Transverse impedance of Ceramic collimator. Comparison of HFSS versus GdfidL

1. Transverse impedance of Ceramic collimator. Comparison of HFSS versus GdfidL A.Grudiev 07.05.08

2. PML PML Perfect Conductor Perfect Conductor Collimator: εr, σ PML Collimator: εr, σ PML Z Z 2b Lc Lc GdfidL setup d Setup 1: PML b.c. infinitely long setup Setup 2: Short Circuit b.c. finite length setup

3. Dependence on the Lc. εr=5, σ=0 Setup1: PMLBC Numerical effect Setup2: SCBC f[MHz] f[MHz]

4. Dependence on the mesh. Lc=1m, εr=5, σ=0 Setup1: PMLBC f[MHz] Setup2: SCBC f[MHz]

5. HFSS setup. Infinitely long setup Δ/2=1mm L0 d=10mm b=2mm From V. Vaccaro (1994)

6. Variation of σ=1 - 10-6, εr=1 , Lc=1m, d=10mm f[MHz] Very good agreement between HFSS and GdfidL

7. Variation of σ=1 - 106, εr=1, Lc=1m, d=10mm f[MHz] No agreement between HFSS and GdfidL for σ > 10. GdfidL mesh is too bad ?

8. Variation of εr=2-20, σ=0, d=10mm Imaginary part of the transverse impedance f[MHz]

9. Variation of d=1-20mm, σ=0, εr=5. HFSS setup f[MHz]

10. Variation of d=1-20mm, σ=1, εr=1. HFSS setup f[MHz] f[MHz]