Maxwell-PC modeling of dispersive media

Electromagnetic wave propagation in complex
dispersive media
Associate Professor
Department of Mathematics
Workshop on Quantification of Uncertainties in Material Science

January 15, 2016
(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 1 / 35

A Polynomial Chaos Method for Microscale
Modeling
Associate Professor
Department of Mathematics
Workshop on Quantification of Uncertainties in Material Science

January 15, 2016

Outline
1 Preliminaries

Outline
1 Preliminaries
2 Maxwell-Debye

Outline
1 Preliminaries
2 Maxwell-Debye
3 Maxwell-Random Debye

Outline
1 Preliminaries
2 Maxwell-Debye
3 Maxwell-Random Debye
4 Conclusions

Acknowledgments
Collaborators
H. T. Banks (NCSU)
V. A. Bokil (OSU)
W. P. Winfree (NASA)
Students
Karen Barrese and Neel Chugh (REU 2008)
Anne Marie Milne and Danielle Wedde (REU 2009)
Erin Bela and Erik Hortsch (REU 2010)
Megan Armentrout (MS 2011)
Brian McKenzie (MS 2011)
Duncan McGregor (MS 2013, PhD 2016?)

Preliminaries
Preliminaries
Havriliak-Negami (H-N)
A general (phenomenological) material model that arises from
considerations of the multi-scale nature of the spatial microstructure of a
broad class of materials (e.g., glassy, soils, biological tissues, and
amorphous polymers). a
a
See “A complex plane representation of dielectric and mechanical relaxation
processes in some polymers”, J. Polym. Sci, 1967.
Corresponds to a fractional psuedo-differential equation model in the time

domain, not suitable for efficient simulation.

Maxwell-Debye Maxwell’s Equations
Maxwell’s Equations
∂B
+ ∇ × E = 0, in (0, T ) × D (Faraday)
∂t
∂D
+ J − ∇ × H = 0, in (0, T ) × D (Ampere)
∂t
∇ · D = ∇ · B = 0, in (0, T ) × D (Poisson/Gauss)
E(0, x) = E0 ; H(0, x) = H0 , in D (Initial)
E × n = 0, on (0, T ) × ∂D (Boundary)
E= Electric field vector D= Electric flux density

H= Magnetic field vector B= Magnetic flux density
J= Current density n= Unit outward normal to ∂Ω
Maxwell-Debye Maxwell’s Equations
Constitutive Laws
Maxwell’s equations are completed by constitutive laws that describe the

response of the medium to the electromagnetic field.
D = E + P
B = µH + M
J = σE + Js
P= Polarization = Electric permittivity

M= Magnetization µ= Magnetic permeability
Js = Source Current σ= Electric Conductivity
where = 0 ∞ and µ = µ0 µr .

Maxwell-Debye Dispersive Media
Complex permittivity
We can usually define P in terms of a convolution

Z t
P(t, x) = g ∗ E(t, x) = g (t − s, x; q)E(s, x)ds,
0
where g is the dielectric response function (DRF).

In the frequency domain D̂ = Ê + ĝÊ = 0 (ω)Ê, where (ω) is
called the complex permittivity.
(ω) described by the polarization model

Maxwell-Debye Dry skin data
True Data
10
3 Debye Model
Cole−Cole Model
ε
2
10
1
10 2 4 6 8 10
10 10 10 10 10
f (Hz)
Figure : Real part of (ω), , or the permittivity [GLG96]. Note: up to 10%

spread in measurements was observed, but only averages were published.

Maxwell-Debye Dry skin data
1
10
0
10
−1
10
σ
−2
10
−3
10 True Data
Debye Model
Cole−Cole Model
−4
10 2 4 6 8 10
10 10 10 10 10
f (Hz)
Figure : Imaginary part of (ω)/ω, σ, or the conductivity.

Polarization Models
Z t
0
Debye model [1929] q = [∞ , d , τ ]
g (t, x) = 0 d /τ e −t/τ
or τ Ṗ + P = 0 d E
d
or (ω) = ∞ +
1 + iωτ
with d := s − ∞ and τ a relaxation time.

