Skip to content
  • Search
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

ZMT zurich med tech

  1. Home
  2. Sim4Life
  3. Analysis & Postprocessing
  4. Multiport Simulations Export Huygens Source

Multiport Simulations Export Huygens Source

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Analysis & Postprocessing
10 Posts 2 Posters 287 Views 2 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • L Offline
    L Offline
    lisaaregler
    wrote last edited by
    #1

    Hey!

    I constructed a multiport simulation with two ports. I used simulation combiner and extracted the field from the simulation combiner.
    I am not able, despite normalizing the input power and refreshing, to export the Huygens source to use it later in other simulations.

    Can someone help me?

    Thanks in advance

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • SylvainS Offline
      SylvainS Offline
      Sylvain
      ZMT
      wrote last edited by
      #2

      Hi,
      I suppose you need to select both the E and the H fields out of the Sensor Combiner. You should then be able to see the Huygens Exporter in the Imp./Export menu.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • L Offline
        L Offline
        lisaaregler
        wrote last edited by lisaaregler
        #3

        Hi Sylvain,

        thanks for your answer.
        I always see the Huygens Exporter, when choosing the total simulation or when E-H-fields selected. When exporting, the export itself doesnt work.
        The information I get is: 'Could not retreive input power; Interpolation to correct frequency of incident field input power failed; Huygens exporter was unable to write ....".

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • SylvainS Offline
          SylvainS Offline
          Sylvain
          ZMT
          wrote last edited by
          #4

          Hi, indeed, I managed to reproduce the error you saw.
          I've notified our development team to investigate whether it's some sort of bug or if there is a more fundamental issue.
          I can see two workarounds:

          • re-run the simulation as "single port" (use "Clone as Single Simulation") and set the amplitudes and phases before running the simulation (the obvious drawback is that you have to re-run everything if you want different amplitudes/phases)
          • export a Huygens source for each port individually (i.e. do not use the Simulation Combiner), and set the amplitudes/phases of each Huygens source when you actually use them (this is actually very powerful if you need to simulate several amplitudes/phases configurations)

          I hope this helps.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • L Offline
            L Offline
            lisaaregler
            wrote last edited by
            #5

            Hello Sylvain,

            the point is to not run a single port simulation, as our Bodycoils are multiport. I've seen the tutorial about a single port and in CP mode.
            TO the second point: This doesnt work either. THe sources can be imported, however, it tells me: Field interpolation: out of range at coordinate (-0.0448266,-0.21,-0.2985) and component 0.
            The Source 'volume' (i.e. the volume you have to drag into the source) is identical to the sensor of the multiport simulation.

            Hope that clarifies my problem more.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • SylvainS Offline
              SylvainS Offline
              Sylvain
              ZMT
              wrote last edited by
              #6
              1. I see.
              2. That's a different issue, and not related to multiport/combiners/etc... The source volume (which you use in the "second" simulation, the one with Huygens Sources) has to be smaller (by at least one half grid cell, but I would recommend an extra margin of one grid cell) than the sensor of the "first" simulation (the one with the incident fields). The reason is that the incident fields are interpolated onto the "second" grid at the locations of the huygens sources (and the interpolation scheme has the requirements I mentioned above).
                Check the coordinates given in the error message if you want to know the location where the "padding" condition was violated.

              I hope this helps.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • L Offline
                L Offline
                lisaaregler
                wrote last edited by
                #7

                Hello Sylvain,

                indeed it worked, thank you so much for your ideas. Do you assume, it will produce as reliable results as multiport simulations?

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • SylvainS Offline
                  SylvainS Offline
                  Sylvain
                  ZMT
                  wrote last edited by
                  #8

                  Hi Lisa,
                  I'm glad it worked! Regarding the reliability of the results, it obviously depends on a lot of things so I can't make a universal statement...
                  The superposition principle works very well, both in theory (linearity of the governing equations between excitation sources and fields) and in the implementation (terms are just added), so having multiple Huygens sources each with different amplitudes and phases behaves exactly like for a multiport simulation, where results are obtained by a weighted sum of fields.
                  The different between the two approaches, however, is that, in the Huygens case, the scatterer (e.g. a human body inside the coil) has no effect on the coil itself (no backscattering effect). Everything behaves as if the coil remained perfectly tuned (assuming it was tuned before inserting the body). That would not necessarily be the case for a multiport simulation, where the coil might have to be re-tuned after inserting a body.

                  Does that make sense?

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  • L Offline
                    L Offline
                    lisaaregler
                    wrote last edited by
                    #9

                    Hi Sylvain,

                    thank you, the explanation of the Huygens box completely makes sense!
                    Do you have an idea, how to overcome this issue:
                    To link (as in the youtube tutorial) the Exposure simulations (using the Huygens box) with the simulation of the source, the FieldSensorCoil of the source simulation is drag-dropped in the simulation of the body exposure.
                    This link wont be available for simulating the BC Coil with Multiport Simulations, exporting the individual port fields, importing these as Huygens sources in the Exposure Single-Port Simulation? That is correct?

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • SylvainS Offline
                      SylvainS Offline
                      Sylvain
                      ZMT
                      wrote last edited by
                      #10

                      Hi Lisa,
                      You are correct. It won't be possible to link a single multiport simulation with several individual single-port source simulations.
                      However, you can have multiple single-port "exposure" simulations, each linking to a Huygens source file (the one you exported using the Huygens Exporter, for each port).
                      The results can be combined "manually" at post-processing, using the Field Combiner. Note that this algorithm simply does a weighted sum of its inputs, so if you want to compute SAR you have to use it on the E fields, and compute SAR on the combined E field.
                      I can explain in more detail if any of this is unclear, feel free to ask (in that case, please provide a more comprehensive overview of what you are trying to achieve).

                      image.png

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Search