Analysis of Periodic Strctures using FDTD method

ZHNG Bo, Xue Zheng-hui, Ren Wu, Sheng Xin-qing

Shool of Irormation and Electronics, Beiing Institute of Technolog,
Beiing 100081, China
ZDXU6@D1l.6UU.CD
Abstract-The use of FDTD method is a popular technique
employed in periodic structure simulations. This paper
examines the implementation of split-fled FDTD and Spectral
FDTD methods. While following distinctive schemes, both
methods exhibit good accuracy in the results. Then based on the
resource consumption and speed behaviour during the
simulation, it is concluded that these two methods are suitable
for diferent occasions depending on the problem type and
computing platform.
Qw0rd! Split-Field FDTD, Spectral FDTD, Periodic Structure
I. INTRODUCTION
Many structures possess a periodicity in one or more
dimensions, such as fequency selective surface (FSS)
commonly used in a radome to contol the energy that
reaches the atenna and electromagnetic badgap (EBG)
structure that has fequency regions in which wave
propagation is forbidden
[
ll
. The FDTD technique has been
applied to analysis of such periodic structures. Since the
overall structure of such structures usually consists of many
replicas of one basic element, the most common way to solve
the problem is to model one individual element, and
implement boundar conditions (PBC) to simulate the effect
of other periodic elements.
The FDTD approaches used in periodic stucture analysis
can be divided into two main categories. One is characterized
as 'single fequency approach', which means a single
fequency is simulated by a single r of FDTD program ,
the most commonly used one in this category is sine-cosine
method
[
21
. The other is chaacterized as 'multiple fequency
approach', which means multiple fequencies are simulated
by a single r. Since te latter preserves the wide-band
natue of FDTD method, it's more suitable for periodic
structure aalysis, the most recent development of such
approach ae Split-Field method and Spectral FDTD
(SFDTD) method, ad in this paper we focus on the
implement and comparison of these two approaches.
II. NUMERICAL FORMULATION
A. Split-Feld FDTD Formulation
Te Split-Field FDTD uses the fled-transfon technique
[
31
[
41
. Consider the geometr is periodic in the X and
y
direction
with period X p and
y
p' while uniaxial perfectly matched
978-1-4244-6908-6/10/$26.00 2010 IEEE
db+
layers (UPM) are used to truncate the space lattice in
the
z
direction.
In the Split-Field FDTD, a new set of feld variables are
introduced to remove the phase that is accumulated across
the grid:
p(x, y, z, m) = ;0 '(x, y, z, m
)
i
kx
X
e
i
ky
Y
( 1)
Q
(x,y,x,m) = f(x,y,z,m
)J
kx
x
e
J
ky
y
(2)
Thus the periodic boundar conditions (PBC) for the
transfoned feld variables are now:
P(i = 0) =
P(i = i
p ) (3)
P(i = 0)=
P(i = i
p
1i = x,y,z
(4)
Then the trasfoned time domain feld components are
split into additional parts take Py for example (in main grid
and upml grid):
=-

&
y
r
(6)
Substituting these variables into the Maxwell's equations,
we can obtain the 'a' parts of the feld components fIst and
then use them to calculate te remaining components.
During the simulation, we save the transfoned fled
variables at all time steps, and by perfoning inverse Fourier
transfon on (5) and (6), we can obtain the original feld
variables fom transfoned ones in te time domain.
B. Spectral FDTD Formulation
The Spectral FDTD approach is one of direct feld
periodic FDTD methods. Instead of splitting fled
components, it applies PBC by using a constant transverse
wavenumber (CTW) wave instead of conventional single
angle incident wave
[
5
][
61
.
The fequency domain of CTW is defmed as:
Et = exp(Jxx )exp(Jyy )exp(Jz (z -zo))
exp( -
k
g / )exp( mt
g
)
(7)
HI
= exp(Jxx )exp(yy )exp(z (z - Zo ))YTE
(8)
exp( -
k
g / )exp( mt g)
(9)
Where ko = 27/e , and kx ' k
y
represent constat
transverse wavenumbers, exp(- kg / (2) corresponds to a
Gaussian pulse used to limit the badwidth of wave
whileexp(Jlfo )is used to shif the Gauss pulse in te time
domain. Te CTW is calculated by applying inverse Fourier
transfor on (7) and (8) and is introduced into the
computational area using total-feldlscatter-feld formulation.
The feld components update follows standad FDTD
leapfog scheme ad standard UPML layers are implemented
as ABC.
C Frequency-Angle Mapping Formulation
Both Split-Field FDTD and Spectral FDTD are wide-band
approaches, their primary distinction lies in the fequency
angle mapping system. Since Split-Field performs additional
feld-splitting for phase compensating throughout the grid
and uses standard Gaussian plane wave as incident wave, a
fll range of fequency response coresponding to one
incident wave angle can be obtained by a single r of FDTD
program.
Unlike the conventional FDTD approach, the incident
wave in Spectal FDTD is CTW wave defmed as a time
domain wave with trasverse wavenumbers(independent of
fequency).As is shown in Fig. 1,
y
x
Fig.1 Multiple incident angles carried by a CTW wave
The CTW has constant transverse wavenumbers (kx ,k
y
)
and it caries a continuous range of incident agles, each
angle corresponds to a fequency component with
relationship by fowing equations:
B=sin-1(kj/ko) ( 10)
r= tan-l (k
y
/
kx
),
k
}
=k
; +
k

