May 5, 2021 at 9:59 amqliuSubscriber
I am simulating the interaction of a particle with light in DGTD to see the farfield light distribution. I notice that I can define surfaces with different shapes as a reference for the incident light, say rectangle, sphere or plane as shown below. But with different geometry for the source I got different results, even the original location of the plane wave and other parameters are the same. Can someone explain how the geometry is used for the incident light, and why I got different farfield projection?May 6, 2021 at 2:46 pmqliuSubscriber
I enclosed the DGTD file and the figures obtained by using a rectangular source (field, ID and index). And another question I would like to ask is:
In the field figure, there is a jump of intensity/phase on the interface between the source rectangle and the open space, especially in the upper part, which is not correct. How can I fix this?
May 14, 2021 at 3:58 pmGuilin SunAnsys EmployeeSorry to reply you late as our team is busy in other projects. As you may know, Ansys staff are not allowed to download and open client's files. So I can only reply according to your description and the images you posted.
Regarding to "jump of intensity/phase on the interface between the source rectangle and the open space, especially in the upper part", It is correct, since inside TFSF it is the total field, and outside the TFSF, it is the scattering field. they are not continuous. Please refer this post: Ansys Insight: FDTD ÕêØÕ¡ªÞÇà´╝Ü Õ╣│ÚØóµ│óÕÆîÕà¿Õ£║µòúÕ░äÕ£║tfsfÕàëµ║Éµ£ëõ╗Çõ╣êÕî║Õê½
As for the different result using different source surfaces, what result you are referring? how large the difference it is? due to discretization, small change of the result is due to the calculation error, which is normal. In theory, plane wave has plane wavefront. We can simplify the plane wave to be injected from a sphere surface, as we know analytically the phase difference at each point on the sphere surface, without simulation. By this way the simulation volume can be smaller than a rectangle. I would suggest that you check the mesh at different excitation method, and see if there is any difference.
Viewing 2 reply threads
Ansys Innovation Space
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Simulation World 2022
Check out more than 70 different sessions now available on demand. Get inspired as you hear from visionary companies, leading researchers and educators from around the globe on a variety of topics from life-saving improvements in healthcare, to bold new realities of space travel. Take a leap of certainty and check out a session today here.
Earth Rescue – An Ansys Online Series
The climate crisis is here. But so is the human ingenuity to fight it. Earth Rescue reveals what visionary companies are doing today to engineer radical new ideas in the fight against climate change. Click here to watch the first episode.
Subscribe to the Ansys Blog to get great new content about the power of simulation delivered right to your email on a weekly basis. With content from Ansys experts, partners and customers you will learn about product development advances, thought leadership and trends and tips to better use Ansys tools. Sign up here.Trending discussions
- “Import optical generation” or “delta generation rate”?
- Why am I getting “process exited without calling finalize”, and how do I fix it?
- Error on Lumerical device
- Using a license file on a new license server
- Ansys Insight: Diverging Simulations
- Ansys Insight: About override mesh in FDTD: its use and settings
- Error: addfdtd is not a valid function or a variable name
- Ansys Insight: Transmission results greater than one
- Ansys Insight: Convergence issues in CHARGE
- Is there a Lumerical script command to output the Simulation and Memory requirements?
Top Rated Tags
© 2022 Copyright ANSYS, Inc. All rights reserved.Ansys does not support the usage of unauthorized Ansys software. Please visit www.ansys.com to obtain an official distribution.