Read what it actually says. It does not say "The parabolic horn is a rectangular horn with two parallel sides, the two other sides expanding linearly", it says "The parabolic horn is a true 1P horn if it is rectangular with two parallel sides, the two other sides expanding linearly". And the concept of true 1P horns is a different issue that what we are talking about here, and applies mainly to directivity controlling devices (i.e. at HF, not for LF/subwoofers). Also note that it is only the 1P part that depends on the geometry, if it is a parabolic horn or not depends only on how the area changes along the horn.
I get that you want people to model what they build what the model, but that is a different issue from how horn profiles are defined in the equations that are used to simulate them.
I get that you want people to model what they build what the model, but that is a different issue from how horn profiles are defined in the equations that are used to simulate them.
The parabolic horn was never the issue, so that is not the case that you need to rest.
You categorically stated in Post #14,663 that a conical horn has all straight expanding sides (no parallel sides) and that an exponential horn has all curved expanding sides (no parallel sides). This is not necessarily the case, as was clearly demonstrated in examples I posted.
Incidentally, you may be interested to know that a rectangular parabolic horn does not need to have two parallel sides provided that the area expansion remains linear, which it does in the following example.
If "The parabolic horn is a true 1P horn if it is rectangular with two parallel sides, the two other sides expanding linearly" does not describe what 99% of the people in this thread build, then what does?
Like I said before, a parabolic horn can have an exponential expansion with "the 2 other sides expanding linearly." That scenario does not make the enclosure exponential. ALL sides have to expand in conical and exponential horns. They cannot have parallel walls to perform as efficiently as they do.
We see that situation in everyday life. Other than subwoofer enclosures, how often do we see parabolic horn enclosures? 99% of the time, we see horns with ALL sides expanding from brass instruments to intake (filter, tube, or restricter for balance of PERFORMANCE), megaphone exhaust, bull horns, cheerleader horns, etc.
Do you think those items would move air better with 2 parallel sides???
Could you please stop with this repeated arbitrary claim?
And are you aware that this thread is about a simulation tool (not about building)?
Edit: Sorry to sound rude, but I just don't understand you repeated critique of a tool that no one is forcing you to use.
Last edited:
Time to stop beating a dead Horse. Move on. You've been officially smacked down by the Software engineer and a guy that studied his brains out on Horns! And wrote a damn good book too!
Including the parabolic horn, see figure 2, which shows a circular parabolic horn.
The parallel sides is only mentioned in reference to the 1P horn concept, which relates to what equations can be used to model the horn, and their range of validity.
Everyone, I'm sorry to adding pointless arguments to a discussion that I think has been settled for most of the readers. I just don't like it when people try to argue with me by reading things into my papers that just isn't there.