2020 IEEE MTT-S International Conference on Numerical Electromagnetic and Multiphysics Modeling and Optimization (NEMO) | 978-1-7281-6966-8/20/$31.

00 ©2020 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/NEMO49486.2020.9343611

Stability-Improved HIE-FDTD for Magnetized

Graphene from Microwave to THz Band
Xiang-Hua Wang1 and Jian-Yun Gao2
1
School of Science, Tianjin University of Technology and Education, Tianjin 300222, China
2
Department of Basic Courses, Tianjin Vocational Institute, Tianjin 300410, China
E-mail: xhwang199@outlook.com

Abstract—A stability-improved hybrid implicit-explicit finite-

difference time-domain method (HIE-FDTD) for magnetized II. FORMULATION
graphene is proposed. The graphene is treated as a current Assume the graphene sheet placed in the x-z plane and a
source modeled by an auxiliary differential equation which is
divided into two separate equations to describe isotropic and
fine discretization applied in the y-direction. The time-domain
anisotropic properties. The one time-step iteration in the Maxwell’s curl equations can be written as:
 
conventional algorithm is decomposed into two sub steps where E   H 
the conventional HIE-FDTD combined with the isotropic    H  J ,    E (1a, b)
t t
equation is implemented first followed by the Crank-Nicolson 
(CN) scheme combined with the anisotropic equation to retain where J satisfies the equation [2]:
the stability. Numerical results show that, differently from other 
dJ   
recent extensions, the stability condition of the proposed method  MJ  0 E (1c)
preserves the same form as that of the conventional HIE-FDTD. dt h
We illustrate the application of the proposed algorithm to   c 
here J   J x , J z  , M = 
T
, ν the scattering rate, h
accurately compute graphene transmission properties e.g.,
 c  
Faraday and Kerr rotations.
the thickness of the graphene sheet set as one Yee’s grid cell,
Index Terms—Hybrid implicit-explicit finite-difference time- σ0=2e2kBTln(2cosh(μc/2kBT))/πνћ2 with e the electron charge,
domain method (HIE-FDTD), Kerr rotation, magnetized kB the Boltzmann’s constant, T the temperature, μc the
graphene, stability. chemical potential, ħ the reduced Planck’s constant, ωc=eB0V2F
/μc the cyclotron frequency, VF≈9.5×105 m/s the Fermi
I. INTRODUCTION velocity, and B0 the biased magnetostatic field [1].
Note that since (1c) is a coupled equation, for maintaining
Graphene as a 2-D material, exhibits strong gyrotropic the original stability condition of a FDTD method based on
properties when biased by a magnetostatic field. This property (1a, b), Jx and Jz should be synchronized with Ex and Ez in time.
can be exploited to develop nonreciprocal devices [1]. To To this end, we split (1c) inside the time-update algorithm into
model magnetized graphene-based structures, the matrix two separate sub-time steps: one for the isotropic term and the
exponential finite-difference time-domain method (FDTD) other for the anisotropic one, i.e.
was proposed in [2]. However, as an explicit method, its time  
1 dJ   0  1 dJ  0   
step is limited by the Courant–Friedrich–Levy (CFL) stability   J  E,  c J (2a, b)
condition [3]. To remove this limitation, the hybrid implicit- 2 dt h 2 dt  c 0 
explicit FDTD (HIE-FDTD) [3] [4] was extended to simulate For (2a), by applying the Crank-Nicolson (CN) scheme at time
electrostatic field biased graphene-based structures [6] [7]. (n+1/4)∆t, we obtain
     
HIE-FDTD is highly suited for the analysis of graphene sheets 1 J n 1/ 2  J n J n 1/ 2  J n  0 E n 1/ 2  E n
because it enables a very fine discretization along the    (3)
2 t / 2 2 h 2
graphene sheet thickness without penalizing the stability Then we have
condition. Recently, HIE-FDTD was further extended for  
 2 t  n  0t ( E n 1/ 2  E n )
magnetized graphene sheets in [8]. However, numerical J n 1/ 2  J  (4)
experiments show that the stability condition of the method 2  t (2  t )h
proposed in [8] is not the same as that for the conventional For (2b), the CN scheme being applied at time (n+3/4)∆t, it
non-dispersive HIE-FDTD. The CFL number may decreased has
   
greatly depending on the choice of parameters. In this paper, 1 J n 1  J n 1/ 2  0 c  J n 1  J n 1/ 2
 (5)
we develop a new extension of the HIE-FDTD method for 2 t / 2  c 0  2
magnetized graphene-based structure while keeping the Then we have
stability condition the same as that of conventional HIE-FDTD
4  (c t ) 2 n 1/ 2 4c t
method. J xn 1  Jx  J zn 1/ 2 (6a)
4  (c t ) 2
4  (c t ) 2

Authorized licensed use limited to: Carleton University. Downloaded on May 27,2021 at 10:54:13 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 4  (c t ) 2 n 1/ 2 4c t additionally explicit calculations of (6) for the magnetized
J zn 1  Jz  J xn 1/ 2 (6b) graphene. Because we use the CN scheme for (2) and Jx and Jz
4  (c t ) 2
4  (c t ) 2
are synchronized with Ex and Ez in time, the stability condition
On the other hand, we also decompose (1) into two sub-time of the proposed method is the same as that for electrostatic
steps i.e., for n∆t –(n+1/2)∆t field biased graphene and consequently the same as that for
 
