!" #$ %&



 
   % '()'*
  $% +)((*)','*)+
  --
-- )',

  
 

     
     



   !!"
#!$#" % & ' %   % (& &) *& 


+     ,+&)



- .) !!") 
   & % /
'
 ,
' (  &
* 
) -

  
) 
      
          #!) 0 )  

) ,1
2#3""3432)


 
 
  
   
' &  
'  %
 &+
  
  + & &  ) %%   % 3
 % 3%% 5*6

 % 3 5.*6  & % 

+7 8

 
  & &)
, 
 % 
  
 % & %% ' % 
 9  &


   & ') -   % & &  ' &     ) *&


& &
 &


' %
:'  
     & 
   %
&   % :   
   
 
   516)
,
  
     
 & 

  % & & 

&)
/
'
 % %

  
  
 +


 % 
 

 
%) *& :  % 

 
 % +
'

) -
  %8 &%  % % & 

 %  
& 
 5(;6
'

   5-16  .*   ) (  
    

 
 ' '

 &
 & %
) < 
   +&
%   + 30!1
 
 % %%   % +
' '
&' 
) .



 
& 
'

 

&
' +
'     
'
 %83
   % &  
=& > 8
) =' %

    & *
 .* % 
 
+
'  )
  &
 
 
     &


  % +%
  ) -  


  3   

 % 

) -
3
 >


&    +& 
 '
 
    '
&
9 ) *&

& 
 
'
 % % 
+7 8

'   

 (;) ,%    
 
  
 & '  & 
  
 
 

) (

    %  
'  '  %  
   '   &

 
  )
?
  % 

 
 

%    
  
  %
   &
  ' )

 
+7 8
 3
 * % 3  & & & 
+
' (;  
'
9  '
 3
 >


! "#$    %  $ &' (()$    $
 *)+,-+   $ 

@ .: - !!"

,, #"#3#
,1 2#3""3432
$$$$
3!#4 5& $AA):)ABC$$$$
3!#46
To Viktor and Vera
List of Papers

This thesis is based on the following papers, which are referred to in the text
by their Roman numerals.

I Abenius, E., Andersson, U., Edelvik, F., Eriksson, L., Ledfelt,

G. (2002) Hybrid Time Domain Solvers for the Maxwell Equa-
tions in 2D. International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering, 53:2185-2199.∗
II Abenius, E., Edelvik, F., Johansson, C. (2005) Waveguide
Truncation Using UPML in the Finite-Element Time-Domain
Method. Technical Report, 2005-026, Department of
Information Technology, Uppsala University.
III Abenius, E., Strand, B. (2005) Solving Inverse Electromagnetic
Problems Using FDTD and Gradient-based Minimization. Sub-
mitted to International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering.
IV Abenius, E., Edelvik, F. (2005) Thin Sheet Modeling Using Shell
Elements in the Finite-Element Time-Domain Method. Accep-
ted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Antennas and
Propagation.
V Abenius, E., Johansson, C. (2005) Modeling of Inhomogeneous
Waveguides using Hybrid Methods. Submitted to International
Journal of Numerical Modelling: Electronic Networks,
Devices and Fields.

∗ Reprints were made with permission from the publishers.

v
Contents

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2 Time-domain hybrid solver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1 Governing equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2 The finite-difference time-domain method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2.1 Discretization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2.2 Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.3 Plane wave excitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.4 Absorbing boundary condition (ABC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2.5 Dispersive media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2.6 Subcell models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.2.7 Parallelization by domain decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3 The finite-element time-domain method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3.1 Absorbing boundary conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.3.2 Subcell models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.4 Hybridization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3 Waveguides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4 Inverse scattering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.1 Difficulties in the inverse problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.2 Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.3 Minimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.4 Computing gradients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.5 Numerical examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
6 Summary in Swedish: Direkta och inversa metoder för vågledare och
spridningsproblem i tidsdomänen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

vii
1. Introduction

In the modern society electromagnetic fields are used in many different

devices and for many different purposes. Common examples include
wireless communication in antenna systems for mobile phones and satellites,
heating in microwave ovens and medical X-ray imaging equipment and
tomography. As a result it has become increasingly important to have a
good understanding of the electromagnetic field and how it interacts with
the environment. The propagation of the field is described by a system
of partial differential equations (PDEs) called Maxwell’s equations, [48].
Even though the equations are linear for most applications, the added
complexity of boundary conditions and materials precludes the exact solution
of most realistic problem. Since experiments are usually very costly and
time-consuming, numerical simulation often represents the most efficient
tool for analysis and design.
Computational electromagnetics (CEM) has experienced a tremendous
growth in the last decades due to the availability of powerful computers.
Some of the applications that receive most attention are
• prediction of radar cross-section (RCS),
• antenna coupling and analysis,
• microwave devices and guided structures,
• electromagnetic compatibility (EMC),
• bioelectromagnetics, e.g. tomography or determination of the specific ab-
sorption rate (SAR) for radiation from mobile phones.
Due to the computational power of modern computers the area of design
optimization and inverse problems has received an increased interest. In these
problems the physical properties are not fully characterized but contain un-
known parameters. Examples include antenna design and optimization, and
the design of radar absorbing materials to minimize the RCS. Also, reflection
measurements are used to determine the characteristics of unknown media.
Similar problems arise in medical applications where X-rays are used to ex-
amine the human body, for instance to locate tumors.
The work presented in this thesis has been carried out within the Paral-
lel and Scientific Computing Institute (PSCI), mainly in the projects GEMS
(General Electromagnetic Solver) and IMPACT (Inverse Methods for Wave
Propagation Applications in Time-Domain). The PSCI projects are joint ef-

1
forts between industry and academia, supported by the Swedish Agency for
Innovation Systems (Vinnova). The objectives are motivated by industrial de-
mands and a high level of academic research.
In the GEMS projects (including the succeeding GEMS2, GEMS3 and
SMART) a general software was developed, consisting of hybrid solvers for
Maxwell’s equations. The frequency-domain solver combines a state-of-the-
art multipole boundary integral method with different asymptotic techniques
for high-frequency problems. The time-domain solver consists of a coupled
structured-unstructured method with an extensive library of modules includ-
ing subcell objects, such as thin wires and sheets, dispersive materials, ab-
sorbing boundary conditions, waveguide modeling, etc.. Both codes are par-
allelized and have been extensively tested on challenging industrial problems
on high performance computers.
Several theses [5, 45, 19, 38, 55] including the current one are direct results
of the research performed within GEMS. The solvers are in production use in
the industry and a company is being founded for the maintenance and further
development of the codes. The industrial partners that were involved in the
GEMS projects are Ericsson Microwave Systems, Saab Ericsson Space, Aero-
techTelub (former Saab Avionics), the Swedish Defence Research Agency
(FOI), the Fraunhofer-Chalmers Research Centre for Industrial Mathematics
(FCC) and the academic partners were KTH and Uppsala University.
In the IMPACT project, an inverse scattering method for wave propaga-
tion problems was developed, with applications in electromagnetics, ultra-
sonics and elastodynamics. The problem is solved in the time-domain using
a deterministic, gradient-based minimization approach where the gradient is
computed using the adjoint solution. This approach has the advantage of cov-
ering a range of frequencies in a single computation, and of being generic and
applicable to existing solvers for the direct problem. Applications in elec-
tromagnetics include determining the characteristics of an unknown material
using reflection measurements and model reduction. The electromagnetic ap-
proach has been described in [1]. The industrial partners were Aerospatiale
(now part of EADS), AerotechTelub, Esaote (Italy) and QSW (UK) and the
code providers were KTH and CRS4 (Italy). The work presented in [1] was
conducted at KTH.
In the following chapters a background to the topics addressed in papers I–
V is presented. The three-dimensional FEM-FDTD hybrid solver is described
in Chapter 2. The solver is a further development of the two-dimensional
hybrid solver discussed in Paper I and has been carefully described in [19].
The primary contributions to the hybrid solver in this thesis consist of the
development of a UPML absorbing boundary condition in Paper II and a novel
subcell model for thin material sheets in Paper IV. In Chapter 3 time-domain
waveguide modeling is addressed. This is the subject of Paper V where a

2
general approach for time-domain analysis of inhomogeneous waveguides is
developed.
Inverse scattering is a large subject in electromagnetics, with many differ-
ent research areas. The background given in Chapter 4 is intended as a brief
introduction to the minimization approach used for reconstruction problems
in Paper III. In this paper a general form of Maxwell’s equations covering both
PML and dispersive media is formulated and the derivation of exact adjoint
gradients is described. Further, model reduction using subcell models is dis-
cussed and gradients are derived for a combined thin sheet and slot geometry.

3
2. Time-domain hybrid solver

The most commonly used time domain method for the Maxwell equations
is the finite-difference time-domain method (FDTD) [77]. It has several ad-
vantages compared to other time domain methods. The simple data structures
make it straightforward to implement and facilitates vectorization and paral-
lelization. With respect to time and memory consumption, the FDTD method
is an almost optimal second-order method for homogeneous materials.
The main drawback of the FDTD method is its inability to accurately model
curved objects and small geometrical features. The Cartesian grid leads to a
staircase approximation of the geometry and small details are not resolved at
all.
An efficient approach to avoid staircasing is to use unstructured grids near
curved objects and around small geometrical details but revert to structured
grids as quickly as possible for the rest of the computational domain. This
approach combines the efficiency of structured grids with the flexibility of
unstructured grids. An example of such a hybrid grid is shown in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1: Hybrid grid for a Clavin antenna. A structured FDTD grid is used
for the main part of the antenna and an unstructured tetrahedral grid resolves
the slot and monopoles.

