to get ones with the largest shank your router will take. If you can get the same bit with 1/4 or 1/2" shank always go for the bigger one. It will be much stronger.

Other items:

Clamps. The more the better. You need at least 48" clamps for some parts due to the size of the cabinet.

Rags. PL and glue are messy. Have plenty.

New saw blades... Sandpaper... putty knife... drill... speed square... framing square... pencils... tape measure... You get it.

 

[Haoleb]

Tips I leaned along the way:

1. Because there are SO many parts in this design it is crucial they are all cut to their respective dimensions precisely. If you are off by a 1/16 on a few parts it will add up and the end product will not fit together as perfect as it could.

2. If you use the 1/4-20 screws to hold the driver in you will likely want to enlarge the holes in the driver mounting flange slightly. Completely stock they WILL fit 1/4 size fasteners but there is zero tolerance.

3. When laminating sheets together such as when attaching the port assembly to the bottom panel or attaching the two front baffle's be sure to spread the glue out evenly. Do not just drizzle on the glue all over the place and expect it will spread evenly when you throw the pieces together. Get a putty knife or bondo spreader and spread the glue out in a good even coat covering the entire surface. Personally. I prefer to clean up a bunch of squeeze out rather than have a dry joint because I was too conservative with the glue.

4. When attaching the double thickness front baffle it is better to first attach the inner baffle to the cabinet so you can screw it to the port assembly and get everything clamped tight. Then cut out the port hole with a flush trim bit. Then attach the outer baffle which covers all end grains and any fasteners used to screw the first baffle. Then cut out the port hole again tracing your first cutout.

 

[Haoleb]

Placeholder

 

[Haoleb]

Placeholder 01

 

[chucksrt]

This is such an awesome build!! They look like beast. Do you know what the differences would be if using the Stereo Integrity 18? I was looking to do the full marty build but this enclosure is really nice. I have a buddy who is a cabinet maker and i would love to know what the pros and cons are compared to the full marty.

 

[TheHills44060]

Wow I am impressed! Those things look serious and I admire the patience and craftsmanship. Great job Haloeb. Your thread will definitely inspire others for sure.

 

[Haoleb]

This is such an awesome build!! They look like beast. Do you know what the differences would be if using the Stereo Integrity 18? I was looking to do the full marty build but this enclosure is really nice. I have a buddy who is a cabinet maker and i would love to know what the pros and cons are compared to the full marty.

I am not sure. When I set out and decided to build subwoofers I read up on the current favorite designs and the martysub was right up there at the top because it seems to be very popular. I would assume this box could work quite well for the SI driver if it works good for the dayton considering I see people using both of these drivers in the marty.

Not to knock the marty design but I did not really like the look of the cabinet or the way it is constructed. It is meant to be a simple design that is easy for folks to build but that was not really the direction I wanted to go.

The marty would certainly be cheaper and easier to build. I don't know how much it weighs but i doubt it is quite as heavy as these. Performance wise I would expect this cabinet design to be more rigid and less likely to have any panel resonance but that is purely speculation. And lets be honest I am rather fond of this design over that one

 

[lsiberian]

Performance wise I would expect this cabinet design to be more rigid and less likely to have any panel resonance but that is purely speculation. And lets be honest I am rather fond of this design over that one

Per Chris's research panel resonance is a non issue in most subwoofer designs given the wavelength of the frequencies compared with panel size. This doesn't negate the importance of a strong box, but does mean you can get away with a lot less bracing than with a full-range speaker.

 

[TLS Guy]

Per Chris's research panel resonance is a non issue in most subwoofer designs given the wavelength of the frequencies compared with panel size. This doesn't negate the importance of a strong box, but does mean you can get away with a lot less bracing than with a full-range speaker.

Pull the other one!

Wave length has little if anything to do with bracing need in a sub. It is the pressure in the box that is the issue. The pressures are enormous and you don't want the panels flexing.

This is a nice thread. I don't recommend substituting drivers, until I remodel for different drivers. Usually swapping drivers ruins the project.

This design was crafted to give a powerful tight bass. It takes very little to muck that up.

I won't be able to look at other drivers for a while. I fly to England tomorrow for a wedding next weekend. (The wedding is in the Temple Church with the organ on the Interstellar soundtrack).

I will be on Normandy on the Seine estuary on Monday.

You really don't need to substitute a driver. The driver picked is cost effective and in that enclosure, and will have more than enough power and extension for any domestic situation. A 100 watt amp will be more than enough to knock the house down.