Polarization Models
Z t
0
Debye model [1929] q = [∞ , d , τ ]
g (t, x) = 0 d /τ e −t/τ
or τ Ṗ + P = 0 d E
d
or (ω) = ∞ +
1 + iωτ
with d := s − ∞ and τ a relaxation time.
Cole-Cole model [1936] (heuristic generalization)
q = [∞ , d , τ, α]
d
(ω) = ∞ +
1 + (iωτ )α
Polarization Models
Z t
0
Debye model [1929] q = [∞ , d , τ ]

d
(ω) = ∞ +
1 + iωτ
Cole-Cole model [1941] q = [∞ , d , τ, α]
d
(ω) = ∞ +
1 + (iωτ )α
Havriliak-Negami model [1967] q = [∞ , d , τ, α, β]

d
(ω) = ∞ +
(1 + (iωτ )α )β

Maxwell-Random Debye Distribution of Parameters
Distributions of Relaxation Times
The macroscopic Debye polarization model can be derived from

microscopic dipole formulations by passing to a limit over the
molecular population [see, Elliot1993].


In 1907, von Schweidler observed the need for multiple relaxation
times.


times.
In 1913, Wagner proposed a (continuous) distribution of relaxation
times.


times.
times.
Empirical measurements suggest a log-normal or Beta distribution
[Bottcher-Bordewijk1978].


times.
times.
One can show that the S-N (and Cole-Cole) model corresponds to a
continuous distribution “... it is possible to calculate the necessary
distribution function by the method of Fuoss and Kirkwood.”
[Cole-Cole1941].


times.
times.
One can show that the S-N (and Cole-Cole) model corresponds to a
continuous distribution “... it is possible to calculate the necessary
distribution function by the method of Fuoss and Kirkwood.”
[Cole-Cole1941].
“Continuous spectrum relaxation functions” are also common in
viscoelastic models.
Maxwell-Random Debye Fit to dry skin data with uniform distribution
3
True Data
10 Debye (27.79)
Cole−Cole (10.4)
Uniform (13.60)
ε
2
10
2 4 6 8 10
10 10 10 10 10
f (Hz)
Figure : Real part of (ω), , or the permittivity [REU2008].

Maxwell-Random Debye Fit to dry skin data with uniform distribution
1
10 True Data
Debye (27.79)
Cole−Cole (10.4)
Uniform (13.60)
0
10
−1
10
σ
−2
10
−3
10
2 4 6 8 10
10 10 10 10 10
f (Hz)
Figure : Imaginary part of (ω)/ω, σ, or the conductivity [REU2008].

Distributions of Parameters
To account for the effect of possible multiple parameter sets q, consider

the following polydispersive DRF
Z
h(t, x; F ) = g (t, x; q)dF (q),
Q
where Q is some admissible set and F ∈ P(Q).

Then the polarization becomes:
Z t
P(t, x; F ) = h(t − s, x; F )E(s, x)ds.
0

Maxwell-Random Debye
Random Polarization
Alternatively we can define the random polarization P(t, x; τ ) to be the

solution to
τ Ṗ + P = 0 d E
where τ is a random variable with PDF f (τ ), for example,
1
f (τ ) =
τb − τa
for a uniform distribution.

Random Polarization
Alternatively we can define the random polarization P(t, x; τ ) to be the

solution to
τ Ṗ + P = 0 d E
where τ is a random variable with PDF f (τ ), for example,
1
f (τ ) =
τb − τa
for a uniform distribution.
The electric field depends on the macroscopic polarization, which we take
to be the expected value of the random polarization at each point (t, x)
Z τb
P(t, x; F ) = P(t, x; τ )f (τ )dτ.
τa

Maxwell-Random Debye Polynomial Chaos
Polynomial Chaos
Apply Polynomial Chaos (PC) method to approximate each spatial

component of the random polarization
τ Ṗ + P = 0 d E , τ = τ (ξ) = τr ξ + τm , ξ∼F
resulting in
~˙ + α
(τr M + τm I )α ~ = 0 d E eˆ1
or
~ = ~f .
~˙ + α
Aα

Polynomial Chaos
Apply Polynomial Chaos (PC) method to approximate each spatial

component of the random polarization
τ Ṗ + P = 0 d E , τ = τ (ξ) = τr ξ + τm , ξ∼F
resulting in
~˙ + α
(τr M + τm I )α ~ = 0 d E eˆ1
or
~ = ~f .
~˙ + α
Aα
The electric field depends on the macroscopic polarization, the expected
value of the random polarization at each point (t, x), which is
P(t, x; F ) = E[P] ≈ α0 (t, x).