Wu and Itoh [76] were first to present a combination of the FDTD method
and an implicit finite element (FE) method. They have been followed by sev-
eral others [51, 43, 67, 78]. A combination of explicit finite volumes (FV) and
FDTD have been proposed by Riley and Turner [63].

5
 The coupling of two stable methods does not necessarily lead to a stable
hybrid and many of the early efforts suffered from severe stability problems.
An important contribution in this area is [64] where a stable coupling between
FEM and FDTD is presented.
In this chapter we will give a brief description of the two main components
of the time-domain hybrid solver, the FETD and FDTD methods, as well as
explain the stable coupling between them. For more detailed descriptions we
refer to [70] for the FDTD method, [37] for the finite-element method and
[19] for the hybrid FEM-FDTD method.

2.1 Governing equations

The propagation of electromagnetic fields is described by the Maxwell equa-
tions,
∂D
=∇×H −J (Ampère’s law) (2.1)
∂t
∂B
− =∇×E (Faraday’s law) (2.2)
∂t
∇·D =ρ (Gauss’ law) (2.3)
∇·B =0 (Gauss’ law) (2.4)

where B is the magnetic flux density in V s/m2 , D is the electric flux density
in As/m2 , H is the magnetic field in A/m, E is the electric field in V /m,
J is the electric current density in A/m2 and ρ is the electric charge density
in As/m3 . The divergence equations (2.3) and (2.4) may be seen as resulting
from the first two equations in the following sense. Taking the divergence of
(2.1) and (2.2) and changing the order of differentiation we obtain
∂(∇ · D − ρ)
=0 (2.5)
∂t
∂(∇ · B)
=0 (2.6)
∂t
where we have used the continuity equation for the charge
∂ρ
∇·J + = 0. (2.7)
∂t
The equations (2.5) and (2.6) show that if the divergence equations are satis-
fied initially, they will continue to be so for all later times.
The fields in Maxwell’s equations are related by so-called constitutive rela-
tions. In linear, isotropic and non-dispersive (i.e., the material properties are

6
independent of the frequency of the field) media they are
B = µH (2.8)
D = εE (2.9)

where ε is the permittivity, µ is the permeability. The corresponding properties

of vacuum are denoted by ε0 and µ0 . Lossy media are included through the
current density by
J = σE (2.10)

where σ is the conductivity. Using (2.8) and (2.9) the equations (2.1) and (2.2)
may be written as
∂H
−µ = ∇×E (2.11)
∂t
∂E
ε = ∇ × H − σE − J s . (2.12)
∂t
where J s denotes an applied current source. The solution for a given problem
is determined by the above equations together with initial and boundary con-
ditions. A common type of boundary is the perfect electric conductor (PEC)
used for metals. In this case the proper boundary condition is given by
n×E =0 (PEC). (2.13)

In two dimensions the system (2.11)–(2.12) decouples into two independent

systems. The transverse magnetic (TM) mode:
∂Hx ∂Ez
µ = − (2.14)
∂t ∂y
∂Hy ∂Ez
µ = (2.15)
∂t ∂x
∂Ez ∂Hy ∂Hx
ε = − − σEz − Jzs (2.16)
∂t ∂x ∂y

7
and the transverse electric (TE) mode:
∂Ex ∂Hz
ε = − σEx − Jxs (2.17)
∂t ∂y
∂Ey ∂Hz
ε = − − σEy − Jys (2.18)
∂t ∂x
∂Hz ∂Ex ∂Ey
µ = − (2.19)
∂t ∂y ∂x

where the field subscripts denote the respective components in a Cartesian

coordinate system.

2.2 The finite-difference time-domain

method
The minimization approach in Paper III uses an FDTD scheme for the Max-
well’s equations. In this section an introduction is given to the FDTD method,
including modeling of dispersive media in Section 2.2.5 and subcell models
in Section 2.2.6. These subjects are further discussed in the context of inverse
problems in Paper III. The accurate modeling of electrically large problems
may result in computationally very large problems, even in 2D. Therefore, the
full minimization algorithm described in Paper III was parallelized using MPI.
The implementation is briefly described in Section 2.2.7. Absorbing boundary
conditions (ABC) in Section 2.2.4 and plane wave excitation in Section 2.2.3
are important parts of the waveguide modeling discussed in Papers II and V.

2.2.1 Discretization

FDTD is based on the discretization of the Maxwell curl equations (2.11)

and (2.12) using centered finite differences on a uniform Cartesian grid. The
resulting scheme is explicit and second-order accurate. The discrete E - and
H -fields are staggered in both time and space. In Figure 2.2 the unit cell in
the three-dimensional grid is illustrated to the left and the two-dimensional
grid for the TM equations (2.14)–(2.16) to the right.

8
 x
j=Ny

j=Ny−1

j=2
Hx Hy
z Ez

Hz j=1
Ey y Hx
z
y Ez Hy
Ex j=0
x
x i=0 i=1 i=2 i=3 i=Nx−1 i=Nx

Figure 2.2: The FDTD unit cell in 3D (left) and the FDTD grid for the 2D
TM case (right).

In an explicit scheme the solution is propagated by time-stepping. We il-

lustrate the FDTD scheme for the TM case. Let the spatial grid index (i, j)
correspond to the physical coordinates (i∆x, j∆y) and the temporal index
n denote the time t = n∆t. Half indices are used for the components that
are centered between the grid points. Using this notation, the time-stepping
expressions for the TM case in a source free region become


n+ 21 n− 12 Ez |ni,j+1 − Ez |ni,j
Hx |i,j+ 1 = Hx |i,j+ 1 − Ci,j+ 12 , (2.20)
2 2 ∆y


n+ 21 n− 21 Ez |ni+1,j − Ez |ni,j
Hy |i+ 1 ,j = Hy |i+ 1 ,j + Ci+ 12 ,j , (2.21)
2 2 ∆x
Ez |n+1
i,j = Da |i,j Ez |i,j
n
 n+ 1 n+ 1 n+ 1 n+ 1

Hy |i+ 12,j − Hy |i− 12,j Hx |i,j+2 1 − Hx |i,j−2 1
+ Db |i,j  2 2
− 2 2 
(2.22)
∆x ∆y

where
Ci,j = ∆t/µi,j , (2.23)
1 − σi,j ∆t/2εi,j
Da |i,j = , (2.24)
1 + σi,j ∆t/2εi,j
∆t/εi,j
Db |i,j = . (2.25)
1 + σi,j ∆t/2εi,j

The material properties (ε, µ, σ ) are assumed to be constant within each cell.
In order to preserve the second order accuracy in inhomogeneous media, in-
terpolation has to used at the interfaces between different media, as discussed
in [5]

9
 The electric field in the σEz -term in (2.16) is approximated using the
centered time average
n+ 21 Ez |n+1
i,j + Ez |i,j
n
Ez |i,j ≈ . (2.26)
2

2.2.2 Stability
The use of an explicit time-stepping scheme for a hyperbolic system implies
that the time step has to be chosen sufficiently small for the solution to re-
main bounded. The stability condition in the three-dimensional case (see for
example [69]) is:
1
∆t <  (2.27)
1 1 1
cmax (∆x)2 + (∆y) 2 + (∆z)2

where cmax is the maximum value of the phase speed c = √1εµ in the com-
putational domain. Note that the given stability condition does not take into
account boundary conditions, dispersive material models, subcell models,etc..
Such modifications of the basic scheme may result in further restrictions on
the time step.

2.2.3 Plane wave excitation

Plane waves are generated by impressing electric and magnetic current
sources on a virtual surface, called Huygens’ surface, surrounding the excited
region. This surface divides the computational domain into a scattered-field
and a total-field region. To see how the excitation is implemented in FDTD,
consider the Ez -equation (2.22) in the 2D-TM case for a Huygens’ surface
with normal in the x-direction. The electric current source is added to the
Ez -field according to
∆t s n+ 21
Ez |n+1
i,j = Ez |i,j −
n+1
J | (2.28)
ε0 z i,j

where
n+ 21 1  n+ 1
1 inc n+ 21
Jzs |i,j = ẑ · x̂ × H inc |i,j 2 = H | 1 . (2.29)
∆x ∆x y i+ 2 ,j

The incident magnetic field H inc is assumed to be a known function. The

scaling 1/(∆x) converts the surface current density into an equivalent volume
current density. Similarly, magnetic current sources are added to the Hy -
components on the Huygens’ surface.
Due to the staggered grid, the excitation surfaces for the electric and mag-

10
netic currents are separated by a half cell. This has to be taken into account
when evaluating the current source to avoid perturbation of the incident wave,
see [16].

