Absorbing boundary conditions for the finite-difference approximation of the time-domain electromagnetic-field equations
Abstract
When time-domain electromagnetic-field equations are solved using finite-difference techniques in unbounded space, there must be a method limiting the domain in which the field is computed. This is achieved by truncating the mesh and using absorbing boundary conditions at its artificial boundaries to simulate the unbounded surroundings. This paper presents highly absorbing boundary conditions for electromagnetic-field equations that can be used for both two-and three-dimensional configurations. Numerical results are given that clearly exhibit the accuracy and limits of applicability of highly absorbing boundary conditions. A simplified, but equally accurate, absorbing condition is derived for two- dimensional time-domain electromagnetic-field problems.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The azimuthal electric field drives a current, which, when combined with the magnetic field, generates second harmonics of the current radial and azimuthal components via the Lorentz force.
“The azimuthal electric field drives a current, which, when combined with the magnetic field, generates second harmonics of the current radial and azimuthal components via the Lorentz force 133,148,149 .”
From Plasma propulsion modeling with particle-based algorithms (2023) · cites this paper as [149]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Enhancement of Light Extraction from Light Emitting Diodes
Zhmakin, A. I. (2011) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2010.11.001 · Cited by 312 · see citing works
Smallest possible electromagnetic mode volume in a dielectric cavity
Coccioli, R., Boroditsky, M., Yablonovitch, E., Rahmat-Samii, Y., & Kim, K. W. (1998) · IEE Proceedings - Optoelectronics · doi:10.1049/ip-opt:19982468 · Cited by 178 · see citing works
Plasma propulsion modeling with particle-based algorithms
Taccogna, F., Cichocki, F., Eremin, D., Fubiani, G., & Garrigues, L. (2023) · Journal of Applied Physics · doi:10.1063/5.0153862 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
- Authors
- Mur, G.
- Affiliations
- Delft University of Technology (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Mur, Gerrit
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility
- Published
- 1981-11
- Volume
- EMC-23
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 377-382
- ISSN
- 0018-9375 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-187X
- OpenAlex
- W1990792968
- Cited by
- 2,565
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 26 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 76 · 2018: 64 · 2017: 48 · 2016: 53 · 2015: 68 · 2014: 62 · 2013: 58 · 2012: 66
- FWCI
- 1.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Electromagnetic Scattering and Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Advanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
- Keywords
- absorbing boundary conditions, finite-difference time-domain simulation, unbounded domains, mesh truncation, artificial boundary, two-dimensional electromagnetic problems, three-dimensional electromagnetic problems
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
