- #1
spookyfw
- 25
- 0
Hi
for my thesis I wanted to show the complete derivation for the grating equation - case: perfectly conducting. The later steps are all no problem, but I am struggling with the proof of pseudo-periodicity. I found in my opinion a nice summary here: http://www.math.purdue.edu/~lipeijun/math598_f10/notes/notes.pdf
He starts with Maxwell, states the boundary conditions on the grating profile for TE and TM waves (page 25):
[itex]n \times (E_1 - E_2) = 0 [/itex]
[itex]n \times (H_1 - E_2) = 0 [/itex]
and then deduces the Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions for the scalar field u that he has defined before.
The two homogeneous conditions read (page 26)
[itex]u(x,f(x)) = 0 [/itex]
[itex]\partial_n u (x,f(x)) = 0 [/itex]
He states that the Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions directly follow, when E= (0,0,u) and H = (0,0,u). But I don't see how, as the normal vector has both x and y components, when moving along the grating profile.
If someone could point out how this simple form is derived I would be really grateful.spookyfw
for my thesis I wanted to show the complete derivation for the grating equation - case: perfectly conducting. The later steps are all no problem, but I am struggling with the proof of pseudo-periodicity. I found in my opinion a nice summary here: http://www.math.purdue.edu/~lipeijun/math598_f10/notes/notes.pdf
He starts with Maxwell, states the boundary conditions on the grating profile for TE and TM waves (page 25):
[itex]n \times (E_1 - E_2) = 0 [/itex]
[itex]n \times (H_1 - E_2) = 0 [/itex]
and then deduces the Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions for the scalar field u that he has defined before.
The two homogeneous conditions read (page 26)
[itex]u(x,f(x)) = 0 [/itex]
[itex]\partial_n u (x,f(x)) = 0 [/itex]
He states that the Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions directly follow, when E= (0,0,u) and H = (0,0,u). But I don't see how, as the normal vector has both x and y components, when moving along the grating profile.
If someone could point out how this simple form is derived I would be really grateful.spookyfw