Note: This discussion is about an older version of the COMSOL Multiphysics® software. The information provided may be out of date.
Discussion Closed This discussion was created more than 6 months ago and has been closed. To start a new discussion with a link back to this one, click here.
Mutual coupling in "scatterer on substrate" vs "plasmonic wire grating" models
Posted 30.10.2013, 18:33 GMT-4 RF & Microwave Engineering, Modeling Tools & Definitions, Parameters, Variables, & Functions, Studies & Solvers Version 4.3b 0 Replies
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
In the SoS model, you cannot include the effects of nearest-neighbor (mutual) coupling, as you are using PMLs in ewfd2 to solve for the scattered field. The "background" field solved in ewfd appropriately accounts for periodicity (though it is a flat substrate in the model, imagine how different the solution would be if there were any shape to your substrate, such as a bump, and you did not use Floquet BCs!)--so why is the solution for scattering from the particle not approached in this manner, as well?
Meanwhile, the PWG model has a similar physics approach to the SoS model, but accounts for the local coupling by using FBCs, and everything calculates proper--except you cannot isolate the scattered field component. Aaargh!!
Is there a way to get the benefits of both methods? Would it be as simple as replacing the lateral PMLs with FBC's in the SoS model? Then, since no port is used, then how do you determine the k-vectors from the background field? This, I think, is the heart of the dilemma...
-ado
Hello Bryan Adomanis
Your Discussion has gone 30 days without a reply. If you still need help with COMSOL and have an on-subscription license, please visit our Support Center for help.
If you do not hold an on-subscription license, you may find an answer in another Discussion or in the Knowledge Base.