2.2.4 Absorbing boundary condition (ABC)

In order to truncate the computational domain, boundary conditions are
needed. For open problems non-reflecting, artificial boundaries have to be
introduced to avoid outgoing waves from reentering the problem. Among
the most popular ABCs that have been used in FDTD is the Mur ABC
[52] which implements the Engquist-Majda boundary condition [24]. It
is computationally cheap but in many cases the reflection errors are not
sufficiently low.
The perfectly matched layer (PML) technique introduced in [8] is a dif-
ferent approach where an outer layer of highly absorbing media is used to
attenuate outgoing waves. This approach is computationally expensive but al-
lows very low levels of reflection independent of the angle of incidence of the
incident wave. In [66] an anisotropic PML absorber was described, called uni-
axial PML (UPML). In this case the PML consists of an anisotropic medium
where the permittivity and permeability tensors are of the form
   
a 0 0 a 0 0
   
ε = ε0 εr  0 a 0  and µ = µ0 µr  0 a 0  (2.30)
0 0 a−1 0 0 a−1

where εr and µr are the relative permittivity and permeability and a is chosen
σ
as a(ω) = 1 + jωε 0
. In order to avoid numerical reflections the conductivity
is gradually increased in the PML. Usually, the layer is terminated by an outer
PEC wall.
σ
In [44] the modified attenuation function a(ω) = κ + α+jωε 0
was in-
troduced. This complex frequency shifted PML (CFS-PML) has later been
shown to remedy problems of linear growth [7] and further the attenuation of
evanescent waves is improved [9].

2.2.5 Dispersive media

Most real materials are dispersive, i.e., the constitutive relations (2.8)–(2.10)
depend on the frequency of the wave. In case of dispersive permittivity the
constitutive relation for the electric field may be written as
D̂(ω) = ε̂(ω)Ê(ω) = ε0 (ε∞ + χ(ω))Ê(ω) (2.31)

11
where ε̂ is the complex dielectric function, ε∞ is the asymptotic permittivity
when ω → ∞ and χ(ω) is called the susceptibility function. In the time-
domain the corresponding relation becomes
 t
D(t) = ε0 ε∞ E(t) + ε0 E(t − τ )χ(τ ) dτ (2.32)
0

where the second term is a convolution.

For the FDTD modeling of dispersive media two different approaches have
been suggested in the literature. In the auxiliary differential equation (ADE)
method [39], equation (2.31) is turned into an ordinary differential equation
by an inverse Fourier transform. The resulting equation is discretized using
an FDTD approximation and solved for the D -field. The electric field is then
obtained from (2.1) which is solved in place of (2.12).
In the recursive convolution method [41], the integral in (2.32) is discret-
ized and computed numerically. The approach uses the fact that for most
common dispersive material models it is possible to compute the convolution
recursively, thereby avoiding a summation over the entire time-history of the
field.

2.2.6 Subcell models

A uniform grid is poor when the grid size is limited by resolution of small
geometrical details and not the wavelength. In this case most of the grid may
be unnecessarily fine. An alternative to grid refinement is local modifications
of the update equations. These subcell models are often derived from the
integral form of Maxwell’s curl equations
   
∂E
ε + σE · dS = H · dl (2.33)
S ∂t C
  
∂H
µ · dS = − E · dl. (2.34)
S ∂t C

The above equations are applied for the discrete fields in the cells containing
the subcell geometry. Integration over the cell results in a time-stepping ex-
pression where the material coefficients depend on the subcell geometry. In
Figure 2.3 we see an example of a thin sheet with a narrow gap, located in a
TE FDTD grid.

2.2.7 Parallelization by domain decomposition

Due to the local property of the FDTD scheme, it is well suited for paral-
lelization using domain decomposition where the computational domain is

12
 (ε, σ, µ)

g d
(εs , σs , µ)
Ey Hz
Ex

Figure 2.3: Subcell thin sheet with a narrow gap in the FDTD TE grid.

divided along the Cartesian axes, as illustrated for a two-dimensional prob-

lem to the left in Figure 2.4. Note that the processor grid does not have to be
uniform. To illustrate the parallelization strategy, consider the 2D-TM equa-
tions (2.20)–(2.22). The Ez -field is advanced in time using the surrounding
Hx - and Hy -fields and the H -fields are correspondingly updated using the
surrounding Ez -fields. In Figure 2.4 (to the right) the communication over a
processor boundary in the y -direction is illustrated. The following operations
take place during one time step ∆t,
1. Processor Pi+1,j sends the Hy -fields to the right of the boundary to
Pi,j ,
2. Pi,j updates the Ez -fields, t = t + ∆t/2,
3. Pi,j sends the Ez -fields to the left of the boundary to Pi+1,j ,
4. Pi+1,j updates the Hy -fields, t = t + ∆t/2.

y
processor boundary
P(i,j) P(i+1,j)

Pi,j Pi+1,j

communication
PML
H−field
E−field
ghost cell
x

Figure 2.4: Domain decomposition using a Cartesian processor grid (left) and
communication over a processor boundary (right).

The efficiency of a parallel FDTD implementation is often very good due to

the small amount of data in the communication. As an example, see Figure 2.5
where the parallel 2D TM solver is evaluated. Two different measures were

13
Figure 2.5: Speed-up and scale-up for the direct solver (left) and speed-up for
the different parts of a full minimization (right).

used, scale-up, where the local problem size on each processor is constant
and speed-up where the global problem size is constant. In the first case the
problem size for each processor was 2500 × 2500 cells and in the second case
the total problem size was 2500 × 2500 cells. The results are illustrated to the
left in Figure 2.5.
The results to the right in Figure 2.5 show the parallel efficiency for the
inverse method discussed in Paper III.

2.3 The finite-element time-domain method

The unstructured solver is based on a time-domain finite-element method for
the vector wave equation. Taking the time derivative of (2.12) and substituting
the magnetic field using (2.11) results in the vector wave equation for the
electric field

∂2E ∂E 1 ∂J s
ε 2 +σ +∇× ∇×E =− , (2.35)
∂t ∂t µ ∂t

The initial conditions are taken to be homogeneous

∂E
E= = 0 at t = 0 (2.36)
∂t
Depending on the problem, different boundary conditions are applied. We dis-
tinguish between Dirichlet boundary conditions where the tangential electric

14
field is prescribed
n × E = g d (r, t), r ∈ Γd (2.37)

and Neumann boundary conditions where

n × (∇ × E) = g n (r, t), r ∈ Γn . (2.38)

Examples of Dirichlet boundary conditions are perfect electric conductors

(PEC) where g d (r, t) = 0 and hybrid boundaries where the FEM domain con-
nects to FDTD. The perfect magnetic conductor is an example of a Neumann
boundary condition where g n (r, t) = 0. Impedance boundary conditions and
absorbing boundary conditions are also of this type.
Defining the space W = H(curl, Ω) = {w : w ∈ L2 (Ω), ∇×w ∈ L2 (Ω)}
the weak form of (2.35) is stated as: Find E ∈ W such that for all w ∈ W ,
 2  
∂ E ∂E 1
2 +σ · w + (∇ × E) · (∇ × w) dΩ =
Ω ∂t ∂t µ
 
1 ∂J s
− (n × (∇ × E)) · w ds − · wdΩ. (2.39)
Γ µ Ω ∂t

The corresponding finite element problem is to find E ∈ W h such that (2.39)

is satisfied for all w ∈ W h where W h ⊂ W is a suitable finite dimensional
subspace. In order to avoid the appearance of spurious solutions, it is import-
ant that the finite basis preserves the divergence free nature of the electric field.
This property is inherent in the edge or Whitney basis functions which were
introduced in [75] and extended to tetrahedra in [53]. Compared to nodal ele-
ments, edge elements also have the advantage that tangential continuity over
element boundaries is enforced and singularities at edges and corners in the
geometry are avoided since the unknowns are located on the edges, see Fig-
ure 2.6. Edge basis functions have been developed for most of the common
element shapes used in unstructured grids. The edge elements in the current
FETD implementation are described in [37] (tetrahedra and hexahedra), [29]
(prisms) and [15, 28, 79] (pyramids).

Figure 2.6: Examples of linear edge elements where the unknowns are located
at the midpoint of the edges, tetrahedra (left), right angular prism element
(middle) and brick element (right).

15
 Let us denote by N i the i:th edge basis function and expand the electric
field in (2.39) according to

N
E= Ei N i (2.40)
i=1

where N is the number of basis functions. Following the Galerkin approach

the test functions w are chosen as the basis functions. The equation (2.39)
may then be written as the linear system of ordinary differential equations
Ne  2

ed E e dE e
M +K +S E =f (2.41)
dt2 dt
e=1

where Ne is the number of elements, M e , K e and S e are the elemental mass

and stiffness matrices and E is a vector containing the unknowns Ei (t), i =
1, . . . , N . The local mass and stiffness matrices are given by:

(M )ij = ε (N i · N j ) dV ,
e
(2.42)
Ve

e
(K )ij = σ (N i · N j ) dV , (2.43)
Ve

1
(S e )ij = (∇ × N i ) · (∇ × N j ) dV (2.44)
µ
Ve

where Ve is the volume of the element. Assembling the local matrices gives
the system
d2 E dE
M 2
+K + SE = f (2.45)
dt dt

The vector f = f d +f n +f s contains contributions from boundary conditions

and sources. Dirichlet conditions (2.37) give contributions of the form
 d2 gjd dgjd
fid = − Mij + Kij + Sij gjd (2.46)
dt2 dt
j∈Γd

where gjd denotes the function g d (r, t) evaluated on edge j . Neumann condi-
tions (2.38) are included by

1 n
fin = − g · N i ds. (2.47)
Γn µ

16
The source terms enter the right hand side by

∂
fi = N i · J s dV.
s
(2.48)
∂t
V

The system of ODEs in (2.45) is discretized using the second-order Newmark-

Beta method [34] resulting in
 
∆t ∆t2 ∆t2
M+ K+ S E n+1
=2 M− S En−
2 4 4

∆t ∆t2
M− K+ S E n−1 − ∆t2 f |t=n∆t (2.49)
2 4

where ∆t is the time step. The numerical scheme is unconditionally stable

due to the symmetry and positive definiteness of the matrices [26].

