Cart (Loading....) | Create Account
Close category search window
 

A comparison of two conformal methods for FDTD modeling

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

3 Author(s)
Steeds, M.W. ; Sch. of Electr. Eng. & Comput. Sci., Washington State Univ., Pullman, WA, USA ; Broschat, S.L. ; Schneider, J.B.

Two conformal finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) methods are considered, the contour path (CPFDTD) method of Jurgens et al. (see IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol.40, p.357, 1992) and the overlapping grid (OGFDTD) method of Yee et al. (see IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol.40, p.1068, 1992). Both TE and TM scattering from a two-dimensional (2-D), perfectly conducting circular cylinder are used to test the accuracy of the methods for curved surfaces. Also, TE and TM scattering from a 2-D, perfectly-conducting rotated square cylinder are used to test the accuracy for corners and edges. It is shown that the conformal method proposed by Yee et al. provide significant improvement in accuracy over the original FDTD algorithm for most of the geometries studied. However, implementation becomes more difficult as the geometries become more complex. The conformal method proposed by Jurgens et al. provide significant improvement in accuracy as well for most of the geometries studied. However, improvement does not occur for the TM case when the square cylinder is not aligned properly with the grid. Implementation of the CPFDTD method is relatively straightforward. For the majority of the cases studied, the OGFDTD method is more accurate than the CPFDTD method

Published in:

Electromagnetic Compatibility, IEEE Transactions on  (Volume:38 ,  Issue: 2 )

Date of Publication:

May 1996

Need Help?


IEEE Advancing Technology for Humanity About IEEE Xplore | Contact | Help | Terms of Use | Nondiscrimination Policy | Site Map | Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest professional association for the advancement of technology.
© Copyright 2014 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.