On Fri, 23 Jun 2007, F.S.F. Brossard wrote: > Still with the same H1 cavity, one can find another issue, this time > concerning > the E field components. Attached are pictures of Hz, Ex, Ey. Hz gives the > correct field profile whereas Ex, Ey are erroneous if compared with published > results. The same problem can be found with other types of cavities, also for > different cell size, resolution, k-point, phase fixed or not, even 2D > calculation (hence z-even or TE)...
What is happening is that, for a cavity, the E (or H) fields may be chosen to be purely real (or purely imaginary). However, the output file still contains both the real and imaginary parts and, if you plot the imaginary part when the field is almost purely real, you are essentially plotting numerical noise, and hence it looks like garbage. This is what it looks like is happening in your case. If you are plotting the real part, try plotting the imaginary part, or vice versa. Regards, Steven G. Johnson _______________________________________________ mpb-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://ab-initio.mit.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mpb-discuss
