760 likes | 1.03k Views
UIUC MURI Review. J.-M. Jin, A. C. Cangellaris, and W. C. Chew Center for Computational Electromagnetics Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, Illinois 61801-2991 Program Director: Dr. Arje Nachman, AFOSR June 19, 2006.
E N D
UIUC MURI Review J.-M. Jin, A. C. Cangellaris, and W. C. Chew Center for Computational Electromagnetics Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, Illinois 61801-2991 Program Director: Dr. Arje Nachman, AFOSR June 19, 2006
Time-Domain Finite Element Method for Analysis of Broadband Antennas and Arrays J.-M. Jin Center for Computational Electromagnetics Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, Illinois 61801-2991 Acknowledgment: This work is sponsored by AFOSR via a MURI grant (Program Director: Dr. Arje Nachman)
TDFEM Antenna Analysis Year 1: • Truncation of Open Free Space • Absorbing boundary condition (ABC) • Perfectly matched layers (PML) • Feed Modeling • Simplified feed model: electric probe feed • Waveguide port boundary condition (WPBC) Year 2: • Novel, Highly Efficient Domain Decomposition • Large antennas • Finite array antennas • Periodic TDFEM • Infinite periodic phased-array antennas
Perfectly Matched Layers (PML) Spatial FEM discretization: Time-Domain Discretization • {e} and {u} are discretized in time domain according to Newmark-Beta method • Resultant system is stable for time marching Convolution
Time-Domain WPBC Time-Domain Formulation: Assume dominant mode incidence:
Monopole Antenna Measured data: J. Maloney, G. Smith, and W. Scott, “Accurate computation of the radiation from simple antennas using the finite difference time-domain method,” IEEE Trans. A.P., vol. 38, July 1990.
Logarithmic Spiral Antenna Probe Feed G. Deschamps, “Impedance properties of complementary multiterminalplanar structures,” IRE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. AP-7, Dec. 1959.
Antipodal Vivaldi Antenna Reflection at the TEM port “The 2000 CAD benchmark unveiled,” Microwave Engineering Online, July 2001
Antipodal Vivaldi Antenna E-plane Radiation patterns at 10 GHz H-plane
Interfaces Domain Decomposition • Traditional Methods: • Schwartz Methods • Schur Complement (Substructuring) Method • Finite Element Tearing and Interconnecting (FETI): • Use Lagrange multiplier to formulate the interface problem, usually solved by an iterative solver • Subdomain problems can be solved independently based on interface solutions • Time-domain FETI is less efficient since the interface problem needs to be solved repeatedly at each time step • Time-Domain Dual-Field Domain Decomposition (DFDD): • Does not require solving the interface problem • Computes both electric and magnetic fields • Employs a leapfrog time-marching scheme similar to the FDTD
Weak-Form Representation: Two-Domain DFDD Second-Order Vector Wave Equation (m=1,2): • Boundary Conditions: • SMmetallic surface • SA impedance surface
Two-Domain DFDD Equivalent Surface Currents:
Temporal Discretization • Leapfrog on subdomain interfaces t t • Newmark-Beta method inside each subdomain
Computational Performance (Serial) • Tested on SGI-Altix 350 system with Intel Itanium II 1.5GHz processor • Subdomain problems are solved in serial on a single processor • Each subdomain system is pre-factorized using direct solver before time marching Peak Memory Total CPU Time: Factorization Time CPU Time per Step
Computational Performance (Parallel) Speedup • Tested on SGI-Altix 350 system with multiple Intel Itanium II 1.5GHz processors • Each subdomain is assigned to a different processor
10-by-10 Vivaldi Array • 2.8 million unknowns • Distributed on 72 processors • Solving time per step: 0.3 s
1m 9 m FEM Discretization • Element size: 0.08 ~ 0.25 m • 208,747 mixed-2nd order tets • 1.4 million unknowns • Partitioned into 9 subdomains 9 m Photonic Bandgap: Dipole Radiating in Photonic BandGap Air er = 11.56
Dipole Radiating in Photonic BandGap f = 0.25 c/a f = 0.35 c/a f = 0.50 c/a Reflection at Coaxial Port
A Generic Periodic Phased Array • Technical challenges: • Enforcement of periodic boundary conditions • Mesh truncation in the non-periodic direction
Transformed Field Variable • Periodic boundary conditions in the frequency domain • Introduce a transformed field variable M. E. Veysoglu, R. T. Shin, and J. A. Kong, “A finite-difference time-domain analysis of wave scattering from periodic structures: oblique incidence case,” J. Electromag. Waves Appl., vol. 7, pp. 1595-1607, Dec. 1993.
Transformed Field Variable • Second-order vector wave equation: where • Solved via a Galerkin method in space using vector testing functions residing in a tetrahedral mesh and time-integration via the Newmark-b method
Higher-Order Floquet ABC • Floquet expansion for the transformed field variable • Time-domain expression • A very accurate truncation condition can be constructed
Reflection from an Array of Spheres qi = 20o with the ABC a small distance from the surface of the sphere TM-polarization TE-polarization M. Inoue, “Enhancement of local field by a two-dimensional array of dielectric spheres placed on a substrate,” Physical Review B, vol. 36, pp. 2852-2862, Aug. 1987.
A Vivaldi Phased-Array Antenna D. T. McGrath and V. P. Pyati, “Phased array antenna analysis with the hybrid finite element method,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 42, pp. 1625-1630, Dec. 1994.
Summary Achievements: • A complete TDFEM modeling of broadband antennas and arrays involving complex geometry and material • A highly effective PML formulation to emulate a free-space environment • A highly accurate waveguide port boundary condition for a physical modeling of antenna feeds • A novel, highly efficient dual-field domain decomposition technique to handle large-scale simulations • TDFEM analysis of infinite phased arrays Work in Progress: • Hybridization of TDFEM and ROM to interface antenna feeds and feed network • Hybridization of TDFEM and TDIE (TD-AIM & PWTD) to model antenna/platform interaction
Finite Element Based, Broadband Macro-modeling of Antenna Array Feed Networks H. Wu and A. C. Cangellaris Center for Computational Electromagnetics & EM Lab Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, Illinois 61801-2991 cangella@uiuc.edu
Objectives • Generate compact, multi-port macromodels for antenna feed network • Broadband macro-models • Generated directly from FEM model using Krylov subspace model order reduction methods • Compatible with both frequency-domain and time-domain EM solvers • Cast in terms of generalized impedance matrix for the electromagnetic multiport • Both waveguide mode-based ports and lumped-circuit ports supported • Impedance matrix elements in terms of rational function of frequency • Frequency interpolation for use with frequency-domain solvers • Computationally-efficient interfacing with time-domain solvers
Multi-Layered Feed Network • Radiating Elements Customization ofsupporting substrate for improved array performance (patterned substrate, embedded EM band-gap structures, …) • Spacer - Custom patterning for enhanced array performance; layer for integration of active electronics • Slots • Feed network - Extended to multiple layers to support biasing network for any active electronics
Dispersive Attributes of Feed Network • Conductor loss • Dielectric loss • Dispersive (macroscopic) properties of artificially-designed substrates • Network matrix abstraction of a portion of the feed network in terms of frequency-dependent multiport
Macromodeling of FEM Models With Dispersion • Krylov subspace-based model order reduction • Surface impedance boundary conditions • Skin effect in lossy conductors • Generalized surface impedance boundary conditions • Frequency-dependent permittivity and permeability • Debye media, Lorentz media, Drude media,… • Incorporation of frequency-dependent electromagnetic multi-ports in FEM models • Frequency-dependent, multi-port macromodel abstractions of sub-domains
1 4 2 3 The Finite Element Model
d Two-Port Macro-model of Metal Plates
0.5 0.25 0.6 0.6 0.02 0.2 Example 1: Microstrip On Debye substrate • 6 cm-long line terminated at a 60-Ohm load • Substrate relative permittivity: εr = 2 +10(1+ jω2×10-10)-1 • All dimensions in mm
Example 2: Microstrip band-pass filter Substrate relative permittivity = 9.8
Summary • Krylov subspace, equation preserving, model order reduction of FEM models that include frequency-dependent features • Hybrid distributed-lumped element models • Dispersive media • Cost of reduction dominated by the solution of E-field finite element equation at the expansion frequency • Generated reduced-order model provides for: • Fast frequency interpolation of system’s electromagnetic response • Rational function matrix macro-modeling of complex, passive multiports for computationally efficient interfacing with time-domain solvers
W. C. ChewCenter for Computational Electromagneticsand Electromagnetics LaboratoryDepartment of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL MURI REVIEW 2006 OSU MURI Review June 19, 2006