A Comparative Study of Three Finite Element-Based Explicit Numerical Schemes for Solving Maxwell's Equations

Three finite element-based explicit numerical algorithms, named the dual-field domain decomposition at the element level (DFDD-ELD), the discontinuous Galerkin time-domain method with upwind fluxes (DGTD-Upwind), and the discontinuous Galerkin time-domain method with central fluxes (DGTD-Central), a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:IEEE transactions on antennas and propagation 2012-03, Vol.60 (3), p.1450-1457
Main Authors: Li, Xiaolei, Jin, Jian-Ming
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accuracy
Applied classical electromagnetism
Convergence
Discontinuous Galerkin method
domain decomposition
Electromagnetic wave propagation, radiowave propagation
Electromagnetism
electron and ion optics
Equations
Exact sciences and technology
finite element method
Finite element methods
Fundamental areas of phenomenology (including applications)
Mathematical model
Moment methods
Physics
Time domain analysis
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Three finite element-based explicit numerical algorithms, named the dual-field domain decomposition at the element level (DFDD-ELD), the discontinuous Galerkin time-domain method with upwind fluxes (DGTD-Upwind), and the discontinuous Galerkin time-domain method with central fluxes (DGTD-Central), are investigated and compared in terms of accuracy and efficiency. All three algorithms can perform an efficient domain decomposition and avoid the inversion of a global system matrix, yet the study shows that they differ from each other in terms of accuracy and efficiency. Hybrid implicit-explicit schemes, which can relax the restriction on the time step size imposed by the smallest elements in the computational domain, are also investigated for both DFDD and DGTD and compared in terms of efficiency.
ISSN:0018-926X
1558-2221
DOI:10.1109/TAP.2011.2180341