Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

VituixCAD v2 released

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • kimmosto
    replied
    Few small but helpful changes done to wiring since previous post. I've no development plans for wiring anymore, though list of possibilities is endless (unlike my programming resources and life expectancy). Some circuit simulators and schematic capturing tools could be better, but I suppose this is quite adequate for crossover simulator. Improvement suggestions will be read as before.

    2.0.3.5 (2018-06-13)
    * Segment of an existing hor/ver wire is splitted and junction created if user clicks intermediate point while adding new wire. Wire to be added won't split even it travels via component terminal or endpoint or corner of some existing wire.
    * Black dot is drawn to common nodes of two (or more) wires to visualise junctions. Dots are not rendered while adding and dragging, to library block images and wires not connected to network.

    2.0.3.4 (2018-06-12)
    * Wire propagation and terminal pairing improved to get red dot to all terminals which are not connected to other terminal.
    * Black dot removed from wire ends to avoid giving impression that wire is connected to another wire if it is not.

    2.0.3.3 (2018-06-12)
    * Fixed crash with incomplete network. Bug since 2.0.3.1 (2018-06-10), related to data types of new high speed network solver.

    Leave a comment:


  • kimmosto
    replied
    Max. internal frequency returned back to 40 kHz in rev. 2.0.3.2 (2018-06-11). It doesn't bother anymore because network calculation is 15x faster than two days ago.
    Also refreshing of parameters grid is returned how it was in version 1.1 to avoid lag in display while mouse wheeling.

    Leave a comment:


  • kimmosto
    replied
    Speed of your sparse matrix implementation might be good enough already. My original selection was very slow.
    New (dense matrix with LUP decomposition) is copied from here (see link to other page with download link):
    https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/jj863137.aspx

    Then I converted data type from double to Complex (System.Numerics). That part was very easy in this case.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlr
    replied
    Originally posted by kimmosto View Post
    Rev 2.0.3.1 (2018-06-10):
    * Crossover network calculation speed improved 15-20x by using dense matrix solver with LUP decomposition.
    How did you implement that? Are you using an open source package for that? I'm using a sparse matrix, but with a small matrix, I'm curious to know if it would be worth the effort to change.

    dlr

    Leave a comment:


  • kimmosto
    replied
    Rev 2.0.3.1 (2018-06-10):
    * Crossover network calculation speed improved 15-20x by using dense matrix solver with LUP decomposition.

    Leave a comment:


  • kimmosto
    replied
    ^If you mean version 1, please note that development has ended. Auxiliary calculator and Merger tool already have some small additions which are done to version 2 only. But generally, ladder with fixed blocks is much faster to modify. New projects are not so different because block library helps a lot with free form schematic.

    Leave a comment:


  • civit
    replied
    Originally posted by kimmosto View Post

    This has been since 0.1.0.25 (2015-01-15). Basically version 2 has nothing really new for graphs. Focus has been in free form crossover which has caused some changes to driver handling, response exports and optimizer, power dissipation and impulse response windows.
    My mistake, Kimmo, spectacular work here. Funnily enough I've gotten used to the block based crossover schematic and find I prefer it now.

    Leave a comment:


  • kimmosto
    replied
    Originally posted by civit View Post
    Also, you can set it to display a polar diagram now, instead of the directivity sonogram view or the 3d waterfall graph.
    This has been since 0.1.0.25 (2015-01-15). Basically version 2 has nothing really new for graphs. Focus has been in free form crossover which has caused some changes to driver handling, response exports and optimizer, power dissipation and impulse response windows.

    Leave a comment:


  • kimmosto
    replied
    Few words about history of VituixCAD. I programmed my first speaker simulator in late 80s', including simple passive ladder network, very simple x/o optimizer and room response simulation by the first boundary reflections. Max. 4 ways and 20 drivers. That wasn't remarkable software though I felt that way for a short time
    In the beginning of 2k I restarted diy hobby by testing few simulators such as LspCAD, SoundEasy and FRD tools. LspCAD 5.25 was very rational and fast package, and I ended up to purchase version 6.0 with older 5.25 Pro, though I already had SoundEasy 11-12.
    Programming has always been big part of my diy hobby, so I decided to start new simulator to satisfy some essential requirements e.g. calculation of power, DI and off-axis responses by measurements in two planes. User interface of VituixCAD 0.1 was imitated from LspCAD 5. Modern features such as moving and adding with drag&drop were added later.
    Primary additional tool has been Merger since the beginning because acoustic labs are not available for common people, and weather is too bad most of time for anechoic measurements outdoors. Diffraction tool is the last member of essential tools because it helps converting measurement data from near field to far field. Other tools such as Enclosure and SPL Trace are requested by some other users, or just personal programming challenge if other choices in the marker are not so good imo.