Maximum Difference Calculated for different values of p and r

2
10
0 r = 1.00τ
10
r = 0.75τ
r = 0.50τ
r = 0.25τ
−2
10
−4
Maximum Error
10
−6
10
−8
10
−10
10
−12
10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
p

Maxwell-Random Debye Inverse Problem Numerical Results
Comparison, noise = 0.1, refinement = 1, perturb = −0.8

100
Data
Initial J=983.713
80 Optimal J=1.25869
Actual J=1.25879
60
40
20
E
−20
−40
−60
−80
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
t x 10
−9
Comparison of simulations to data [Armentrout-G., 2011].

11 Distributions, noise = 0.1, refinement = 1, perturb = −0.8

x 10
6
Initial J=983.713
Optimal J=1.25869
Actual J=1.25879
0
−12 −11 −10
10 10 10
Comparison of initial to final distribution [Armentrout-G., 2011].

11 Distributions, noise = 0.1, refinement = 1,test = 5
×10
3.5
Initial J=9.59699
Optimal J=3.02332
Actual J=3.02348
3
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
×10 -11

Maxwell-Random Debye system
In a polydispersive Debye material, we have

∂H
µ0 = −∇ × E, (1a)
∂t
∂E ∂P
0 ∞ =∇×H− −J (1b)
∂t ∂t
∂P
τ + P = 0 d E (1c)
∂t
with Z τb
P(t, x; F ) = P(t, x; τ )dF (τ ).
τa

Maxwell-Random Debye Random Debye Dispersion Relation
Theorem (G., 2015)

The dispersion relation for the system (1) is given by
ω2
(ω) = kkk2
c2
where the expected complex permittivity is given by

1
(ω) = ∞ + d E .
1 + iωτ
√
Where k is the wave vector and c = 1/ µ0 0 is the speed of light.

Maxwell-Random Debye Random Debye Dispersion Relation
Theorem (G., 2015)

The dispersion relation for the system (1) is given by
ω2
(ω) = kkk2
c2
where the expected complex permittivity is given by

1
(ω) = ∞ + d E .
1 + iωτ
√
Where k is the wave vector and c = 1/ µ0 0 is the speed of light.
Note: for a uniform distribution on [τa , τb ], this has an analytic form since
τ =τa

1 1 1 2
E = arctan(ωτ ) + i ln 1 + (ωτ ) .
1 + iωτ ω(τb − τa ) 2 τ =τb
The exact dispersion relation can be compared with a discrete dispersion

relation to determine the amount of dispersion error.
Maxwell-Random Debye FDTD
Finite Difference Time Domain (FDTD)
We now choose a discretization of the Maxwell-PC Debye model. Note

that any scheme can be used independent of the spectral approach in
random space employed here.
The Yee Scheme (FDTD)
This gives an explicit second order accurate scheme in time and space.
It is conditionally stable with the CFL condition
c∆t 1
ν := ≤√
h d
√
where ν is called the Courant number and c∞ = 1/ µ0 0 ∞ is the
fastest wave speed and d is the spatial dimension, and h is the
(uniform) spatial step.
The Yee scheme can exhibit numerical dispersion and dissipation.

Yee Scheme for Maxwell-Debye System (in 1D)
∂H ∂E
µ0 =−
∂t ∂z
∂E ∂H ∂P
0 ∞ =− −
∂t ∂z ∂t
∂P
τ = 0 d E − P
∂t
become
n+1 n n+ 1 n+ 12
Hj+ 1 − H Ej+12 − Ej
2
j+ 1 2
µ0 =−
∆t ∆z
n+ 1 n− 1 n n n+ 12 n− 21
Ej 2 − Ej 2 Hj+ 1 − H Pj − Pj
2
j− 1 2
0 ∞ =− −
∆t ∆z ∆t
n+ 1 n− 1 n+ 1 n− 1 n+ 1 n− 21
Pj 2 − Pj 2 Ej 2 + Ej 2 Pj 2 + Pj
τ = 0 d − .
∆t 2 2
Discrete Debye Dispersion Relation
(Petropolous1994) showed that for the Yee scheme applied to the

Maxwell-Debye, the discrete dispersion relation can be written
2
ω∆ 2
∆ (ω) = K∆
c2
where the discrete complex permittivity is given by

1
∆ (ω) = ∞ + d
1 + iω∆ τ∆
with discrete (mis-)representations of ω and τ given by
sin (ω∆t/2)
ω∆ = , τ∆ = sec(ω∆t/2)τ.
∆t/2

