-
Filter by Topic
Release
Popular Topics
- List all discussions
LinkedIn
Facebook
Twitter
Delicious
Digg
Stumbleupon
More services...Reflectance / Transmittance calculation using PORT
|
Thread index | Previous thread | Next thread | Start a new discussion |
RSS feed |
Turn on email notifications |
4 Replies
Last post: January 11, 2013 12:45am UTC
January 9, 2013 6:53am UTC
Reflectance / Transmittance calculation using PORT
Hello all
I want to calculate effect of nanostructure on reflectance and transmittance.
As a starting point, I have refered "Fresnel equation" library.
Without any nanostructure, the calculated reflectance is well matched with theorectical value!
So.. one thing I want to know is that the same port boundary condition can be applied to a model system with 3D nano structure? (Simply, air/Nanostructures on substrate/substrate)
Also, I want to calculate the reflectance using input and output power.
Output power can be calculated using integration of time-averaged power outflow (nPoav).
However, I don't know how to know incident power when I use scattering boundary condition, or electric field condition.
Would you comment on this?
<Summary>
1. Using same model of "Fresnel equation" library, can reflectance of a system with 3D nano structure be calculate?
2. How can I calculate incident power of light, when I use electric field boudnary condition?
Thanks!
Dong-yeong Kim
Reply | Reply with Quote | Send private message | Report Abuse
January 9, 2013 5:37pm UTC in response to Dong-yeong Kim
Re: Reflectance / Transmittance calculation using PORT
1. Yes, generally
2. Electric field BC won't give you the correct solution. Only scattering BC will work.
Reply | Reply with Quote | Send private message | Report Abuse
January 10, 2013 1:00am UTC in response to Alexander Kuznetsov
Re: Reflectance / Transmittance calculation using PORT
Thanks sir.
I wanna ask you 3 more things.
1. As far as I know, there are 3 ways to generate electric field.
- Scattering boundary condition
- Electric field
- Port
Could you explain the differences between them?
2. Many libraries are using Floquet periodicity for imposing periodic boundary condition.
In my humble opinion, effect of "Floquet periodicity option" and "Continuity option" might be same.
Is it right?
3. For periodicity, PEC(PMC) condition can be used when electric(magnetic) field is normal to surface.
So.. if field is not perpendicular to a certain surface, I should use a periodic condition instead of PEC/PMC.
Is it also right?
I have had difficulty choosinig boundary conditions. :(
Reply | Reply with Quote | Send private message | Report Abuse
January 10, 2013 6:51pm UTC in response to Dong-yeong Kim
Re: Reflectance / Transmittance calculation using PORT
1. Electric field BC - you simply specify total electric field at the boundary. Since you generally don't know the reflected field, you can't use it
Scattering BC - to launch plane waves
Port BC - to launch plane waves as well as any other. As a benefit, reflection coefficients are calculated for you.
2. Floquet BC is more general since it takes care of phase shift at the boundary. Continuity BC doesn't.
3. No. You should use Floquet. I'd suggest using it always, even when PEC/PMC would work.
Reply | Reply with Quote | Send private message | Report Abuse
January 11, 2013 12:45am UTC in response to Alexander Kuznetsov
Re: Reflectance / Transmittance calculation using PORT
Thanks a lot!
This is a big helpful to me.
Reply | Reply with Quote | Send private message | Report Abuse
Rules and guidelines
