How to Model Drude Materials using FDTD

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on modeling Drude materials using the Finite Difference Time Domain (FDTD) method, particularly in the context of incorporating metals into light interaction models. Users have encountered instability in their code when attempting to use negative or imaginary permittivities, which are essential for accurately representing metals. A suggested approach is to model metals as Drude materials, where the complex susceptibility can be defined by specifying a positive damping value, thus avoiding the need for negative or complex values. Additionally, splitting the complex susceptibility into its real and imaginary parts may help in treating the imaginary part as a real conductivity term. The conversation emphasizes the need for clarity in code implementation and the challenges faced without specific code details.
thepolishman
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Hello all,

I have been learning to use FDTD to model light interaction with various materials. I've successfully managed to model light interaction with semiconductors/insulators. However, I've been having trouble understanding how to incorporate metals into this model. The code becomes unstable whenever I give it a negative or imaginary permittivity. One of the methods used to circumvent this problem is to model the metal as a Drude material, as outlined in this FDTD help guide:

http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/~schneidj/ufdtd/chap10.pdf

After incorporating the equations shown in Section 10.4 in the link above, I still can't use any negative or imaginary permittivities in my code. I'm fairly certain I did not make any coding errors. My guess is that I have to incorporate this negative or imaginary permittivity indirectly somehow. The problem is, I don't know how.

Any help regarding how to correctly implement this model (or possibly an alternative one, as I'm aware that there are others) would be greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First, it would have been nice to write out what FDTD stands for (Finite Difference Time Domain) instead of leaving it to us to find out.
Maybe the point is only how to specify the susceptibility:In the Drude model is that the complex value of the susceptibility arises once you specify a positive value for the damping g. So you don't have to enter any negative or complex values explicitly.
You could also try to split the complex susceptibility into its (positive) real part and the imaginary part and treat the latter as a real conductivity term.


If this doesn't solve your problem, it is rather difficult to propose a solution as I can't tell you what goes wrong without knowing your code.
 
Thread 'Unexpected irregular reflection signal from a high-finesse cavity'
I am observing an irregular, aperiodic noise pattern in the reflection signal of a high-finesse optical cavity (finesse ≈ 20,000). The cavity is normally operated using a standard Pound–Drever–Hall (PDH) locking configuration, where an EOM provides phase modulation. The signals shown in the attached figures were recorded with the modulation turned off. Under these conditions, when scanning the laser frequency across a cavity resonance, I expected to observe a simple reflection dip. Instead...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
962
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
887
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K