 

[annunaki]

Per Chris's research panel resonance is a non issue in most subwoofer designs given the wavelength of the frequencies compared with panel size. This doesn't negate the importance of a strong box, but does mean you can get away with a lot less bracing than with a full-range speaker.

If I recall correctly, with subwoofers used up to 100hz, bracing should make contact with the panel no further than 7" in any direction.

 

[TLS Guy]

If I recall correctly, with subwoofers used up to 100hz, bracing should make contact with the panel no further than 7" in any direction.

What is your reference and data for that?

There is abundant evidence, especially from laser interferometry from B & W and Celestion, that 2 X4 type bracing is next to useless on any enclosure.

This is what JL Audio have to say.

Since the B & W white paper I have braced all ported and sealed enclosures with the type of bracing used by Haoleb.

Basically a driver in a closed box is like a bicycle pump without valve on a balloon.

Although the pressures in ported cabinet are much higher and the need for obsessional bracing greater.

 

[annunaki]

I don't recall mentioning 2x4 bracing in my post?

What I was referencing was a matrix bracing system in which all 6 panels are tied together and that on any given panel interior surface no more than 7" in any direction is unbraced. I also recommend that the bracing not end up symmetrical. Meaning an unbraced portion may end up on one panel as 5x7 and another part as 4x6 and so on. Is that overkill, probably, but I do know it makes for a very strong enclosure. Combine that with a constrained damping layer and a decoupled mounting system for the driver and it would be acoustically inert.

 

[TLS Guy]

I don't recall mentioning 2x4 bracing in my post?

What I was referencing was a matrix bracing system in which all 6 panels are tied together and that on any given panel interior surface no more than 7" in any direction is unbraced. I also recommend that the bracing not end up symmetrical. Meaning an unbraced portion may end up on one panel as 5x7 and another part as 4x6 and so on. Is that overkill, probably, but I do know it makes for a very strong enclosure. Combine that with a constrained damping layer and a decoupled mounting system for the driver and it would be acoustically inert.

Sorry, I did not understand your post correctly, and now I see what you are saying

 

[annunaki]

No worries good Dr.

 

[JohnnieB]

Congrats once again on this build, and many thanks on taking the time to document and post it. They look terrific.
As spring is upon my house, remodeling once again takes priority over other projects, so it may yet be a while before I get to this one.
I am however still debating a few details about this sub build. I think I remember Ares using 3/4 material vs the 1". Although it would mean a lighter enclosure and possibly be a few dollars cheaper, what are the general thoughts on differences in thickness. Would 1" panels be the preferred choice? Is it simply a matter of preference or is the thicker panel justified by improved stiffness? Splitting hairs?

 

[Haoleb]

Congrats once again on this build, and many thanks on taking the time to document and post it. They look terrific.
As spring is upon my house, remodeling once again takes priority over other projects, so it may yet be a while before I get to this one.
I am however still debating a few details about this sub build. I think I remember Ares using 3/4 material vs the 1". Although it would mean a lighter enclosure and possibly be a few dollars cheaper, what are the general thoughts on differences in thickness. Would 1" panels be the preferred choice? Is it simply a matter of preference or is the thicker panel justified by improved stiffness? Splitting hairs?

Thank you, I hope my efforts can be used by others who want to build their own subs. I have thought about putting it all together in a single PDF one could download and have complete plans but so far I have not really seen the demand. I think it seems too complex for the average DIY sub builder seeking plans.

In my opinion the thicker material you use the better. Obviously if weight is a consideration you can cut some weight using the 3/4". For me it was not a factor. The one inch is NOT light. However it will give you some more confidence if you use screws to aid in the strength because you have an extra 1/4" to work with as well as more gluing surface area.. etc.

Another thing to keep in mind is that you will likely have a harder time getting the 1" MDF. I had to go to a specialty sheet goods supplier to find the 1" MDF and I live near a pretty good sized city with a lot of industry.

If you were to build this exact design you would need to modify it for the thinner material. The dimensions would change on many items and you would have to rework the volume because of the decreased thickness. Basically a complete design change.

 

[ARES24]

I used 3/4 plywood not mdf. I would imagine that 3/4 mdf would be sufficient but overkill is underrated.

 

[annunaki]

Remember that sufficient bracing allows one to go thinner on material thickness. 3/4" is fine in the majority of builds as long as it is braced well.

 

[lsiberian]

I used 3/4 plywood not mdf. I would imagine that 3/4 mdf would be sufficient but overkill is underrated.

Every speaker and sub I've built was done with plywood because it's lot lighter and I've had to move.