October 13, 2023 at 10:41 pmAndy LiSubscriber
I'm looking to optimize a device, using Lumopt's topology optimization, that is intended to operate at two different temperatures. I tried doing so by defining two different geometries (TopologyOptimization2D objects) in the Lumopt script that have different refractive indices for the background and waveguide materials. In addition, I added separate optimizations with different refractive indices for the background and waveguides.
However, the resulting device had very poor simulated performance which was significantly worse than a device that had not been optimized for temperature at all. In addition, I noticed that the final value of the refractive index for the higher temperature (and higher refractive index) device was lower than the refractive index implied by the waveguide permittivity set in the geometry definition.
Is there a working method to optimize a device for more than one temperature in Lumopt?
October 18, 2023 at 6:38 pmDevikaAnsys Employee
Apologis for the delay in response. Could you please share the optimization progess?
There is a chanace the optimization didnt run to completion.
Are you optimizing both temperature simultaniously (superopt:Getting Started with lumopt - Python API – Ansys Optics)?
I am sharing a link might here: Optimizable Geometry - Python API – Ansys Optics
October 18, 2023 at 10:28 pmAndy LiSubscriber
I am optimizing for both temperatures simultaneously. The optimization has finished running; the end device is about 99% binarized.
October 19, 2023 at 4:10 pmTaylor RobertsonAnsys Employee
Could you share the optimization progress, and compare this with the performance of the unoptimized device? I don't understand how the device could have worse performance then the initial design? The optimizer could certainly get stuck in a local minima, but perhaps starting from your best candidate then proceeding with lumopt at the both temperatures could help?
Also how are you assigning the defining the device and background index via python. Could you share some code snippets? Are you using varFDTD?
October 19, 2023 at 8:46 pmAndy LiSubscriber
I tried starting from the best candidate (which was optimized at one temperature) but the same issue occurred - the performance at both temperatures worsened.
This is being optimized using 2D FDTD.
October 19, 2023 at 10:12 pmTaylor RobertsonAnsys Employee
In superopt it optimizes the toal FOM, so one FOM could reduce if the other improves by a greater amount; however, it shouln't be possible for the performance to reduce overall. The optimization wouldn't proceed in that case, unless I am missing something it seems that there may be an issue with the simulation set-up or opt definition.
Maybe double check that the eps values are being set correctly, by looking at the index monitors?
Can you share the optimization progress report.
I would also note that the performance between 2D and 3D could be quite significant. While varFDTD tries to make 2D FDTD more accurate, the assumptions may not be valid in topology.
October 23, 2023 at 6:23 pm
October 23, 2023 at 7:38 pmTaylor RobertsonAnsys Employee
This is plotting the error from the metric function, so it appears that it has improved a reasonable amount in the first 20 iterations. Is it clear how you should define the figure of merit? After that it seems the performance for FOM_1 and FOM_2 gets better, but 3/4 gets worse, the total improves very marginally. It then seems that binarization starts, but the performance doesn't get significantly worse. It looks like you could continue running. If required.
October 23, 2023 at 8:09 pmAndy LiSubscriber
I noticed that all of the figures of merit seem to trend downward (improving), yet I still notice significantly worse performance. Could it be due to some sort of scaling of the figure of merit?
October 26, 2023 at 11:04 pmTaylor RobertsonAnsys Employee
It seems likely that the FOM definition doesn't match up with how you considering performance. Maybe you copuld share some code snippets from that section and I will see if I can see any issue? See ModeMatch - https://optics.ansys.com/hc/en-us/articles/360050995394.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Boost Ansys Fluent Simulations with AWS
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) helps engineers design products in which the flow of fluid components is a significant challenge. These different use cases often require large complex models to solve on a traditional workstation. Click here to join this event to learn how to leverage Ansys Fluids on the cloud, thanks to Ansys Gateway powered by AWS.
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.
- “Import optical generation” or “delta generation rate”?
- Why am I getting “process exited without calling finalize”, and how do I fix it?
- Using a license file on a new license server
- Ansys Insight: Diverging Simulations
- Error: addfdtd is not a valid function or a variable name
- Questions about the calculation of the cross-polarization conversion efficiency of metasurface
- Finding your Ansys (or Lumerical) account number
- Error on Lumerical device
- Ansys Insight: About override mesh in FDTD: its use and settings
- Lumerical – error message when trying to open from Linux terminal
© 2023 Copyright ANSYS, Inc. All rights reserved.