question about theory behing the activated carbon pellet technology-Acoustics Forum-Acoustic Fields Forum

Hi Jason, I think the gram coverage might be overstated but nonetheless, carbon has a large absorption coefficient. I tried numerous combinations (12) of different thicknesses for the carbon filters but settled on the 3″ thick filter to achieve the absorption curves I desired. For The ACDA -12, I wanted everything I could get from 30 – 50 Hz. I got 30 + % at 30 Hz. , 63% @ 40 Hz. and 100 % @ 50 Hz. This is a frequency response range that produces many issues in 97 % of the small rooms in my data base. Here are test results.

I also needed a broadband absorber from 30 – 200 Hz. This was also a frequency response range found to be problematic in 95 % of our rooms in data base. The average octave coefficient is around 23 % and it is quite linear. Here are the test results: https://acousticfields.comcont…..A-12.pdf/-

These are pressure activated devices. Front walls slow energy wave, middle cabinet space area of low pressure produces pressure variance, rear/ side wall/ rigidity forces front walls to vibrate in sympathy with pressure. The carbon filters are basically a perforated absorber filled with our carbon technology which we process ourselves. With our ACDA series you have a perforated absorber inside a diaphragmatic cabinet.