2018 12th International Conference on the Properties and Applications of Dielectric Materials (ICPADM) 2018
DOI: 10.1109/icpadm.2018.8401061
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Calculation of 3-D electric field intensity in presence of conductors with floating potentials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, different from the Dirichlet boundary condition, ϕ C η is an unknown and therefore we can not simply move the above integral to the right hand side as done in (16). Therefore we add ϕ C η as an unknown to the linear system (13).…”
Section: B Discontinuous Galerkin Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…However, different from the Dirichlet boundary condition, ϕ C η is an unknown and therefore we can not simply move the above integral to the right hand side as done in (16). Therefore we add ϕ C η as an unknown to the linear system (13).…”
Section: B Discontinuous Galerkin Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several techniques have been introduced to the traditional FEM so that FPCs can be accounted for. These include the virtual permittivity method (VPM) [10], the matrix reduction method (MRM) [13], and the charge simulation method (CSM) [11], [12], [16]. These methods' accuracy, ease of implementation (or amount of modifications required for implementation in legacy FEM codes), ability to account for charges on FPCs, and savings in the number of unknowns have recently been compared in [15].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Both VPM and MRM cannot account for this nonzero charge condition 10‐12 . CSM can account for charge conditions since it enforces a specific charge distribution on an FPC but this requires a priori knowledge of simulation results or multiple iterative simulations 10‐13 . Several boundary element methods (BEMs) have also been developed for modeling FPC in electrostatic simulations 2,16 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Even though execution of these electrostatic simulations by using a finite element method (FEM), which solves the Poisson equation, has become a common practice, accurate and efficient incorporation of FPC models within a FEM framework is still not a trivial task. In recent years, various techniques have been introduced to address this challenge 7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14 . The most commonly used methods among these are the virtual permittivity method (VPM) 7 , the matrix reduction method (MRM) 10 , and the charge simulation method (CSM) 8,9,13 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%