You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Current the eigenmode solve for wave ports supports only PEC (homogenous Dirichlet) or PMC (natural) boundary conditions. It inherits these from the parent 3D model, but this can lead to confusion when a 3D model surface has an impedance BC (conductivity, surface impedance, absorbing) and that does not get correctly handled by the wave port automatically. The current expectation is that the user can manually chose whether an impedance boundary maps to a PEC or PMC BC in the wave port using the "WavePortPEC" object, but this might be overly complex and correctly supporting impedance BCs in the 2D mode solve should not be too difficult.
This might help issues like #264 tries to solve in the future.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Current the eigenmode solve for wave ports supports only PEC (homogenous Dirichlet) or PMC (natural) boundary conditions. It inherits these from the parent 3D model, but this can lead to confusion when a 3D model surface has an impedance BC (conductivity, surface impedance, absorbing) and that does not get correctly handled by the wave port automatically. The current expectation is that the user can manually chose whether an impedance boundary maps to a PEC or PMC BC in the wave port using the
"WavePortPEC"
object, but this might be overly complex and correctly supporting impedance BCs in the 2D mode solve should not be too difficult.This might help issues like #264 tries to solve in the future.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: