David Lively davidlively@... writes:
Thanks, Arthur. I finally managed to get this working yesterday. I
couldn't find a prebuilt binary for our installation that contained H5
support, so I had to build Meep from the source.Tracking down all of the
nested library requirements - - meep
I have a problem installing meep and mpb on my fedora system. The
problem is a file named ctlgeom.h which can't be found by include
ctlgeom.h. It is present on the system and if I change the include
to include path/to/ctlgeom.h (including the actual path to the file)
it is working. But
Hi, everyone,
1) I want to define a wavelength independent complex refractive index in
meep, for example, n= 5+0.05i. Because I just want to simulate the absorption
of the materials, so we do not need Drude model. But how to define it in
meep?
2) Can meep calculate two-photon
Dear Steven and Meep users,
The Optical Forces tutorial
http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep_Tutorial/Optical_forces
cries for the addition of one very helpful sentence following the quote
below.
Finally, we must mention that the MST computed by Meep does not include
a factor of 1/2,
Hi Everyone,
I wonder if we can use custom source which is Laguerre Gaussian beams or a
source file in meep ?
Thanks a lot !
Kenan
--
*PhD Std. Kenan CICEK*
*Faculty of Engineering Queen's Building room 2.8 *
*University of Bristol *
*Bristol BS8 1TR, UK*
*Tel (+44) 0117 331 5456*
* E-mail:
Dear Steven and fellow meep users,
I have calculated Flux = 0.0219609359 and Force = 14.0166101794. Now I
would like to convert to SI units. I've looked in meep-discuss and in
the tutorial, where I found this:
Finally, we must mention that the MST computed by Meep does not include
a factor of
Dear Steven and meep users,
I already saw some examples of oblique source by introducing a phase shift in
source function. Is it possible to construct a focused source by Gaussian
distribution of phase ? If yes, can anybody give an example please. Regards,
Yousuf
Dear Steven and other MEEP users,
When using the harminv to calculate the Q-factors, are we calculating the
in-plane or out-of-plane or overall Q-factor?
For example in calculation of Q-factor for ring resonator given in the
tutorial
I read this article, which appears to be relevant to Meep and other
programs which pre-calculate the material parameters for each cell in
the simulation, and then read this from RAM during the simulation process.
Performance of FDTD Method CPU Implementations for Simulation of
Electromagnetic
Dear Steven and Meep users.
I ran a short 3-d simulation with an Ez source, outputting the eps file
and all 6 fields - ex, ey, ez, hx, hy, and hz - at the end of the run.
I used a single processor and did not use symmetry of any sort.
Running H5topng on slices (-x 0:1:14) seemed to work but all
Dear Steven and meep users,
I have modeled a simple cylindrical RF cavity resonator. Dimensions are
Length 0.1223642686 meters, Dia = 0.0754898000 meters using perfect
metal, and a characteristic length, a = 0.01. The TE 1,1,1 mode resonant
frequency analytical solution for this cavity is 2.45
Hi, everyone,
1) I want to define a wavelength independent complex refractive index in
meep, for example, n= 5+0.05i. Because I just want to simulate the absorption
of the materials, so we do not need Drude model. But how to define it in
meep?
2) Can meep calculate two-photon
Hi all,
I tried simulating simple plane wave propagating from one material to another.
The geometry is 2D. The interface is infinitely extended in the plane
transverse to the direction of propagation. I used two block structures
simulating the two materials with PML at the boundaries.
Since
It took me a while to track down the fix for the error: dereferencing
pointer to incomplete type when compiling h5topng.c with libpng version =
15. I realize that this has been solved before, but the relevant messages
are buried and not easily decyphered. I am posting this to save another
from
Hi all,
I started out trying meep on Linux to see if it would do what I wanted. At
first, I used the Scheme interface, but didn’t like it, so I followed the
instructions at http://www.fzu.cz/~dominecf/meep/index.html
http://www.fzu.cz/~dominecf/meep/index.html to install the python interface.
I am getting puzzling inconsistencies between results for the reflection
spectrum of a scatterer when I vary the width of the Gaussian pulse. Since I
am a beginner this probably stems from my lack of understanding of something.
The scattering antenna is a metal loop with a small gap (i.e. the
Hi, if you properly divide the reflected amplitude by the incident
amplitude, the reflection of a linear system should indeed be the
same, independent of the source duration and spectrum.
If it is not, one possible cause may be that you clip the time record
while the source was still running, or
Hi, currently I do not have the example you mention, but surely you
can make a focused beam from an oblique beam, by introducing a
*quadratic* term into the imaginary part of the exponential that
defines the source amplitude.
If you wish to build a focused *gaussian* beam, you will also wish to
Thank you, Glenn, great job.
I will be happy to add a link to your post!
Filip
___
meep-discuss mailing list
meep-discuss@ab-initio.mit.edu
http://ab-initio.mit.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/meep-discuss
Steve,
I know this is about two months late, but for some reason, the meep list
just dumped a half-dozen emails in my inbox...
This is of possible interest:
https://www.mail-archive.com/meep-discuss@ab-initio.mit.edu/msg05241.html
Tom
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Steve
Dear Liu,
from the principle of FDTD computation, there is no other way how to
define complex refractive index than to include dispersion. Either you
may introduce a Drude term (conductivity), or some high-frequency
Lorentzian.
More details are here:
Gib,
There is a patch that has been distributed for this, if you'd like to
compare notes, see here (towards the bottom):
https://www.mail-archive.com/meep-discuss@ab-initio.mit.edu/msg05241.html
Tom
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Gib Bogle g.bo...@auckland.ac.nz wrote:
It took me a while to
Hi Filip,
Thanks for your response. This is how the run is carried out:
(run-sources+
(stop-when-fields-decayed
50
Ez
(vector3 0 0 (- 0 z_plane_src))
1.0e3
)
)
It looks to me as if the simulation ends as soon as
23 matches
Mail list logo
