Base
| Full Name | Paul Hill |
| Organization | Fraunhofer UK |
| Job Title | Masters Student |
| Country |
Forum Replies Created
Okay Steve, thank you!
I am now getting sensible data using the FDTD since correcting the boundary conditions Damian spotted using a straight waveguide and have chose it as the best answer as it is the closest to the original problem statement.
Thank you Steve for your help also and I still intend to pursue your suggested method in time for comparison.
Thank you Damian
Sorry I was away for a couple of days, I have followed your suggestion Damian and got data I couldn’t really make sense of as it was modulated the power spectrum was a sinusoidal one that gave values above 1 when normalized with Input Field which confused me, I have attached examples of the data before normalization(Modulated1/2). When I swapped from Gaussian Modulated CW to a simple CW (@ 0.55mu) I got spectra that seemed to make more sense but which were very small (like fempto, atto, small). I am not sure if the data makes sense I have attached an example you could perhaps comment on (ObservationArea1/2).
Steve I am interested in trying out the conformal mapping method as well but can’t find any help on the forums or tutorials on how to implement this, are you able to suggest anything?
EDIT: Apparently I cant attach spectra for security reasons but essentially both were gaussian around the center of 0.55 (the wavelength I picked) with the modulated being sinusoidal (i.e. the envelope was gaussian).
I followed the instructions in the mentioned tutorial but applied to my 3d example, I could see no options for setting the sampling size as it mentions but I think I managed everything else. When coming to plotting the Power Spectrum however even with the “Normalize With:” check box selected the spectrum shows values ranging as high as 4.
Can you suggest why I am not getting values between 0 and 1?
EDIT***: The above was when I used an observation area very close to the Input plane, the next observation area shows .1%. Is it then just an error due to being too close to the Input Plane that gave me this artifact?
No not the project just the script for changing the wavelength, but I am fairly sure now that I receive the error in the first place because the simulation requires the modes to be able to run.
So I guess I should start a new thread saying I want to calculate mode solutions for a range of wavelengths, for a range of geometries, and is there a way to sweep the wavelength automatically instead of changing 10 times for every geometry?