As is shown in Fig2, by changing the value of kj' both
angel and fequency can scan within the desired range, which
dbb
makes it possible to obtain multiple agle and fequency
responses in a mush fewer simulation counts compared to
single fequency approach. For example, in order to simulate
o 15G fequency response at incident angle B = 30

of a
periodic structure, we repeat simulation Z3 times with
kx = 2; sin(30
0
) / ee,
( 1 1)
f = 15 ^ 10
9
(n -1)/25,n = 1,2 .. .25,ee = 3 ? 10

and k =0 .The agle-fequency curves, as illustrated in

J
Fig2, suggest that a considerable range of incident angles and
fequencies are simulated as well.
------
b V'Il0uS K
.
_5V`

Ib6lS
Z
O C
. b. T. Tb.
cc
Fig.2 Angel-Frequency Curves obtained by 25 times of simulation
III. NUMRCAL RESULTS AD COMASON
A. numerical results
The frst periodic structure being aalysed here consists of
simple straight diploes arrayed in a fashion of rectangular
grid. The inter-element spacing is 17.8mm, Dipole Length
is12.7mm, Dipole Width is1.27mm. We apply both Split
Field FDTD and Spectral FDTD method in the simulation
and compare the results with result obtained by CST M
Studio. Te size of mesh cells is 56x 56x 100 in both Split
Field FDTD ad Spectral FDTD. The time and space costs of
both methods ae listed in Tablel ad results ae plotted in
Fig.3. As can be seen in Fig.3, results of Split-Field FDTD
and Spectral FDTD show good agreement with CST result,
which verif te accuracy of both methods.
TALE 1 TNPbPL LLb LL NMLb
Time Time Time Memory Disk Space
Steps Cost Cost/Step Cost Cost (MB)
(Min.) (Min.) (MB)
Split- Z 1+ .3J ++J 3JV
Field
Spectral +V + .Z1 J3 +
gg ..........................
gg _ . _ . _---,---------. --------
gy ........ ........., ....... .
U

>
........ , ......... , ........
g
.
..........................
g| ..........................
g] ........ ........., ...... ..
g_ ....................... ..
g
_
_._._---.---------.--------
C5TM5tudo
5pectrzll1
5plt-ledI1
-----------------_ .' ._----- _. ! . _------
, , ,
'. -- -- '. - -- -----... --. -. ----. -_. -.'--
"g

_

>

g
_

_
_
|
_
>
_
g
_g
Frcqucucc/(GHz)
Fig.3 Power refection coefcient of a dipole array
To illustrate the fequency-agle mapping system of
SFDTD, we then simulate a periodic structue consists of
square patches. The inter-element spacing is 1 Om and square
size is Scm ? Scm. To calculate fequency response at J
degree, we var k _ fom 0 to 66.72 , as can be seen in FigA
and Fig.5, trough proper interolation, fequency response
other than 0 degree and 30 degrees are obtained as well.

,
l --Incident Angle
--
r
----------l-----------
r'
--
Incident Angle=lO
g
g .......................... .
gg .--.... ---.... ---- ... -->-...
----------:-.--.-------: --- - ---
j g.
E
U.>

_
g
.|
t
.
U
]
4
---------- -----------.--- ----
-----_._--.-_ .. _--_ ..-. -- . ---
.......... ' .............. .. .. .
. . . _ _ .
.
. _ -: - .. _ .. _ _ . . .. : .... -
g_ _.........

... _.... ..

