improve support for lossy transmission lines and complex reference impedances #2650
+560
−55
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
![greptile-apps[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/867647?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM
3 files reviewed, no comments
Edit PR Review Bot Settings | Greptile
dmarek-flex
force-pushed
the
dmarek/fix-waveports-with-lossy-modes
branch
from
94e2936 to
5caee13
Compare
Diff CoverageDiff: origin/develop...HEAD, staged and unstaged changes
Summary
|
dmarek-flex
changed the title
dmarek-flex
force-pushed
the
dmarek/fix-waveports-with-lossy-modes
branch
from
1566a98 to
5825d9c
Compare
support both pseudo and power wave formulations, while defaulting to pseudo wave definition support non-conjugated dot product
dmarek-flex
force-pushed
the
dmarek/fix-waveports-with-lossy-modes
branch
from
5825d9c to
86b866d
Compare
| "reflections from simulation boundaries. ", | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| S_def: SDef = pd.Field( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
trying to compare the following terminologies for the field name: wave_choice, basis_choice, s_param_def, and the current one.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
WavePort.We stick with using the unconjugated value for reference impedance, but now we switch our default approach for extracting S parameters to the pseudo-wave formulation.
Also includes a fix for calculating voltage from current + flux as well as calculating current from voltage + flux, when modes are lossy.
We are still missing proper calculation of mode amps using the non conjugated version of the dot product for lossy modes.Completed
backend: https://github.com/flexcompute/compute/pull/2171
Greptile Summary
Improved handling of lossy modes in WavePort by updating reference impedance calculations and fixing voltage/current computations for transmission line modes.
tidy3d/plugins/smatrix/component_modelers/terminal.pyto use complex conjugate of load impedance (Z_L*) for power wave calculationstidy3d/plugins/smatrix/ports/wave.pyto properly handle directionality and complex flux values for lossy modes