2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.wavemoti.2009.11.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Embedding formulae for scattering by three-dimensional structures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
13
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
1
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These figures also show that in some cases the third formula can cover the whole sphere ( Figures 17 and 19 ), but this is not always the case as shown in Figure 20 and 22. In order to demonstrate that these results agree with the results published in [18], Figure 18 gives the value of the Dirichlet diffraction coefficient along the black dashed line of Figure 17. Figure 18 also emphasises the perfect agreement between the first and the third Modified Smyshlyaev formulae in this case.…”
Section: Numerical Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…These figures also show that in some cases the third formula can cover the whole sphere ( Figures 17 and 19 ), but this is not always the case as shown in Figure 20 and 22. In order to demonstrate that these results agree with the results published in [18], Figure 18 gives the value of the Dirichlet diffraction coefficient along the black dashed line of Figure 17. Figure 18 also emphasises the perfect agreement between the first and the third Modified Smyshlyaev formulae in this case.…”
Section: Numerical Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…Figure 17 shows the result only for the Dirichlet case, as in this case the incident wave direction is in the same plane as the quarter-plane so that the Neumann diffraction coefficient is zero everywhere. In [18], Shanin et al published the value of the diffraction coefficient given by the first formula along just the dashed black line in Figure 17 (they did not give any results linked to the third formula) and didn't implement the coordinate equation method numerically (they used an integral equation instead). In all the figures the superiority of the third modified Smyshlyaev formula, and the limitations of the first two formulae, are clear.…”
Section: Numerical Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The first motivation is the inconsistency of the representation of the diffraction coefficient of the corner. Indeed, for example, two very important papers on the subject by Shanin (2005b) and Skelton et al (2010) give a different representation of this coefficient. The second motivation is the conjecture formulated at the end of Assier & Peake (2012), where the possibility of an ultimate modified Smyshlyaev formula was expressed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%