Discrete Debye Dispersion Relation (cont.)
The quantity K∆ is given by
sin (k∆z/2)
K∆ =
∆z/2
in 1D and is related to the symbol of the discrete first order spatial

difference operator by
iK∆ = F(D1,∆z ).
In this way, we see that the left hand side of the discrete dispersion relation
2
ω∆ 2
∆ (ω) = K∆
c2
is unchanged when one moves to higher order spatial derivative
approximations [Bokil-G,2012] or even higher spatial dimension
[Bokil-G,2013].
Maxwell-Random Debye PC-Debye FDTD Dispersion Relation
Theorem (G., 2015)

The discrete dispersion relation for the Maxwell-PC Debye FDTD scheme
is given by
2
ω∆ 2
∆ (ω) = K∆
c2
where the discrete expected complex permittivity is given by
∆ (ω) := ∞ + d ê1T (I + iω∆ A∆ )−1 ê1
and the discrete PC matrix is given by
A∆ := sec(ω∆t/2)A.
The definitions of the parameters ω∆ and K∆ are the same as before.

Recall the exact complex permittivity is given by

1
(ω) = ∞ + d E .
1 + iωτ
Maxwell-Random Debye PC-Debye FDTD Dispersion Analysis
Dispersion Error
We define the phase error Φ for a scheme applied to a model to be

kEX − k∆
Φ = , (2)
kEX
where the numerical wave number k∆ is implicitly determined by the
corresponding dispersion relation and kEX is the exact wave number for
the given model.

Dispersion Error
We define the phase error Φ for a scheme applied to a model to be

kEX − k∆
Φ = , (2)
kEX
where the numerical wave number k∆ is implicitly determined by the
corresponding dispersion relation and kEX is the exact wave number for
the given model.
We wish to examine the phase error as a function of ω∆t in the
range [0, π]. ∆t is determined by hτ τm , while ∆x = ∆y determined
by CFL condition.
We note that ω∆t = 2π/Nppp , where Nppp is the number of points
per period, and is related to the number of points per wavelength as,
√
Nppw = ∞ νNppp .
We assume a uniform distribution and the following parameters which
are appropriate constants for modeling aqueous Debye type materials:
∞ = 1, s = 78.2, τm = 8.1 × 10−12 sec, τr = 0.5τm .
PC−Debye dispersion for FD with hτ=0.01, r=0.5τ, θ=0 PC−Debye dispersion for FD with hτ=0.01, r=0.9τ, θ=0
0.4 0.4
0.35 0.35
0.3 0.3
0.25 0.25
M=0
Φ
Φ
0.2 M=1 0.2
M=2
0.15 M=3 0.15 M=0
M=1
0.1 0.1 M=2
M=3
M=4
0.05 0.05
M=5
M=6
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
ω∆t ω∆t
Figure : Plots of phase error at θ = 0 for (left column) τr = 0.5τm , (right

column) τr = 0.9τm , using hτ = 0.01.

PC−Debye dispersion for FD with hτ=0.001, r=0.5τ, θ=0 PC−Debye dispersion for FD with hτ=0.001, r=0.9τ, θ=0
0.5 0.5
0.45 0.45
0.4 0.4
0.35 0.35
0.3 0.3 M=0

M=1
Φ
Φ
0.25 0.25 M=2
M=3
0.2 0.2 M=4
M=5
0.15 0.15
M=6
0.1 M=0 0.1
M=1
0.05 M=2 0.05
M=3
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
ω∆t ω∆t
Figure : Plots of phase error at θ = 0 for (left column) τr = 0.5τm , (right

column) τr = 0.9τm , using hτ = 0.001.

PC−Debye dispersion for FD with h =0.01, r=0.5τ, ωτ =1 PC−Debye dispersion for FD with h =0.01, r=0.9τ, ωτ =1
τ µ τ µ
90 −1 M=0 90 −1 M=0
120 60 M=1 120 60 M=1
M=2 M=2
−3 M=3 −3 M=3
M=4
150 23 150 23 M=5
−5 −5 M=6
180 0 180 0
210 330 210 330
240 300 240 300

270 270
Figure : Log plots of phase error versus θ with fixed ω = 1/τm for (left column)
τr = 0.5τm , (right column) τr = 0.9τm , using hτ = 0.01. Legend indicates degree
M of the PC expansion.

PC−Debye dispersion for FD with h =0.001, r=0.5τ, ωτ =1 PC−Debye dispersion for FD with h =0.001, r=0.9τ, ωτ =1
τ µ τ µ
90 −1 M=0 90 −1 M=0
120 60 M=1 120 60 M=1
M=2 M=2
−3 M=3 −3 M=3
M=4
150 23 150 23 M=5
−5 −5 M=6
180 0 180 0
210 330 210 330
240 300 240 300

270 270
Figure : Log plots of phase error versus θ with fixed ω = 1/τm for (left column)
τr = 0.5τm , (right column) τr = 0.9τm , using hτ = 0.001. Legend indicates
degree M of the PC expansion.