    VituixCAD is 4+ years old now. I suppose it has been de facto standard simulator in Finland since the beginning, and very popular also in Germany where speaker diy is popular. It was not launched to North America's "market" by advertising. I've trusted that diy community spreads good word if product is valuable. Many discussion forums (htguide, techtalk, diyaudio) and areas (multi-way / software) will not help.
    Another thresholds in N.A. has been language barrier and traditions. Many design methods, simulators, measurement gear and programs have long history and lots of users. But lately I have publicly (in diyaudio) challenged some of these methods and tools. For example I've stated that measurement gear without semi-dual channel mode for timing lock between output and mic signal is inadequate for advanced off-axis simulation because time manipulation of individual measurements by minimum phase extraction or normalizing IR peak to 0 ms point is bad thing for off-axis response calculation of speaker with multiple drivers. VituixCAD supports also designing with axial response only or with few off-axis, but that is your own risk; possible bad sound and lots of wasted time. This package is designed for higher targets and lower risks with very short design time. Semi-dual channel measurement gear, (manual) turning table and program with off-axis measurement & export sequences are highly recommended for efficient design process and good result.

    ---

    About version 2. It has free form crossover layout (with single voltage source), unlimited amount and connection of drivers in the crossover. Passive blocks of version 1.1 are replaced with LCR components and library blocks. Operational amplifiers are added too.
    The latest addition in rev 2.0.1 (yesterday) is smart library blocks including user parameters/questions, options (for menu), variables and math expressions to automate calculation of component values. Block library is updated (yesterday) to include math expressions to help designing of mathematically complex stages such as OP notches with gyrator or OP Linkwitz Transform.

    Few screenshots.
    Library block menu:


    Block tuning window:


    Block parameter design and maintenance window:


    More information in user manual and software page.

    I may not write so much here to avoid double work. Primary thread for VituixCAD in English is diyaudio on Software area.

    Greetings from sunny Finland,
    -Kimmo

    Leave a comment:


  • dlr
    replied
    That's been in WinPCD for quite some time in case you haven't checked that out. It doesn't do diffraction, of course, but it does show the effects related to the crossover and driver locations. It now includes rudimentary corrections to SPL with driver diameter. It's all automated.

    dlr

    Leave a comment:


  • bcodemz
    replied
    More people need to know about VituixCAD. The amount of capabilities built in is astonishing, and it is quite easy to use once you get the hang of it. The best part of the software is how optimized it is for crossover simulation with polar response data. Being able to see the various off axis response is extremely valuable and useful. 

    Leave a comment:


  • Kornbread
    replied
    First time I've heard of it.   I'll give it a try.

    Thanks for posting. 

    Leave a comment:


  • DanP
    replied
    Wow.  Never heard about this before.  Looks crazy good for freeware.

    Dan

    Leave a comment:


  • dlr
    replied
    Originally posted by olu78 View Post
    Awesome piece of software. Even when it wasn't free, it was quite formidable. The greater learning curve might have something to do with why it isn't cited more often. Just my thoughts.... Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
    There's an amazing amount of capability built into it. It will be more useful to more advanced users. One reason I stayed with Jeff's PCD overall scheme is because I think it's a somewhat more intuitive approach, making it easier for new and/or less experienced DIYers. Any additions I've made have been with the intention of maintaining simplicity as much as possible. I've hoped to eventually add functionality, but I can't make the time for extensive additions for now.

    For those willing to deep dive into VituixCAD, especially the new v2, it looks to be worth the effort.

    dlr

    Leave a comment:


  • olu78
    replied
    Awesome piece of software. Even when it wasn't free, it was quite formidable. The greater learning curve might have something to do with why it isn't cited more often. Just my thoughts.... Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X