, . , ,
, , , ,
, . , .
, . , .
_____ .' ____ ..- ----- - --------_.' - -'" ------- '. -.', ---------
, . , .
, . , .
, . , ,
, . , ,
, . , ,
, , , ,
, . , .
-----------r-----------}-----------: ------------: ----------
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, . ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , , ,
--------- --,--- ------ --r---- ------- ,----- ------,----------
, , , ,
, , , ,
, , , ,
, , , ,
, , ,
, , , ,
, , , ,
----------
:
-----------,........ ....----------
:
----------
, , , ,
, , , ,
, , , ,
, , , ,
, , , ,
, , , ,
- - - _ < .............. ......... '
, , ,
, , , ,
, , , ,
, . , .
, . , .
, . , .
, , , ,
--- r -- --; --: - : ----. .
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, ,
, , ,
, , , ,
------,-----------r----------,-----------.----------
, . , .
, , , .
, , , ,
, , ,
, , ,
, , , ,
, . , .
g_ .......... , . ..... . . .. . . .. - ... .. -r--- . ---. --
, , , ,
"
g
--

--

--
>
-

g
Frcqucucy/(GHz)
Fig.4 Power refection coefcient of a square patch aray with incident angle
0degree ad 10 degrees
dbb

.9
.b
' 0.7

L
G
.I
.

_ .4

.J
.
-Incident Angle=20o
-Incident . AgleJ"
, ,
----------- _ ---------- ------------,------------->-----------
, ,
, ,
. . _. .. _. .. .......... _.: .. _ ..._... _ . .
:
...... .... .
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, .
--------- ------------,------------.-----------
, ,
-------- ------------.------------. -----------
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, .
- - ------- -----------_._----------_ . _----------
, ,
, ,
, ,
------- --_._-_._-_.'--_._--------,_._-_._-_.-
, ,
, ,
, ,
- . __ .. - ._' .. .. ., ............ ., .......... .
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
-- _ ._- . . . _ _ . . _ _ .. -
.-
............
Z +
cc Hz
D
Fig.S Power refection coefcient of a square patch array with incident angle
20 degrees ad 30 degrees
B. Comparison of to methods
Furtermore, we compare the simulation speed and
resouce consuption of the two methods based on Table 1.
1) Stabilit and Simulation Speed
Since SFDTD follows standad FDTD scheme, it inherit
the spatial and time sample density requirements of
conventional FDTD.
While Split-Field FDTD shares the same stability
requirements in spatial sampling, due to feld variables
splitting, the time sampling requirement of Split-Field FDTD
is stricter tha Spectral FDTD and is relevant to incident
angle of the plane wave.
Due to feld variables splitting, split-fled FDTD takes up
more time and memory in a single r and is less stable
compared with sided when dealing with same problem,
especially in the case of grazing agle since simulation time
of split-FDTD increases in proportion of incident angle while
SFDTD's consumption remains constant.
2) Resource Consumption
Meanwhile, in the Split-Field FDTD, time domain data of
all time steps need to be stored for time shifing operations to
obtain the original feld data. Although we can pre-calculate
the time shif value for individual grids ad store the feld
variables of adjacent time steps during the simulation, it will
greatly increase the memory usage and slow down te
overall speed. On the other hand, since SFDTD is a direct
feld scheme, data of much fewer time steps are needed for
storage compared to Split-Field FDTD, which saves a
considerable amount of storage space ad processing time.
IV. CONCLUSION:

Both Split-Field FDTD method and Spectral FDTD ae

efective method in periodic structure aalysis. Split-Field
FDTD is more suitable for problems concering single
incident angle. For cases involving multiple incident angle
(especially near grazing angle) response, Spectral FDTD is
more effcient. What's more, because SFDTD scheme is
more robust and less memor consuming, it's paricularly
more suitable for hardwae accelerating, such as cluster ad
GPU accelerating.
REFERENCES:
[I] Munk, H. A., Frequenc Selective Suraces: Theor and Design, John
Wiley, New York, 2000.
[2] Ko, W.L., ad R. Mittra, "Implementation of Floquet boundary
condition in FDTD for FSS analysis" Proc. J IEEE Antennas
Propagat. Soc.Int1.Symp., Ann Arbor, M,1 993, VoU , pp.14-17
[3] J. Alan Roden and Stephen D.Gedney, "Time-Domain Analysis of
Periodic Structures at Oblique Incidence: Orthogonal and
Nonorthogonal FDTD Implementations", IEEE Transactions on
microwave theor and techniques, Vol, 46, No.4, April 1998.
[4] A. Tafove, Computational Electodnamics: The Finite-Diference
Time-Domain Method Third Edition. Norwood, MA. Artech House,
2005.
[5] Aminian, A.andRahmat-Samii,Y.,Spectral
FDTD: a novel computational technique for the analysis of periodic
structures, IEEE Antennas and Propagation Societ International
Syposium, Vol 3,2004.
[6] Aminian, A. and Rahmat -Samii, Spectral FDTD: a novel technique
for the aalysis of oblique incident plae wave on periodic structures,
IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, Vol 54,2006.
db1