Conclusions
Conclusions
We have presented a random ODE model for polydispersive Debye

media
1
Gibson, N. L., A Polynomial Chaos Method for Dispersive Electromagnetics,
Comm. in Comp. Phys., 2015
Conclusions
Conclusions

media
We described an efficient numerical method utilizing polynomial
chaos (PC) and finite difference time domain (FDTD)
1
Conclusions
Conclusions

media
Exponential convergence in the number of PC terms was
demonstrated
1
Conclusions
Conclusions

media
demonstrated
We have proven (conditional) stability of the scheme via energy decay
(not shown)1
1
Conclusions
Conclusions

media
demonstrated
We have proven (conditional) stability of the scheme via energy decay
(not shown)1
We have derived a discrete dispersion relation and computed phase
errors
1
Appendix Polynomial Chaos
Polynomial Chaos: Simple example
Consider the first order, constant coefficient, linear IVP
ẏ + ky = g , y (0) = y0
with
k = k(ξ) = ξ, ξ ∼ N (0, 1), g (t) = 0.
We can represent the solution y as a Polynomial Chaos (PC) expansion in
terms of (normalized) orthogonal Hermite polynomials Hj :
∞
X
y (t, ξ) = αj (t)φj (ξ), φj (ξ) = Hj (ξ).
j=0
Substituting into the ODE we get

∞
X ∞
X
α̇j (t)φj (ξ) + αj (t)ξφj (ξ) = 0.
j=0 j=0

Triple recursion formula
∞
X ∞
X
α̇j (t)φj (ξ) + αj (t)ξφj (ξ) = 0.
j=0 j=0
We can eliminate the explicit dependence on ξ by using the triple recursion

formula for Hermite polynomials
ξHj = jHj−1 + Hj+1 .
Thus
∞
X ∞
X
α̇j (t)φj (ξ) + αj (t)(jφj−1 (ξ) + φj+1 (ξ)) = 0.
j=0 j=0

Galerkin Projection onto span({φi }pi=0 )
In order to approximate y we wish to find a finite system for at least the

first few αi .
We take the weighted inner product with the ith basis, i = 0, . . . , p,
∞
X
α̇j (t)hφj , φi iW + αj (t)(jhφj−1 , φi iW + hφj+1 , φi iW ) = 0,
j=0
where Z
hf (ξ), g (ξ)iW := f (ξ)g (ξ)W (ξ)dξ.

Galerkin Projection onto span({φi }pi=0 )
In order to approximate y we wish to find a finite system for at least the

first few αi .
We take the weighted inner product with the ith basis, i = 0, . . . , p,
∞
X
α̇j (t)hφj , φi iW + αj (t)(jhφj−1 , φi iW + hφj+1 , φi iW ) = 0,
j=0
where Z
hf (ξ), g (ξ)iW := f (ξ)g (ξ)W (ξ)dξ.
By orthogonality, hφj , φi iW = hφi , φi iW δij , we have
α̇i hφi , φi iW + (i + 1)αi+1 hφi , φi iW + αi−1 hφi , φi iW = 0, i = 0, . . . , p.

Deterministic ODE system
Let α
~ represent the vector containing α0 (t), . . . , αp (t).
Assuming α−1 (t), αp+1 (t), etc., are identically zero, the system of ODEs
can be written
~˙ + M α
α ~ = ~0,
with  
0 1
 1 0 2 
 
 .. .. .. 
M=
 . . . 

 .. .. 
 . . p 
1 0
Pp
The degree p PC approximation is y (t, ξ) ≈ y p (t, ξ) = j=0 αj (t)φj (ξ).
The mean value E[y (t, ξ)] ≈PE[y p (t, ξ)] = α0 (t).
The variance Var (y (t, ξ)) ≈ pj=1 αj (t)2 .

Figure : Convergence of error with Gaussian random variable by Hermitian-chaos.

