Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Finite-element frequency domain #46

Open
simbilod opened this issue Apr 17, 2023 · 6 comments
Open

Finite-element frequency domain #46

simbilod opened this issue Apr 17, 2023 · 6 comments

Comments

@simbilod
Copy link
Contributor

simbilod commented Apr 17, 2023

For FEFD, we had "issues" due to source directionality

Is this even a problem? In https://nbviewer.org/github/fancompute/workshop-invdesign/blob/master/01_First_simulation.ipynb they just compute the Poynting vector somewhere away from the source.

Could we simply compare the amount of propagating energy and/or the fields close to the source vs at the target outputs modes/positions to get the S-parameters?

@HelgeGehring

@HelgeGehring
Copy link
Owner

With the current way, we just define the field in a certain location. So to be very correct, it's not a source and thus there's no directionality.
I'd guess that's okay, as we could also put it close to a PML and just absorb whatever goes in the other direction.
We could measure the power in the modes at the ports by calculating overlap integrals, right?

The main problem I have at the moment in my understanding is how we would calculate back reflection. but maybe we could solve that by calculating an overlap integral before and after the position where we set the field?

@simbilod
Copy link
Contributor Author

simbilod commented Apr 18, 2023

could we somehow "normalize" the source/input field by computing its flux or field profile near the position where the source/field is set in a simple waveguide geometry, and attribute deviations from that in more complicated structures to reflections?

@simbilod
Copy link
Contributor Author

simbilod commented Apr 18, 2023

This looks like what they might be doing here http://hade.ch/docs/report_FDFD.pdf, see Fig 3 and explanation in text. I'm not sure how you can plot both an incident and reflected wave from one simulation where both would be superposed

@timurdogan
Copy link

Few inputs here, if you find the correct eigenmode with all full vectorial components, Ex,Ey,Hx,Hy, and launch with those, there are no theoretical reflections and directivity comes naturally. The eigenmode calculation error can result in mismatch. However, there is also a limit on any FDTD/FDFD code based on settings used like acceleration parameters and 16bit/32bit/64bit processing and scaling to not run out of bits. This can be tested by placing a straight single-mode waveguide and running it and simulating loss vs. waveguide length, looking at absorption in PML boundaries vs. what is launched. The goal should be within an error of better than -40dB in transmission and reflection. If you want to learn about these limits, I suggest this book;
"Computational Electrodynamics: The Finite-Difference Time-Domain Method, Alan Taflove"

@HelgeGehring
Copy link
Owner

thanks @timurdogan ! looks like a great ressource! I'll start with the waveguide example

I've done first steps in #59, mostly docs and a simple waveguide example, but more to come

@timurdogan
Copy link

timurdogan commented Jun 29, 2023 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants