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

Select both sides of a boundary for dielectric postprocessing #280

Open
awollack opened this issue Aug 16, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Select both sides of a boundary for dielectric postprocessing #280

awollack opened this issue Aug 16, 2024 · 1 comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@awollack
Copy link

The documentation describes how to select dielectric interfaces for postprocessing boundaries. However, there isn't an option to select both sides of an internal boundary using "Side" (i.e., what happens when the dielectric constants are equal?).

A simple example is a suspended piece of metal in air. There are metal-air interfaces ("MA") on both sides of the metal, but "Side" only allows selecting the "SmallerRefractiveIndex" or "LargerRefractiveIndex". Also in the general case, there is no guarantee that the loss tangents on either side will be the same, so simply summing the contributions from both sides might be insufficient for all users.

The code to for side selection for the internal dielectric interface is here.

@awollack awollack added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 16, 2024
@hughcars
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @awollack,

This is an edge case that wasn't considered in the original design of the "smaller" "larger" interface, but which I believe is effectively addressed by https://github.com/awslabs/palace/pull/261/files#diff-61260285bc97ffe5f44411fffe5a4829fb1cb44a943e11099356cdff3d81c5d7R311 which will approach the boundaries on both sides. The case of different loss tangent on either side I'll have to think about a little more, as I'm not sure I know what that would even mean for such a truly 2-sided metal.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants