# Axisymmetric simulations for a neumann problem

**URL:** <https://bempp.discourse.group/t/axisymmetric-simulations-for-a-neumann-problem/258>\
**Category:** Uncategorized\
**Created:** [24 April 2024 12:33 UTC](https://bempp.discourse.group/t/axisymmetric-simulations-for-a-neumann-problem/258 "2024-04-24T12:33:21Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 6\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![speetpeet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@speetpeet](https://bempp.discourse.group/u/speetpeet)\
**Post date:** [24 April 2024 12:33 UTC](https://bempp.discourse.group/t/axisymmetric-simulations-for-a-neumann-problem/258/1 "2024-04-24T12:33:21Z")

</div>

For a horn loudspeaker radiation problem in bempp I’d like to speed up simulations. As the boundaries are rigid and axisymmetric i’d like to simulate in 2d instead of 3d, drastically reducing the complexity of the problem. This is a feature commonly used in BEM simulation software for acoustic and electroacoustic applications such as [Akabak](https://www.randteam.de/).

Can bempp run such models?

 ![image](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/bempp/original/1X/02139326823f2d883b41c3867f3abd3adc813fd9.png)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![speetpeet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@speetpeet](https://bempp.discourse.group/u/speetpeet)\
**Post date:** [24 April 2024 12:40 UTC](https://bempp.discourse.group/t/axisymmetric-simulations-for-a-neumann-problem/258/2 "2024-04-24T12:40:16Z")

</div>

If revolved around it’s axis you’ll obtain this device with in the center the cone, in this case moving in the +/- z direction

 ![image](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/bempp/original/1X/06f2d2122a4a4c5caeb3a51a23593b68a2e80894.png)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Elwin](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/bempp.discourse.group/elwin/32/38_2.png) [@Elwin](https://bempp.discourse.group/u/Elwin)\
**Post date:** [26 April 2024 13:40 UTC](https://bempp.discourse.group/t/axisymmetric-simulations-for-a-neumann-problem/258/3 "2024-04-26T13:40:46Z")

</div>

The bempp-cl library currently offers capability for 3D problems only. It’s true that axisymmetric BEM will speed up calculations but requires different meshes and Green’s functions than the ones currently implemented. The only option is to revolve the geometry and generate triangular surface meshes and perform 3D simulations.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![speetpeet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@speetpeet](https://bempp.discourse.group/u/speetpeet)\
**Post date:** [26 April 2024 13:57 UTC](https://bempp.discourse.group/t/axisymmetric-simulations-for-a-neumann-problem/258/4 "2024-04-26T13:57:59Z")

</div>

Thanks Elwin for your quick response.

Meshing could be resolved. The Green’s functions, however, I’ve got no idea what the implications are to include it in bempp-cl package.

Do you happen to know by any chance whether this feature is on the roadmap to be included in bempp-cl?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Elwin](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/bempp.discourse.group/elwin/32/38_2.png) [@Elwin](https://bempp.discourse.group/u/Elwin)\
**Post date:** [26 April 2024 19:49 UTC](https://bempp.discourse.group/t/axisymmetric-simulations-for-a-neumann-problem/258/5 "2024-04-26T19:49:05Z")

</div>

Programming new Green’s function requires adjustments to the core of bempp-cl and incorporating axisymmetric models will require considerable implementation effort. As far as I know, there are currently no developments to include this feature in the library.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![speetpeet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@speetpeet](https://bempp.discourse.group/u/speetpeet)\
**Post date:** [26 April 2024 21:04 UTC](https://bempp.discourse.group/t/axisymmetric-simulations-for-a-neumann-problem/258/6 "2024-04-26T21:04:16Z")

</div>

Understood, thanks. Let me know if you’d think it makes sense to log this feature request somewhere. Cheers.