2.3.1 Absorbing boundary conditions

In the hybrid FEM-FDTD solver the external boundary is typically located
in the structured FDTD region and thus the need for an ABC in the unstruc-
tured region is limited. In some cases however, it is necessary to truncate
the unstructured domain without causing reflections. For example consider a
coaxial waveguide feeding an antenna. In this case the waveguide needs to
be resolved by an unstructured FEM grid while the exterior problem is most
efficiently modeled by FDTD. To avoid that backscattered fields in the wave-
guide perturb the solution in the exterior domain an ABC has to be used to
truncate the waveguide.
A simple form of ABC is given by

1 ∂E
n × (∇ × E) + n × n × =0 (2.50)
c ∂t
√
where c = 1/ µε is the speed of propagation of the electromagnetic wave.
Such a boundary condition enters the FEM problem through contributions of
the form (2.47). In case the backscattered field is a plane wave with ortho-
gonal angle of incidence, the above ABC works rather well. However, in
many common types of waveguides, such as hollow rectangular and circu-
lar waveguides, the propagating field consists of plane waves that are almost
tangential to an orthogonal surface. For such cases (2.50) is not sufficiently
accurate.
Recently, the UPML method has been applied to open problems in the
finite-element time-domain method [36], [65]. These implementations are
based on tetrahedral discretization of the UPML. However, there are prob-
lems of late-time instability. In [65] they use higher order edge elements in

17
the UPML to reduce the effect of the instability. In Paper II we describe a
UPML in a complex frequency-shifted form using prism elements. Although
the instability is not completely avoided, our results indicate that the prob-
lems are less severe for the prism element PML compared to a tetrahedral
PML. The strategy employed in Paper II is to create a truncating UPML by
extending the triangulated waveguide port into layers of prism elements with
constant height, as illustrated in Figure 2.7. An advantage with this approach
is that the grid for the UPML does not have to be created by the grid generator
but can easily be generated in a preprocessing step in the solver. In the paper
it is shown that reflection errors as low as -70dB can be obtained.
Waveguide UPML
(tetrahedral elements) (prism elements)

inner
conductors

000
111
different 111
000
000
111
000
111
000
111
media 000
111
000
111

Figure 2.7: Waveguide truncation using UPML and prism elements.

2.3.2 Subcell models

In principle, a tetrahedral grid could be used to resolve fine system details.
However, in practice, the number of unknowns can be prohibitive and may
lead to worse conditioning of the system. Thus, the development of accurate
models that characterize the physics of small features without the need for a
highly resolved grid is essential.
In recent publications subcell models for the FETD method have been de-
veloped for thin wires and thin slots [61, 21, 22]. In Paper IV a method for sub-
cell modeling of thin sheets and coatings is described. The approach is based
on a representation of the sheet using degenerated prism elements, or shell
elements. The advantage of this approach compared to impedance boundary
condition (IBC) approximations [62] is the possibility to take the discontinu-
ous normal electric field component into account by introducing additional
degrees of freedom. This is similar to what is achieved by the Maloney-Smith
thin sheet model for FDTD [47].
Shell elements are frequently used in solid mechanics, see e.g. [35] and

18
references therein, and have also been applied to eddy current problems [60].
Figure 2.8 illustrates the construction of an edge shell element following the
approach in [60].

z 3’
y
x n
3 3

1’ 2’
δ

1 2 1 2
Figure 2.8: A right prism edge element (left) and the corresponding shell ele-
ment (right).

As an example of the results that can be achieved by the shell element mod-
eling, consider a dielectric sphere with permittivity ε = 4ε0 and radius a
covered by a thin (a/30) dielectric coating with ε = 10ε0 . In Figure 2.9 the
bistatic RCS using the shell elements are compared with the exact solution for
the case ka = 1 where k = 2π/λ.
5

−5
σ [dB/π a ]
2

−10

−15

−20

Mie series
FEM shell
−25
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Azimuth (deg)

Figure 2.9: Bistatic RCS for the coated dielectric sphere for ka = 1.

2.4 Hybridization
The coupling between the FEM and FDTD domains follows the approach
in [64]. In order for the coupling to be stable it is necessary that interpolation
is avoided. This may be achieved by the use of pyramids and hexahedra in the

19
transition from the unstructured tetrahedral grid to the structured FDTD grid.
The tetrahedral grid is thus phased into a layer of hexahedral cells identical
with the FDTD cells via pyramidal elements, as illustrated in Figure 2.10.
Dirichlet boundary for FEM Dirichlet boundary for FDTD

Tet

Hexa Hexa Pyra Tet Tet

Tet
Tet

Hexa

FDTD FEM+FDTD FEM

Figure 2.10: The hybrid interface between the FEM and FDTD domains. The
shaded region show the overlap between the two domains

Each time step, the fields on the respective boundaries are exchanged
between the domains and treated as time-dependent Dirichlet boundary
conditions. By using trapezoidal integration in FEM for the hexahedral
elements, the FEM and FDTD fields in the overlapped region becomes
identical. The resulting interface is stable subject to the FDTD stability
condition. In [20] results are presented where the FEM-FDTD hybrid solver
is applied to a number of complex problems.

20
3. Waveguides

Waveguides are used to transfer electromagnetic energy, typically at

microwave frequencies. Applications include all forms of guided signal
transmission, for example the feeding of antennas. We will assume that
the cross-section of the waveguide is uniform in the direction of the
energy transport. The most common shapes are rectangular and circular
cross-sections. The field in the waveguide can only propagate in certain
patterns, called waveguide modes, determined by the geometry and media in
the cross-section.
Assume a waveguide oriented in the z -direction. Let us divide the electric
field in the waveguide into a tangential and a normal part E = E t + Ez ẑ ,
as illustrated in Figure3.1. The tangential field can be written as a linear

Et

Ez

Figure 3.1: Decomposition of the field in a waveguide oriented in the z-

direction.

combination of forward and backward propagating modes


Et = Vn+ en e−jβn z + Vn− en ejβn z (3.1)
n

where en = en (ω, x, y) denotes the electric field pattern for mode n and
βn = βn (ω) is the associated propagation constant. Similarly, the tangential
magnetic field may be decomposed into modes, hn . The modes are orthogonal

(em × hn ) · dS = 0, βn = ±βm (3.2)
S

and are often normalized to unity, i.e.


(en × h∗n ) · dS = 1. (3.3)
S

21
where S denotes the cross-sectional surface. The energy transport in system
of waveguides is often characterized by the scattering parameters. The energy
is assumed to enter and exit the system through ports, cross-sectional surfaces
with a field decomposition according to (3.1). For a thorough description of
this concept see [14]. We simply note that S11 denotes the reflection coeffi-
cient for mode 1 in port 1 and S12 denotes the transmission of mode 1 to port
2,
V1− V2−
S11 = , S12 = . (3.4)
V1+ V1+

The amplitude of mode n, propagating backwards through a port in a lossless

waveguide is given by

−
Vn = (E t × hn ) · dS (3.5)
S

where we have used (3.3).

For some simple cases, including homogeneous rectangular and circular
waveguides as well as coaxial waveguides, the mode fields are given by ana-
lytical expressions. However, for more complex geometries and inhomogen-
eous waveguides they have to be computed numerically. The frequency do-
main mode field is a solution of the vector Helmholtz equation for the wave-
guide cross-section

1
∇× ∇ × E − k02 εr E = 0, (3.6)
µr

where k02 = ω 2 µ0 ε0 . Using a FEM discretization a generalized eigenvalue

problem is obtained which may be solved iteratively, for example using the
Arnoldi method [6].
In Paper V we describe how waveguide modes computed by a frequency-
domain mode solver can be used for excitation and registration in the 3D hy-
brid FEM-FDTD code. The work was also presented in [2]. The suggested
approach relies on Huygens’ surfaces for the excitation and the time-domain
excitation is generated by inverse Fourier transform of the mode fields.
The following problem was analyzed in Paper II. The geometry consists of
a rectangular waveguide of dimensions 0.2m×0.1m where the bottom half of
the waveguide is filled with a dielectric with εr = 4 and an interior conductor
of width 0.1m is suspended on top of the dielectric. The waveguide is en-
closed by a PEC boundary. This type of waveguide is referred to as a shielded
microstrip. Figure 3.2 illustrates the geometry and the computed mode field
for the fundamental quasi-TEM mode. A short section of the waveguide,
of length 0.1m, was analyzed in the 3D time-domain FEM-FDTD solver. The

22
 0.1

0
0 0.2

Figure 3.2: The mode field at f=2GHz for the shielded microstrip.

waveguide was terminated in both ends by 8 cells thick UPMLs. The S11 and
S12 parameters were computed and are found in Figure 3.3. In this case we
should have S11 = 0 and S12 = 1 (note that the results in the figure are given
in dB). The RMS error in the frequency interval 2–3GHz was −33dB for the
S11 parameter and −57dB for S12 . The main part of the error in the S11 is due
to the excitation while the error in S12 is mainly from the UPML, as discussed
further in Paper II.