Generalizations
Consider the non-homogeneous IVP
ẏ + ky = g (t), y (0) = y0
with
k = k(ξ) = σξ + µ, ξ ∼ N (0, 1),
then
α̇i + σ [(i + 1)αi+1 + αi−1 ] + µαi = g (t)δ0i , i = 0, . . . , p,
or the deterministic ODE system is
~˙ + (σM + µI )~
α α = g (t)e~1 .
~ (0) = y0 e~1 .
Note that the initial condition for the PC system is α

Generalizations
For any choice of family of orthogonal polynomials, there exists a triple

recursion formula. Given the arbitrary relation
ξφj = aj φj−1 + bj φj + cj φj+1
(with φ−1 = 0) then the matrix above becomes

 
b0 a1
 c0 b1 a2 
 
 .. .. .. 
M=  . . . 

 .. .. 
 . . ap 
cp−1 bp

Generalized Polynomial Chaos
Table : Popular distributions and corresponding orthogonal polynomials.

Distribution Polynomial Support
Gaussian Hermite (−∞, ∞)
gamma Laguerre [0, ∞)
beta Jacobi [a, b]
uniform Legendre [a, b]
Note: lognormal random variables may be handled as a non-linear function

(e.g., Taylor expansion) of a normal random variable.

Maxwell-PC modeling of dispersive media

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Maxwell-PC modeling of dispersive media

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Electromagnetic wave propagation in complex

Workshop on Quantification of Uncertainties in Material Science

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 1 / 35

Workshop on Quantification of Uncertainties in Material Science

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 2 / 35

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 3 / 35

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 3 / 35

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 3 / 35

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 3 / 35

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 4 / 35

Corresponds to a fractional psuedo-differential equation model in the time

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 5 / 35

E(0, x) = E0 ; H(0, x) = H0 , in D (Initial)

E= Electric field vector D= Electric flux density

Maxwell’s equations are completed by constitutive laws that describe the

P= Polarization = Electric permittivity

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 7 / 35

We can usually define P in terms of a convolution

where g is the dielectric response function (DRF).

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 8 / 35

Figure : Real part of (ω), , or the permittivity [GLG96]. Note: up to 10%

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 9 / 35

Figure : Imaginary part of (ω)/ω, σ, or the conductivity.

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 10 / 35

Debye model [1929] q = [∞ , d , τ ]

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 11 / 35

Debye model [1929] q = [∞ , d , τ ]

Debye model [1929] q = [∞ , d , τ ]

Havriliak-Negami model [1967] q = [∞ , d , τ, α, β]

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 12 / 35

Distributions of Relaxation Times

The macroscopic Debye polarization model can be derived from

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 13 / 35

Distributions of Relaxation Times

The macroscopic Debye polarization model can be derived from

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 13 / 35

Distributions of Relaxation Times

The macroscopic Debye polarization model can be derived from

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 13 / 35

Distributions of Relaxation Times

The macroscopic Debye polarization model can be derived from

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 13 / 35

Distributions of Relaxation Times

The macroscopic Debye polarization model can be derived from

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 13 / 35

Distributions of Relaxation Times

The macroscopic Debye polarization model can be derived from

Figure : Real part of (ω), , or the permittivity [REU2008].

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 14 / 35

Figure : Imaginary part of (ω)/ω, σ, or the conductivity [REU2008].

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 15 / 35

To account for the effect of possible multiple parameter sets q, consider

where Q is some admissible set and F ∈ P(Q).

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 16 / 35

Alternatively we can define the random polarization P(t, x; τ ) to be the

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 17 / 35

Alternatively we can define the random polarization P(t, x; τ ) to be the

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 17 / 35

Apply Polynomial Chaos (PC) method to approximate each spatial

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 18 / 35

Apply Polynomial Chaos (PC) method to approximate each spatial

P(t, x; F ) = E[P] ≈ α0 (t, x).

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 18 / 35

Maximum Difference Calculated for different values of p and r

(N.L. Gibson, OSU) Maxwell-PC Debye NIST-UQ4Mat 2016 19 / 35

P= Polarization = Electric permittivity

Figure : Real part of (ω), , or the permittivity [GLG96]. Note: up to 10%

Figure : Imaginary part of (ω)/ω, σ, or the conductivity.

Debye model [1929] q = [∞ , d , τ ]

Debye model [1929] q = [∞ , d , τ ]

Debye model [1929] q = [∞ , d , τ ]

Havriliak-Negami model [1967] q = [∞ , d , τ, α, β]

Figure : Real part of (ω), , or the permittivity [REU2008].

Figure : Imaginary part of (ω)/ω, σ, or the conductivity [REU2008].

∆ (ω) := ∞ + d ê1T (I + iω∆ A∆ )−1 ê1