Custom made horns and waveguides (Stránka 2 z 4)

I like the smaller one.

But I see no prove about CD. What's on the picture?

What's on the picture? Measurement? Full hemisphere is not available?
What is gaussian optimization of LeCleach horn leading to CD? What is optimized? Horn or source?

I've made an utility for OS WG calculation for Windows command line.

Usage:
oswg.exe <throat_diameter[cm]> <full_coverage[deg]> <transition_diameter[cm]> <roundover_radius[cm]> resolution[cm]> [<front_length[cm]> [<mount_length[cm]>]]

transition_diameter - a diameter at which OS profile is beginning to be curved to baffle mounting.
roundover_radius - a minimum radius for the above transition
front/mount_length (optionals) - lenghts of straight contours to be added to the throat/mouth

It outputs the profile coordinates to the file "oswg_profile.txt" in mm, (can be easily imported to Excel), also prints the wall angles for some common (desired) throat diameters.
Here is the resulting text file for the command line parameters 2.519 90 29 5 0.05 1 1:

In a case of the true OS WG (which I hope) we could agree on some numbers / make a finall decision...

PS. There can be bugs in the code - maybe for some higher resolutions, I don't know (didn't try).

No, there is no room for real-world improvement unless you improve the source. No simulation, no hype, no fancy super-balanced-holy-whatever can change it, nor impress others. It is proved by math and work as intended in reality. It is not the best imaginable, but OS is the state-of-art in CD and is really existing. If somebody does not feel comfortable with it and like something else ok, but it doesn't prove anything still.

Guys, let's leave this topic to Jean-Michel and Earl (we all know the story and background) and concentrate on our new OS WG countour.

- I, so as MethMan, really do believe in OS (and paramount importance of CD), there is no chance to convert anyone, I'm sorry. We want just that

"If you want baffle mountable version (<90deg) then it should be cheaper"

That's what I wished to hear That's great, really.

DE250, probably? (why to complicate things...)
I don't know yet. Sure, we should agree on that - because of the throat.

Well, that part is just for a technological purpose (if you mean the throat) - by cutting it away it will be possible to attach the driver more precisely (we hope). The initial throat diameter is made a little bit smaller for this purpose and the WG has the right wall angle at 1".

Question: How precise will the resulting shape be? In other words, what resolution for the profile coordinates makes even sense?

No, we would do that. You would just be provided with the coordinates of the whole thing (i.e. that's what you've offered in post #9). No other cutting or measuring work for you...

My question was this: When I finally send you the coordinates, what resolution will be sufficient for maximum quality obtainable by your technology (say, how many decimal places of numbers in milimeters)? (Just informative - I don't have an idea.)