0
−25

−27.5
−0.005

−30
|S | [dB]
|S | [dB]

−32.5 −0.01
12
11

−35
−0.015

−37.5

−40 −0.02
2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3
f [GHz] f [GHz]

Figure 3.3: The scattering parameters for the basic quasi-TEM mode of the
shielded microstrip, S11 (left) and S12 (right)

23
4. Inverse scattering

incident field

receiver

scattering
geometry

scattered
field

Figure 4.1: The inverse scattering problem.

For any electromagnetic problem we may distinguish between the funda-

mental part, consisting of the governing equations, and the data i.e. boundary
and initial conditions, sources and physical properties, such as geometry and
media. Finding the fields from the governing equations with given data is
the direct or forward problem. In the inverse problem the field is partially
known, for example from measurements or design objectives, and we wish to
determine the data from which this observed field originates. In particular, the
investigation of an object by measuring the scattered field outside the object
is called inverse scattering. Figure 4.1 illustrates an inverse scattering experi-
ment where an unknown object is illuminated by an incident plane wave and
the scattered field is observed in a number of receivers.
We distinguish between two common types of inverse scattering problems.
The inverse media problem where we wish to determine the material para-
meters of the scatterer and the inverse obstacle problem where the geomet-
rical shape of a perfectly reflecting body is sought. Here, we will only con-
sider the inverse media problem where the unknown parameters appear in the
coefficients of the governing equations.
Figure 4.2 illustrates an experimental set-up for reflection measurements at
Saab Bofors Dynamics, Linköping.

25
Figure 4.2: Anechoic chamber used for reflection experiments at Saab Bofors
Dynamics, Linköping. (Courtesy of Erik Söderström, AerotechTelub AB.)

4.1 Difficulties in the inverse problem

The inverse problem is more difficult to solve than the direct problem mainly
due to ill-posedness and non-linearity. A problem is called well-posed if the
solution exists, is unique and continuous with respect to the data. If any of
these properties is not fulfilled the problem is called ill-posed. Inverse prob-
lems are usually ill-posed due to a number of reasons. The inverse scattering
problem, where the field is only observed outside the scatterer, has inher-
ently non-unique solution since evanescent fields resulting from lossy media
or small geometrical features are not observed. Other common difficulties
are:
• Lack of data. The observed data are not complete, for example due to
limited spatial or spectral information in measurement data.
• Noisy data. Experimental data are contaminated with random perturba-
tions.
• Unreachable observation data. The desired response in an optimization
problem may be non-physical or otherwise unattainable by the direct
model.
• Inexact method. Numerical approximations may lead to instability and
limited resolution of discrete models may result in non-physical solutions.
There is a number of ways to stabilize the inverse problem. Usually some
kind of regularization is used, taking into account a priori information on the
parameters. For example, the solution may be required to stay close to an a

26
priori known value or by penalizing local variations. The observation data
often contains unnecessary or unwanted information and some filtering has to
be done to extract the pertinent part, for instance by time gating time-domain
data or filtering out high frequency noise components. The frequency of the
incident field also affects the properties of the inverse problem.
The non-linearity is a serious practical difficulty since it precludes direct
solution methods and leads to non-convex minimization. However, in some
cases it is possible to linearize the inverse problem.
The theoretical analysis of inverse problems has primarily been concerned
with the issue of instability, for which a unified treatment using regularization
is possible. Most of the available theory is limited to linear inverse problems.
In [23] a thorough description of the regularization method is given including
convergence results.

4.2 Methods
Analytical solutions of inverse electromagnetic scattering problems are pos-
sible only in a few special cases, such as scattering from layered media in
one dimension. More interesting problems require approximative techniques.
The early methods typically involved approximations of the physics in order
to obtain a simplified model for the direct problem.
In the Born and Rytov approximations [10] linear relations between the
material properties of the scatterer and the scattered field are obtained by as-
suming that the contrast between the scatterer and the background media is
low, so-called weak scattering. The error of the approximation depends on
the frequency of the incident wave, see [40] for a discussion of the validity
of the approximations. In both cases the scattered field is related to the ob-
ject through a Fourier integral. The Fourier space is covered by varying the
position of transmitter and receiver as well as the frequency and the object is
recovered using an inverse transform. This inverse algorithm is called diffrac-
tion tomography [17]–[18]. An iterative variant of the Born inverse method,
called the Born-iterative method [74], takes into account multiple scattering
effects which are omitted using a linear model. In X-ray tomography the WKB
approximation is used to linearize the inverse problem, see [12], and the object
is reconstructed using the Radon transform [58]. In case the object is perfectly
conducting, the physical optics approximation (PO) may be applied to linear-
ize the inverse problem. The resulting problem may be solved in a diffraction
tomography manner, see [46] and [68]. However, the PO approximation is
feasible only for convex objects and high frequencies.
In addition to the severe physical approximations, all of the above meth-
ods require great flexibility in the measurement procedure since the inverse

27
transform typically relies on observation data for many different angles of in-
cidence and many different frequencies. Further, multiple scattering effects,
which are important for non-convex geometries with high contrast between
background media and scatterer, are lost in the linearization.
A more general approach is minimization where the difference between
simulated and measured field is minimized by varying the unknown paramet-
ers in an iterative optimization algorithm. This method is costly, in particular
for higher dimensions, since the direct problem needs to be solved in each
iteration. The minimization approach was introduced for acoustic problems
in [72]. In most references, deterministic algorithms such as the conjugate
gradient and quasi-Newton methods are used but global optimization has also
been applied, for applications in electromagnetics, see [25], [49] and [56].
The possibility to cover a large range of frequencies using pulse excitation
makes time-domain approaches attractive. For time-domain minimization ap-
proaches using FDTD, see for example [31], [4], [59], [13], [54] and [71].
In [57] FDTD is used in a layer-stripping reconstruction algorithm. We also
mention inverse scattering using wave-splitting where the field is decomposed
into waves traveling in opposite directions. The inverse problem is solved
in a layer-stripping manner using invariant embedding as described in [32]
and [30].
In Paper III, [1] and [3] deterministic gradient-based minimization is used
where the cost function is the difference between estimated and observed
fields. The gradient is derived using a Lagrange multiplier formulation for the
discrete system. By considering the completely discretized problem we en-
sure that the resulting gradient is algebraically exact. The numerical scheme
for the adjoint equations as well as the gradient expressions are thus determ-
ined by the direct scheme and not chosen independently. We show that it is
possible to state the Maxwell equations in a general form which is valid in
both dispersive media (of Debye and Lorentz type) as well as in the perfectly
matched layer (PML) and thereby avoid such interface problems.
Subcell models are used in FDTD to avoid resolving fine geometrical de-
tails by refining the grid. We show how the gradient for parameters in such
discrete models may be derived.

4.3 Minimization
In the minimization approach for inverse scattering the cost function is a meas-
ure of the difference between the observed field and the computed field for
some trial parameters and an optimizer is applied to improve the solution.
Since each evaluation of the cost function requires the solution of the dir-
ect problem the computational cost is high, particularly for three-dimensional

28
problems. The resulting optimization problem is non-linear and may contain
many local minima. Regularization using a priori information is therefore
often employed to obtain a smoother cost function and limit the parameter
space. In non-linear optimization there are two basic choices, global optim-
ization where one attempts to find (approximately) the global minimum us-
ing stochastic methods, and local, deterministic optimization where gradient
information is used to find a local minima. Global techniques, such as sim-
ulated annealing [42], [50] and genetic algorithms [33], [27], often require a
large number of cost function evaluations and are therefore considered more
costly than local methods. In Paper III we use deterministic, gradient-based
optimization where the gradients are obtained by an adjoint formulation. The
resulting gradients require a lot of disk space but the computational cost is
independent of the number of parameters. The adjoint approach for the para-
meter identification problem was introduced in [11] and is also described in
for example [73].

4.4 Computing gradients

The efficiency of deterministic algorithms relies on accurate gradient inform-
ation. In our case, the cost function depends implicitly on the parameters
through Maxwell’s equations and the gradient may not be computed directly.
However, using an adjoint formulation the Fréchet derivative of the cost func-
tion may be computed using an additional simulation to solve the adjoint prob-
lem. An alternative approach is to approximate the gradient using finite dif-
ferences.
Assume a direct problem of the form
L(p)u = f , x ∈ Ω, t ∈ [0, T ], (4.1)
u = 0 at t = 0

where L(p) is a linear differential operator in time and space including bound-
ary conditions and depending on some parameters p. An inverse problem can
be stated as: given an observed field uobs , determine p such that the solution
to (4.1) coincides with the observed field.
Let us define a cost function according to
T  
j= u − uobs δ obs dΩdt (4.2)
Ω
0

where δ obs denotes the Dirac delta function which has the value 1 in the ob-
servation points and is 0 everywhere else. The minimization approach to the

29
 Initial guess p = p 0

Direct solution [0,T]

u (p)

Observed data u obs

Compute residual
u (p) u obs
Minimize j( p)
p = p +dp
Adjoint solution [T,0]
u *(p)

Compute gradient
j(p)

no
j =0

yes

p* = p

Figure 4.3: The minimization procedure using adjoint gradients.

inverse problem is: minimize j(p) subject to the governing equations (4.1).
The gradient of the cost function can be derived using a Lagrangian formula-
tion. The resulting gradient becomes
T 
∂j ∂L
= < λ, u > dΩdt. (4.3)
∂pi Ω ∂pi
0

where < ·, · > is the scalar product between two vectors and λ is the solution
of the adjoint problem

L∗ λ = − u − uobs δ obs . (4.4)

The adjoint operator L∗ satisfies the relation

T  T 
< L∗ λ, u > dΩdt = < λ, Lu > dΩdt. (4.5)
Ω Ω
0 0

30
 7 iterations 15 iterations

20 20

15 15

10 10

5 5

5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20

200 iterations cost function and rel. error

2
10
20 rel. error
cost function
0
10
15

−2
10
10

−4
10
5

−6
10
5 10 15 20 0 50 100 150 200 250
iteration

Figure 4.4: Reconstruction of the “z”-profile

Note that the integrand in (4.3) is non-zero only in the parts of the domain
where the direct operator depends on the parameter, pi . To be able to compute
the gradient we need to solve both the direct and adjoint problems. Figure 4.3
illustrates the resulting algorithm

4.5 Numerical examples

In this example the inverse algorithm is applied to the reconstruction of a
conductivity profile i.e., εr = εr (x, y). Synthetic observation data is used
and the geometry to be reconstructed consists of a “z”-shaped object with
permittivity εr = 5.0. The field is sampled in twelve points surrounding the
unknown domain. The size of the FDTD grid is 40 by 40 cells the cell size
is ∆ = 0.001 m and the permittivity is varied within a 21 by 21 cells square
resulting in 441 unknown parameters. The dimensions of the unknown region
corresponds to one by one wavelength for the cutoff frequency of the incident
Gaussian pulse. The permittivity is initially set to free space.

