2017
DOI: 10.1080/09205071.2017.1409137
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the representation of electromagnetic fields in closed waveguides using four scalar potentials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
10
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
10
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Applying the separation of variables method, we obtain the equation for the transverse and longitudinal parts [4][5][6][7][8][9]   2 2 2 2 0 0…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Applying the separation of variables method, we obtain the equation for the transverse and longitudinal parts [4][5][6][7][8][9]   2 2 2 2 0 0…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As the 2nd step, the standard approach suggests using the Krylov Subspace Methods [11], but in modern computer algebra system Sage [12] we may work over the field of algebraic numbers without any numerical errors. This approach to computing eigenmodes was tested on several waveguides [13]. Our computing experiments have shown that in such a way we can calculate all the running modes (that is, modes with real eigenvalues β) and the small locked modes with correct multiplicities.…”
Section: Normal Modes Of a Waveguidementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our works [30], [31], a previously unknown representation of electromagnetic fields in a waveguide using four potentials was proposed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But even in the case when the permittivity and permeability are described by discontinuous functions, they turn out to be quite smooth functions. The Maple system has developed a symbolic-numerical method for finding normal modes based on a combination of this representation of the field and the incomplete Galerkin method [30], [32], [33]. Comparison of the calculation results with the results obtained using the mixed finite element method was significantly complicated by the lack of a public version of the finite element implementation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%