Thank you for the reply. I am trying to replicate the example results for "far field summing" method with "farfieldexact3d" command instead of using "farfieldvector3d". All the calculated near fields and other parameters are identical. All the underlying physics should stay the same. Essentially, my question boils down on how we can perform the far field summing with "farfieldexact3d" command? If you have an example script, that would solve my issue.