31
 high frequency low frequency

3 0.06

2 0.04

1 0.02

0 0
0 10 0 10
5 5 5 5
10 0 ε3 10 0 ε3
ε1 ε1

10 10

8 8

6 6
ε3

ε3
4 4

2 2

2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10
ε1 ε1

Figure 4.5: The cost function using a high-frequency incident field (left) and
low-frequency (right).

In Figure 4.4 the permittivity profile in different minimization iterations is

illustrated. We note that the “z”-shape is apparent after just a few iterations.
The convergence of each parameter is however quite slow and the accuracy is
about three digits after 800 iterations.
The frequency spectrum of the incident wave strongly affects the charac-
teristics of the minimization problem. In general a short wavelength gives
sharper minima, in the sense that a small deviation from the minima results in
a large increase of the cost function. The drawback is that short wavelengths
also tend to generate many local minima. Longer wavelengths on the other
hand give a smoother cost function with less distinct minima.
To illustrate this behavior we studied the cost function for a multilayer prob-
lem where the parameters were the relative permittivities in two of the layers,
ε1 and ε3 . Two different excitations were used, both Gaussian plane waves
with cutoff frequencies of about 1 GHz in the low-frequency case and 30 GHz
in the high-frequency case. Figure 4.5 illustrates the cost function for the two
excitations. The minimum is located at ε1 = 5,ε3 = 3.
The figure indicates that for long wavelengths the convergence will be ini-
tially fast and then slow down as the iterations approach the minima. This
is preferable if little or nothing is known about the media such that the ini-
tial guess may be far away from the correct solution. In case the quality of

32
the a priori data is better, a short wavelength will give faster convergence.
One could also think of using a combination of two excitations, a longer
wavelength to get a rough estimate of the solution and then a short wavelength
to improve the accuracy.
In Paper III successful examples of material reconstruction are presented,
where both synthetic data obtained by simulation and measurement data from
practical experiments are used. Furthermore, a synthetic reconstruction ex-
ample is given, where parameters in a thin sheet and slot subcell model are
recovered using the inverse method.

33
5. Acknowledgments

There are a number of people who deserve my gratitude for contributing to

this thesis in different ways.
First of all I would like to thank my co-authors, Ulf Andersson, Fredrik
Edelvik, Lars Eriksson, Christer Johansson, Gunnar Ledfelt and Bo Strand
for their contributions to the presented papers.
Most of the work has been conducted in close collaboration with the in-
dustry within the GEMS, GEMS2, GEMS3 and IMPACT projects. This ex-
perience has been very rewarding and in particular I would like to thank An-
ders Höök and Bo Wästberg, Ericsson Microwave Systems, Stephane Alestra,
EADS, Bo Strand and Erik Söderström, AerotechTelub for generously sharing
their experience and providing results for various test cases.
My advisor Prof. Per Lötstedt and co-advisor Dr. Fredrik Edelvik both have
a large part in the successful finish of my Ph.D. studies. Thank you for your
guidance and support and not the least for the time spent on proofreading!
Part of the work presented in this thesis was carried out at Nada, KTH and I
am very grateful for the support of my advisors during that period, Prof. Björn
Engquist and Prof. Jesper Oppelstrup.
I also thank colleagues and friends at KTH and Uppsala University for sup-
port and sharing all kinds of extra-curricular activities.
Financial support has been provided by the Parallel and Scientific Comput-
ing Institute (PSCI), a Vinnova Competence Center, KTH, Uppsala University
and the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research (SSF) and is gratefully ac-
knowledged.
Finally, to Nina for your love and support and to Viktor and Vera for making
my home a safe haven, completely void of electromagnetic fields (figuratively
speaking, at least).

35
6. Summary in Swedish: Direkta och
inversa metoder för vågledare och
spridningsproblem i tidsdomänen

I det moderna samhället används elektromagnetiska vågor inom en rad olika

områden. De flesta av oss har ju till exempel en mikrovågsugn, i vilken
elektromagnetiska vågor sätter vattenmolekyler i maten i rörelse, och en up-
pvärmning sker. I mobiltelefoner används elektromagnetiska vågor för trådlös
kommunikation, ett brett användningsområde som även innefattar radio, TV,
trådlösa telefoner, GPS (Global Positioning System), nätverk för datorer samt
en mängd andra tillämpningar. I den medicinska världen används högfrek-
venta elektromagnetiska vågor både i traditionell röntgenutrustning och för
tomografiska undersökningar. Att radar används för identifiering inom det
militära området känner många till men det finns även flera civila användning-
sområden inom området fjärranalys, till exempel vid geologiska och meteor-
ologiska undersökningar. Figur 6.1 visar hur olika typer av elektromagnetiska
fält kategoriseras efter frekvens.

AM−
Kraftledningar radio TV Radar Infrarött Ultraviolett Gammastrålning
Röntgen

2 4 6 8 10 12
0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 14 10 16 10
18
10
20
10
22

frekvens
DC 10Hz 1kHz 1MHz 1GHz 1THz 1PHz 1EHz 1ZHz (Hertz)

Lågfrekvens Radiovågor Mikrovågor Joniserande strålning

Figure 6.1: Det elektromagnetiska spektrumet.

Den omfattande användningen av elektromagnetiska fält har lett till ett ökat
behov av kunskap om hur de beter sig. Det system av partiella differentialek-
vationer som matematiskt beskriver vågornas utbredning formulerades redan
1873, av James Clerk Maxwell. Att lösa ekvationerna analytiskt med papper
och penna är möjligt bara för mycket enkla problem. Ett annat alternativ är
att genom experiment och mätningar ta fram den information som eftersöks.
I många fall är detta dock alldeles för kostsamt, både vad gäller tidsåtgång
och i pengar. Ett bättre alternativ är numerisk lösning av ekvationerna med
hjälp av datorer. Detta innebär oftast att den studerade geometrin delas upp i

37
små element där en förenklad beskrivning av fältet kan göras, en s.k. diskret-
isering. Att numeriskt lösa ekvationerna för ett tredimensionellt problem med
komplicerad geometri kan docka vara mycket krävande beräkningsmässigt.
Det har därför dröjt till de senaste årtiondena innan området elektromagnet-
iska beräkningar (EMB) har börjat växa, trots att de grundläggande numer-
iska metoderna varit kända avsevärt längre. Några områden där numeriska
beräkningar haft stor betydelse är
• beräkning av radarmålarea (RCS) för flygplan,
• analys av antenner,
• vågledare och mikrovågsapparater,
• elektromagnetisk kompatibilitet,
• biologiska tillämpningar som tomografi och bestämning av SAR
(Specific Absorption Rate) för strålning från mobiltelefoner.
Det finns även många intressanta tillämpningar där det problem som un-
dersöks inte är fullständigt beskrivet, utan innehåller okända parametrar. Det
kan t.ex. röra sig om optimering av egenskaper hos en antenn eller att ta
fram nya radarabsorberande material (RAM) för att minimera reflektioner. I
både dessa exempel vill man ange ett önskat beteende och därefter bestämma
vilken uppsättning parametrar som ger det önskade resultatet. Problem där
man söker efter vad som orsakade ett visst resultat kallas inversa, att jäm-
föra med problem där man vill bestämma resultatet för ett givet problem som
kallas direkta.
En av de mest populära numeriska metoderna för lösning av Maxwells
ekvationer är FDTD (finita-differenser i tidsdomänen). Den bygger på en
diskretisering av den undersökta geometrin med hjälp av rektangulära, oftast
kubiska, element (celler) i ett kartesiskt koordinatsystem. Tids- och rumsde-
rivator approximeras med finita differenser.
En stor nackdel med FDTD är att rektangulära celler ger en geometrisk
beskrivning som påminner om ett LEGO-bygge där rundade former repres-
enteras av trappstegsbeskrivningar. I artikel I beskrivs en hybridmetod där
rektangulära element och FDTD används i områden med enkel geometri och
mer generella element (trianglar i två dimensioner) används för att modellera
rundade former. I den ostrukturerade delen av beräkningsnätet används finita-
element metoden (FEM) vilken lämpar sig bättre för dessa typer av nät. Denna
FEM-FDTD hybridlösare har sedan dess vidareutvecklats till tre dimensioner
där tetraeder element används i den ostrukturerade delen.
Ett vanligt förekommande problem vid elektromagnetisk simulering är att
geometrin innehåller små detaljer som inte går att modellera utan att använda
mycket små element. I många fall är det inte praktiskt möjligt att gör en
sådan lokal nätförfining då det resulterar i för många element och tiden för
en simulering blir för lång. Ett alternativ till nätförfining är modellering med
s.k. subcell-modeller. I artikel IV beskrivs en ny subcell-modell för tunna

38
dielektriska skikt där en form av platta prismelement används. Med den
föreslagna metoden är det möjligt att beskriva det tunna skiktet som en yta
i simuleringsmodellen och ändå få noggranna resultat, jämförbara med vad
som skulle erhållas med ett upplöst skikt.
Många problem begränsas inte naturligt av en yttre rand, utan är s.k. öppna
problem. För att få en beräkningsmodell av begränsad storlek vid exempelvis
simulering av hur en antenn strålar, måste man i sin numeriska modell därför
införa artificiella ränder. Eftersom dessa ränder inte existerar i det verkliga
problemet vill man att de ska vara reflektionslösa, så att vågor som färdas utåt
mot ränderna absorberas. I artikel II diskuteras absorberande randvillkor för
FEM, specifikt för avslutning av vågledare.
Vågledare används för överföring av elektromagnetisk energi. Oftast avser
man då mikrovågor, till exempel för matning av en antenn. En vågledare
är typiskt en lång “kanal”, öppen eller sluten, där tvärsnittsgeometrin inte
förändras längs kanalen. Det elektromagnetiska fältet i en vågledare kan ofta
ges en förenklad beskrivning då de endast kan fortplanta sig i viss givna fält-
mönster eller moder. Det kan till exempel jämföras med hur ljudvågor i ett
musikinstrument endast kan ge vissa toner som bestäms av storleken och for-
men på luftkanalen. I artikel V diskuteras modellering av vågledare i FEM-
FDTD lösaren. Problemet kan delas upp i två delar: beräkning av moderna,
vilket görs i frekvensdomänen för tvärsnittsgeometrin, och användandet av
dessa moder för att skapa ett propagerande fält i en tre-dimensionell modell
av vågledaren i FEM-FDTD lösaren. Det är viktigt att inga restriktioner vad
gäller geometri och material i vågledaren görs, då inhomogena vågledare med
komplexa tvärsnittsgeometrier är vanligt förekommande i modern mikrovåg-
sutrustning.
I artikel III beskrivs en metod för lösning av inversa problem där man ön-
skar bestämma materialegenskaper genom reflektionsmätningar. Det inversa
problemet formuleras som ett minimeringsproblem där materialegenskaperna
systematiskt varieras så att skillnaden mellan ett simulerat reflekterat fält och
det uppmätta fältet blir så liten som möjligt. Då varje simulering är tid-
skrävande används en effektiv gradientmetod för minimeringen där gradienten
beräknas exakt. Vidare härleds gradienten för en subcell-modell bestående av
ett tunt dielektriskt skikt med ett smalt gap. Tanken är att sådana modeller
genom lösning av ett inverst problem kan fås att efterlikna beteendet hos ett
komplicerat objekt som inte kan modelleras.

39
References

[1] E. Abenius. Time-Domain Inverse Electromagnetic Scattering using

FDTD and Gradient-based Minimization. Lic. thesis, Department of Nu-
merical Analysis and Computer Science, Royal Institute of Technology, June
2004. Available at http://www.diva-portal.org/diva/getDocument?urn_nbn_ se_
kth_ diva-1751-2_ _ fulltext.pdf.

[2] E. Abenius and C. Johansson. A general approach for time-domain simulation

of waveguides in 3D. In EMB 04 Computational Electromagnetics –
Methods and Applications, pages 220–226. SNRV, October 2004.

[3] E. Abenius, B. Strand, and S. Alestra. Inverse electromagnetic scattering us-

ing the finite-difference time-domain (FD-TD) method. AP2000 Millennium
Conference on Antennas and Propagation, 2000.

[4] S. Alestra. Problème Inverse Dans le Domaine Temporel Pour

des Milieux Stratifiés, Periodiques et Bidimensionnels. Ph.D. thesis,
l’Université Paris 13, 1997.

[5] U. Andersson. Time-domain Methods for the Maxwell Equations. Ph.D.

thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, 2001.

[6] J. Arroyo and J. Zapata. Subspace iteration search method for generalized eigen-
value problems with sparse complex unsymetric matices in finite-element ana-
lysis of wavegudes. IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory and Techniques,
46(8):1115–1123, 1998.

[7] E. Becache, P. Petropoulos, and S. Gedney. On the long-time behavior of un-

split perfectly matched layers. IEEE Trans. on Antennas and Propagat.,
52:1335–1342, May 2004.

[8] J-P. Berenger. A perfectly matched layer for the absorption of electromagnetic
waves. J. Comput. Phys., 114(1):185–200, 1994.

[9] J-P. Berenger. Application of the CFS PML to the absorption of evanes-
cent waves in waveguides. IEEE Microw. and Wireless Comp. Lett.,
12(6):218–220, June 2002.

41
[10] M. Born and E. Wolf. Principles of Optics. Pergamon Press, New York,
1980.

[11] G. Chavent and P. Lemmonier. Identification de la non linéarité d’une équa-

tion parabolique quasilinéaire. Applied Mathematics and Optimization,
1(2):121–162, 1974.

[12] W. C. Chew. Waves and Fields in Inhomogeneous Media. Van Nostrand

Reinhold, New York, 1990.

[13] Y-S Chung, C. Cheon, and S-Y. Hahn. Reconstruction of dielectric cylinders
using FDTD and topology optimization technique. IEEE Trans. Magn.,
2000(4):956–959, 2000.

[14] R. E. Collin. Foundation for Microwave Engineering. McGraw-Hill,

1992.

[15] J. L. Coulomb, F. X. Zgainski, and Y. Maréchal. A pyramidal element to

link hexahedral, prismatic and tetrahedral edge finite elements. IEEE Trans.
Magn., 33(2):1362–1365, March 1997.

[16] D. E. Merewether, R. Fisher and F. W. Smith,. On Implementing a Numeric

Huygen’s Source Scheme in a Finite Difference Program to Illuminate Scatter-
ing Bodies. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 27(6):1829–1833,
1980.

[17] A. J. Devaney. A filtered backprojection algorithm for diffraction tomography.

Ultrasonic Imaging, 4:336–350, 1982.

[18] A. J. Devaney. A computer simulation study of diffraction tomography. IEEE

Trans. Biomed. Eng., 30:377–86, 1983.

[19] F. Edelvik. Hybrid Solvers for the Maxwell Equations

in Time-Domain. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Information
Technology, Uppsala University, September 2002. Available at
http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?isbn=91-554-5354-6.

[20] F. Edelvik and G. Ledfelt. A comparison of time-domain hybrid solvers for

complex scattering problems. Int. J. Numer. Model.:Electron. Netw.,
Dev. and Fields, 15(5–6):475–487, 2002.

[21] F. Edelvik, G. Ledfelt, P. Lötstedt, and D. J. Riley. An unconditionally stable

subcell model for arbitrarily oriented thin wires in the FETD method. IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propagat., 51(8):1797–1805, August 2003.

42
[22] F. Edelvik and T. Weiland. Stable modeling of arbitrary thin slots in the
finite-element time-domain method. Int. Journal of Numerical Modeling,
17(4):363–383, July/August 2004.

[23] H. W. Engl, M. Hanke, and A. Neubauer. Regularization of Inverse prob-

lems. Mathematics and its Applications. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1996.
[24] B. Engquist and A. Majda. Absorbing boundary conditions for the numerical
simulation of waves. Math. Comput., 31(139):629–651, July 1977.

[25] L. Garnero, A. Franchois, J-P. Hugonin, C. Pichot, and N. Joachimovicz. Mi-

crowave imaging-complex permittivity reconstruction by simulated annealing.
IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory Tech., 39(11):1801–1807, 1991.
[26] S. D. Gedney and U. Navsariwala. An unconditionally stable implicit finite-
element time-domain solution of the vector wave equation. IEEE Microwave
and Guided Wave Letters, 5:332–334, 1995.
[27] D. E. Goldberg. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Ma-
chine Learning. Addison-Wesley, USA, 1989.
[28] R. D. Graglia and I-L. Gheorma. Higher order interpolatory vector bases on
pyramidal elements. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., 47(5):775–782,
May 1999.

[29] R. D. Graglia, D. R. Wilton, A. F. Peterson, and I.-L Gheorma. Higher or-

der interpolatory vector bases on prism elements. IEEE Trans. Antennas
Propagat., 46(3):442–450, March 1998.
[30] M. Gustafsson. Wave Splitting in Direct and Inverse Scattering Prob-
lems. Ph.D. thesis, Lund University, 2000.
[31] M. Gustafsson and S. He. An optimization approach to two-dimensional time
domain electromagnetic inverse problems. Radio Sci., 35(2):525–536, 2000.

[32] S. He, S. Ström, and V. H. Weston. Time Domain Wave-plittings and

Inverse Problems. Oxford University Press, 1998.
[33] J. H. Holland. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems. University
of Michigan Press, USA, 1975.

[34] T. J. R. Hughes. The Finite Element Method: Linear Static and Dy-
namic Finite Element Analysis. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,
1987.

[35] T. J. R. Hughes and E. Hinton, editors. Finite Element Methods for Plate
and Shell Structures, volume 1, Element Technology. Pineridge Press,
Swansea, UK, 1986.

43
[36] D. Jiao, J-M. Jin, E. Michielssen, and D. Riley. Time-domain finite-element
simulation of three-dimensional scattering and radiation problems using per-
fectly matched layers. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., 51(2):296–305,
February 2003.

[37] J. Jin. The Finite Element Method in Electromagnetics. Wiley, New

York, 2nd edition, 2002.

[38] C. Johansson. Numerical Methods for Ports in Closed Waveguides.

Lic. thesis, Department of Numerical Analysis and Computer Science, Royal
Institute of Technology, October 2003.

[39] R. M. Joseph, S. C. Hagness, and A. Taflove. Direct time integration of

Maxwell’s equations in linear dispersive media with absorption for scatter-
ing and propagation of femtosecond electromagnetic pulses. Optics Lett.,
16(18):1412–1414, 1991.

[40] J. B. Keller. Accuracy and validity of the Born and Rytov approximations. J.
Opt. Soc. Am., 59:1003–04, 1969.

[41] D. F. Kelley and R. J. Luebbers. Piecewise linear recursive convolution for dis-
persive media using FDTD. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., 44(6):792–
797, 1996.

[42] S. Kirkpatrick, C. D. Gelatt Jr., and M. P. Vecchi. Optimization by simulated

annealing. Science, 220(4598):671–680, 1983.

[43] D. Koh, H.-B. Lee, and T. Itoh. A hybrid full-wave analysis of via-hole grounds
using finite-difference and finite-element time-domain methods. IEEE Trans.
Microwave Theory Tech., 45(12):2217–2223, 1997.

[44] M. Kuzuoglu and R. Mittra. Frequency dependence of the constitutive para-

meters of causal perfectly matched anisotropic absorbers. IEEE Microwave
Guided Wave Lett., 6(12):447–449, December 1996.

[45] G. Ledfelt.Hybrid Time-Domain Methods and Wire Models fo

Computational Electromagnetics. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Numerical
Analysis and Computer Science, Royal I nstitute of Technology, Stockholm,
Sweden, 2001. Dissertation.

[46] R. M. Lewis. Physical optics inverse diffraction. IEEE Trans. Antennas

Propagat., 17:308–314, 1969.

[47] J. G. Maloney and G. S. Smith. The efficient modeling of thin material sheets in
the finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) method. IEEE Trans. Antennas
Propagat., 40(3):323–330, March 1992.

44
[48] J. C. Maxwell. A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism. Dover Public-
ations, New York, 1873.

[49] Z. Q. Meng, T. Takenaka, and T. Tanaka. Image reconstruction of two-

dimensional impenetrable objects using genetic algorithm. J. Electro. Waves
Applic., 13(1):95–118, 1999.

[50] N. Metropolis, A. Rosenbluth, M. Rosenbluth, A. Teller, and E. Teller. Equa-

tion of state calculations by fast computing machines. J. Chem. Phys.,
21(6):1087–1092, 1953.

[51] A. Monorchio and R. Mittra. A hybrid finite-element finite-difference time-

domain (FE/FDTD) technique for solving complex electromagnetic problems.
IEEE Microwave Guided Wave Lett., 8(2):93–95, 1998.

[52] G. Mur. Absorbing boundary conditions for the finite-difference approximation

of the time-domain electromagnetic-field equations. IEEE Trans. Electro-
magn. Compat., EMC-23(4):377–382, 1981.

[53] J. C. Nedelec. Mixed finite elements in R3. Num. Math., 35(9):315–341,

September 1980.

[54] N. K. Nikolova, H. W. Tam, and M. H. Bakr. Sensitivity analysis with the

fdtd method on structured grids. IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory Tech.,
52(4):1207–1216, 2004.

[55] M. Nilsson. Fast Numerical Techniques for Electomagnetic Problems

in Frequency Domain. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Information Technology,
Uppsala University, December 2003.

[56] M. Pastorino, A. Massa, and S. Caorsi. A global optimization technique for mi-
crowave nondestructive evaluation. IEEE Trans. Instr. Meas., 51(4):666–
673, 2002.

[57] M. Popovic and A. Taflove. Two-dimensional FDTD inverse-scattering

scheme for determination of near-surface material properties. Antennas and
Propagation Society International Symposium, 1:523 – 526, 2003.

[58] J. Radon. Über die Bestimmung von Funktionen durch ihre Integralwerte langs
gewisser Mannigfaltigkeiten. Berichte Sächsische Akademie der Wis-
senschaften, 69:262–77, 1917.

[59] I. T. Rekanos. Inverse scattering in the time domain: an iterative method using
an fdtd sensitivity analysis scheme. IEEE Trans. Magn., 38(2):1117–1120,
2002.

45
[60] Z. Ren. Degenerated prism elements - general nodal and edge shell elements for
field computation in thin structures. IEEE Trans. Magnetics, 34(5):2547–
2550, September 1998.

[61] D. J. Riley. Transient finite-elements for computational electromagnetics: Hy-

bridization with finite differences, modeling thin wires and thin slots, and paral-
lel processing. In 17th Annual Review of Progress in Applied Compu-
tational Electromagnetics, pages 128–138, Monterey, CA, March 2001.

[62] D. J. Riley and N. W. Riley. First order models for thin-material sheets and coat-
ings in the finite-element time-domain method. In Antennas and Propagat.
Soc. Int. Symp., volume 4, pages 3489–3492, Monterey, CA, June 2004.

[63] D. J. Riley and C. D. Turner. VOLMAX: A solid-model-based, transient volu-

metric Maxwell solver using hybrid grids. IEEE Antennas Propagat.
Magazine, 39(1):20–33, 1997.

[64] T. Rylander and A. Bondeson. Stable FEM-FDTD hybrid method for Maxwell’s
equations. Comput. Phys. Comm., 125:75–82, March 2000.

[65] T. Rylander and J-M. Jin. Perfectly matched layer in three dimensions for
the time-domain finite element method applied to radiation problems. IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propagat., 53(4):1489–1499, April 2005.

[66] Z. S. Sacks, D. M. Kingsland, R. Lee, and J. F. Lee. A perfectly matched an-

isotropic absorber for use as an absorbing boundary condition. IEEE Trans.
Antennas Propagat., 43(12):1460–1463, 1995.

[67] S. Selleri, J. Y. Dauvignac, G. Pelosi, and C. Pichot. Comparison between

FDTD and hybrid FDTD-FETD applied to scattering and antenna problems.
Microwave Opt. Technol. Lett., 18(4):247–250, 1998.

[68] W. Tabbara, B. Duchene, C. Pichot, D. Lesselier, L. Chommeloux, and

N. Joachimowicz. Diffraction tomography: Contribution to the analysis of some
applications in microwaves and ultrasonics. Inverse Problems, 4:305–331,
1988.

[69] A. Taflove, editor. Advances in Computational Electrodynamics: The

Finite-Difference Time-Domain Method. Artech House, Boston, MA,
1998.

[70] A. Taflove and S. C. Hagness. Computational Electrodynamics: The

Finite-Difference Time-Domain Method, Third Edition. Artech House,
Boston, MA, 2005.

46
[71] T. Tanaka, T. Takenaka, and S. He. An FDTD approach to the time-domain in-
verse scattering problem for an inhomogeneous cylindrical object. Microwave
Opt. Technol. Lett., 20(1):72–77, 1999.

[72] A. Tarantola. Inversion of seismic reflection data in the acoustic approximation.

Geophysics, 49(8):1259–1266, 1984.

[73] C. R. Vogel. Computational Methods for Inverse Problems. Society for

Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, PA, 2002. Frontiers
in Applied Mathematics.

[74] Y. M. Wang and W. C. Chew. An iterative solution of the two-dimensional

electromagnetic inverse scattering problem. Int. J. Imag. Sys. Tech., 1:100–
108, 1989.

[75] H. Whitney. Geometric Integration Theory. Princeton University Press,

Princeton, NJ, 1957.

[76] R.-B. Wu and T. Itoh. Hybridizing FD-TD analysis with unconditionally stable
FEM for objects of curved boundary. In IEEE MTT-S Int. Microwave
Symp., volume 2, pages 833–836, Orlando, FL, 1995.

[77] K. S. Yee. Numerical solution of initial boundary value problems involving

Maxwell’s equations in isotropic media. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat.,
AP-14(4):302–307, 1966.

[78] M. S. Yeung. Application of the hybrid FDTD-FETD method to dispersive

materials. Microwave Opt. Technol. Lett., 23(4):238–242, 1999.

[79] F. X. Zgainski, J. L. Coulomb, and Y. Maréchal. A new family of finite elements:

the pyramidal elements. IEEE Trans. Magn., 32(3):1393–1396, May 1996.

47
# &
  &. 


       
         

 - 

  
/ 0  

 
0

#   
    
/ 0  



01 &..  &
01   0  0 

 . .
2 # 
3 .
  
.


 

4
.   5 3


  
1 3


 0 
  
 
  0   



   6.


 
  &.. 

    
/ 0  

 
02
7   8  01 (1 


 3  .
 



96.


 
  &..  
 
  
/ 0  

 
0:2;



 
  
 - . 22
 
 --
-- )',