Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Dump Time Resolution #143

Open
ALEEF02 opened this issue Jul 11, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Dump Time Resolution #143

ALEEF02 opened this issue Jul 11, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@ALEEF02
Copy link

ALEEF02 commented Jul 11, 2024

Good afternoon,

I've scoured the docs, and I don't see a way to increase the quantity of frames included in a time-domain dump (e.g. E-field). SetTimeStepFactor does not increase the quantity of data dumped, only the timestep. OverSampling also doesn't do the trick.

Please let me know what you think.

@JTSvejda
Copy link

Hello,

With FDTD, the time step is the applied time increment for the simulation. In order to store the E-field, for example, in a shorter interval than the time step sample, the time step must be adjusted accordingly, i.e. reduced.

Regarding the function SetTimeStepFactor: Following the comment from the file openEMS/python/openEMS/openEMS.pyx, it should be possible to reduce the time step with this function.

With the function SetOverSampling, I think it is not possible to go below the time step.

If you want to save fields for an animation, but the simulation runs cleanly with a sampling rate (or time step) greater than that used for the animation, you might as an alternative interpolate the fields in time.

@ALEEF02
Copy link
Author

ALEEF02 commented Jul 12, 2024

SetTimeStepFactor does indeed reduce the timestep, but the number of dump frames generated stays the same. i.e., setting timestep to 1 will generate ~50 frames of E-field dump in my sim. Setting timestep to 0.5 doubles the run time, but still generates ~50 frames of E-field data.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants