[docs] clarify FDFD-to-FDTD field reconstruction
This commit is contained in:
parent
e50637dc1c
commit
40efe7a450
5 changed files with 51 additions and 5 deletions
14
README.md
14
README.md
|
|
@ -194,6 +194,10 @@ For a broadband or continuous-wave FDTD run:
|
|||
part of the simulation, and compare the extracted phasor to the FDFD field or
|
||||
residual.
|
||||
|
||||
This is the primary FDTD/FDFD equivalence workflow. The phasor extraction step
|
||||
filters the time-domain run down to the guided `+\omega` content that FDFD
|
||||
solves for directly, so it is the cleanest apples-to-apples comparison.
|
||||
|
||||
### Real-field reconstruction workflow
|
||||
|
||||
For a continuous-wave real-valued FDTD run:
|
||||
|
|
@ -211,4 +215,14 @@ For a continuous-wave real-valued FDTD run:
|
|||
pieces to see whether the remaining mismatch is actually in the mode or in
|
||||
weak nonguided tails.
|
||||
|
||||
This is a stricter diagnostic, not the primary equivalence benchmark. A raw
|
||||
monitor slice contains both the guided field and the remaining orthogonal
|
||||
content on that plane,
|
||||
|
||||
$$ E_{\text{monitor}} = E_{\text{guided}} + E_{\text{residual}} , $$
|
||||
|
||||
so its full-plane instantaneous error is naturally noisier than the extracted
|
||||
phasor comparison even when the underlying guided `+\omega` content matches
|
||||
well.
|
||||
|
||||
`examples/waveguide_real.py` is the reference implementation of this workflow.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue