Skip to content

Conversation

@FilipeFcp
Copy link
Contributor

@momchil-flex, @tomflexcompute, and I were discussing last week the limitations of far-field projection for this scattering structure, where it’s not possible to use a closed 3D monitor and the fields don’t decay at the boundaries.

While exploring this, we noticed there’s a compromise between the simulation size and the window_size argument, so we decided to publish a quick tutorial about it. Any insights or comments you might have are very welcome :)

@momchil-flex
Copy link
Collaborator

Any idea why you're getting this? I can't reproduce.

image

@momchil-flex
Copy link
Collaborator

This is pretty interesting! Could you add a plot of the simulation setup so it's easier to understand?

I am surprised that the 3D projection monitor does poorly. Could you check what happens if you make it just a little larger than the scatterer in xy, rather than spanning almost the entire simulation domain?

In the last plot, you might want to play around with the figsize, maybe decrease the horizontal size because the font is quite small? And that should create more vertical space to avoid this overlap.

image

@FilipeFcp
Copy link
Contributor Author

I did some tests with the 3D monitors of 1.2 µm and 2 µm side (the scatterer has 1 µm side). The results seem worse.
Note that I need to exclude the negative z surface.

image

@momchil-flex
Copy link
Collaborator

I did some tests with the 3D monitors of 1.2 µm and 2 µm side (the scatterer has 1 µm side). The results seem worse. Note that I need to exclude the negative z surface.

Ok yeah I think I understand why this is the case, fundamentally the fields don't decay which is always going to be a problem.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 28, 2025

Spell Check Report

FarFieldProjectionNonDecayingField.ipynb:

Cell 1, Line 1: 'non-confined'
  > # Far-field projection limitations with non-confined fields
Cell 1, Line 9: 'workarounds'
  > In this notebook, we will explore the limitations of this scenario and discuss caveats and workarounds.
Cell 15, Line 5: 'TestesFFPSize'
  > batch = web.Batch(simulations=sims, folder_name="TestesFFPSize")

Checked 1 notebook(s). Found spelling errors in 1 file(s).
Generated by GitHub Action run: https://github.com/flexcompute/tidy3d-notebooks/actions/runs/19045523470

Copy link
Contributor

@tomflexcompute tomflexcompute left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @FilipeFcp this is very helpful to clear up some confusion from users. Looks ready to go.

  1. I think the correct rst file should be docs/features/data_visualisation.rst.
  2. The section title Simulation setup -> Simulation Setup

@FilipeFcp FilipeFcp merged commit 8171c83 into develop Nov 3, 2025
1 check passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants