This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision | Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
docs:become [2020/04/22 23:04] pklapetek |
docs:become [2020/04/22 23:06] pklapetek |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 114: | Line 114: | ||
This uses very similar geometry to our calculation (TSF source, periodic and CPML boundaries), | This uses very similar geometry to our calculation (TSF source, periodic and CPML boundaries), | ||
so we can expect that there are not many additional potential error sources when comparing to our calculation. | so we can expect that there are not many additional potential error sources when comparing to our calculation. | ||
- | |||
- | First of all, error in the reference value (PEC reflection) is below 0.001 percent. This certainly | ||
- | cannot affect our results. | ||
Reflectance of the default metal for this particular voxel spacing and other settings is 0.983 | Reflectance of the default metal for this particular voxel spacing and other settings is 0.983 | ||
Reflectanceof the fitted metal model is 0.9587. | Reflectanceof the fitted metal model is 0.9587. | ||
Result from the Filmmetrics reflectance calculator is 0.9678, which is something in between. | Result from the Filmmetrics reflectance calculator is 0.9678, which is something in between. | ||
- | This is probably also not the source of problem (however might be compared to reflectance | + | Finally, error in the reference value (PEC reflection) is below 0.001 percent. This certainly |
+ | cannot affect our results. | ||
+ | So, this all is probably also not the source of problem (however might be compared to reflectance | ||
coming from FEM). | coming from FEM). | ||