 edoardo
|
f1a6fd25ab
|
changed parameters for easier debugging
|
2026-05-26 08:50:50 +02:00 |
|
|
edoardo
|
249d39aa73
|
added faulthandler for testing
|
2026-05-26 08:43:49 +02:00 |
|
|
edoardo
|
2cfce678a3
|
testing for segmentation faults
|
2026-05-26 08:41:58 +02:00 |
|
|
edoardo
|
7f362f3e47
|
trying to lower resolution of design region to the same as the physics
|
2026-05-25 17:21:44 +02:00 |
|
|
edoardo
|
c27f5a3896
|
another parameter test
|
2026-05-25 16:44:50 +02:00 |
|
|
edoardo
|
7039997fbd
|
testing fields again
|
2026-05-25 15:38:48 +02:00 |
|
|
edoardo
|
1311203563
|
param. update
|
2026-05-25 14:41:00 +02:00 |
|
|
edoardo
|
d113f54164
|
add field plot utilities for normalization run
|
2026-05-25 14:30:01 +02:00 |
|
|
edoardo
|
3be89321ee
|
the stop condition on the normalization run needs to be better analyzed. Specifically, we should understand where to position the monitor point. Before, it was in a far field point, outside the simulation cell. I've seen the simulation does not converge, at first glance. Now I'll try position it in a real physical point inside the cell. Let's see if it converges in a different way.
|
2026-05-24 22:45:15 +02:00 |
|
|
edoardo
|
10db14256e
|
minor changes
|
2026-05-24 21:00:07 +02:00 |
|
|
edoardo
|
b6f36ecaa7
|
parameter update
|
2026-05-24 18:20:37 +02:00 |
|
|
edoardo
|
762938960a
|
modified version of metapeg, using epigraph and linewidth/spacing constraints
|
2026-05-24 17:47:07 +02:00 |
|