1 E   1 H  the conventional HIE-FDTD [7].
   H  J ,    E (7a, b)
2 t 2 t
and for n∆t (n+1/2)∆t–(n+1)∆t III. NUMERICAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
  To check the stability of the proposed method, a perfectly
1 E 1 H
  0,  0 (8a, b) electric conductor (PEC) cavity loaded with a graphene sheet
2 t 2 t
is studied as depicted in Fig. 1. The domain size has 50×50×50
Similar as the method provided in [4] [5], by applying the HIE cells. In the simulations, we set T=300 K, ν=0.2 THz, μc=0.1
scheme to (7), we have eV, B0=5 T, fmax=1 THz, ∆x=∆z=10∆y=c0/(20fmax), c0 being the
t H n H zn speed of light in vacuum. The maximum time step of the
E yn 1/ 2  E yn  ( x  ) (7a)
 z x conventional HIE-FDTD is ∆tmax=1/[c0(1/∆x2+1/∆z2)1/2]. The
t Ezn Exn graphene patch is placed at the center of the domain in the y-
H yn 1/ 2  H yn  (  ) (7b) direction. A line current source Ez(t)=exp[-4π(t-t0)2/τ2] along
 x z
n 1/ 2
the z-direction and one cell away from the cavity center is
t  ( H zn 1/ 2  H zn ) H y J xn 1/ 2  J xn used to excited the field, where t0=τ=50∆tmax. The simulation
Exn 1/ 2  Exn  (   ) (7c)
 2y z 2 runs up to 104∆tmax. The observation point is set one cell away
n 1/ 2 from the center of the right surface.
t H y  ( H xn 1/ 2  H xn ) J zn 1/ 2  J zn
Ezn 1/ 2  Ezn  (   ) (7d)
 x 2y 2
Graphene Line source
n 1/ 2
t E y  ( Ezn 1/ 2  Ezn ) z
H xn 1/ 2  H xn  (  ) (7e) 1cell
 z 2y o
t  ( Exn 1/ 2  Exn ) E y
n 1/ 2 y
H zn 1/ 2  H zn  (  ) (7f) x
 2y x B0, E0
From (8), we have
    Obs.
E n 1  E n 1/ 2 , H n 1  H n 1/ 2 (8a, b)
n+1/2
Further, to compute Ex , we substitute the x-component of 50 cells
(4) and (7f) into (7c) to obtain
(a)
t 2  2 ta2 n 1/ 2 t 2  2 ta2 n
(1   ) Ex  (1   ) Ex
4 y 2
2 4 y 2 2
n 1/ 2 2 n 1/ 2 (9)
t H n H y t 2  E y t (a1  1) n
 ( z  )  Jx
 y z 2 yx 2 6 6.15
Proposed t=tmax
where a1=(2-ν∆t)/(2+ν∆t) and a2=σ0ν∆t/ (2+ν∆t)h. To compute 6.10
4 Ref. [8] t=0.7tmax
En+1/2
z , we substitute the z-component of (4) and (7e) into (7d): Ref. [8] t=0.8tmax
Recorded Ez (10-7 V/m)

t 2  2 ta2 n 1/ 2 t 2  2 ta2 n 6.05

(1   ) Ez  (1   ) Ez 2
4 y 2
2 4 y 2 2 6.00
n 1/ 2 2 n 1/ 2 (10) 2.05 2.10 2.15
t H y H xn t 2  E y t (a1  1) n 0
 (  )   Jz
 x y 2 yz 2
-2
Equations (4), (6), (7), (9), and (10) comprise the update
equations of the proposed method for magnetized graphene.
-4
We set Jx and Jz collocated with Ex and Ez in the Yee’s grid,
respectively, so that spatial interpolations should be used in
-6
(6a) and (6b).
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
For clarity, the update computations from n∆t to (n+1)∆t are:
Time (ps)
explicitly update En+1/2 y and Hn+1/2y by (7a) and (7b); implicitly
(b)
update Ex and Ez by (9) and (10); explicitly update Hn+1/2
n+1/2 n+1/2
y

and Hn+1/2
z by (7e) and (7f); explicitly update Jn+1/2 x and Jn+1/2
z by Fig. 1. Recorded Ez computed by the proposed HIE-FDTD and the method
(4); explicitly update Jn+1 x and Jn+1z by (6). Compared with the provided in [8] with different values of ∆t.
method for isotropic graphene sheet [6] [7], there are only two

Authorized licensed use limited to: Carleton University. Downloaded on May 27,2021 at 10:54:13 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Fig. 1 shows the recorded Ez computed by the proposed TABLE I
STABILITY OF THE PROPOSED METHOD (OUTSIDE BRACKET) AND THAT OF [8]
method with ∆t=∆tmax. The results computed by the method (INSIDE BRACKETS) FOR VARIOUS μc (eV) AND B0 (T).
provided in [8] with ∆t=0.7∆tmax and 0.8∆tmax are also given ‘Y’: STABLE. ‘N’: UNSTABLE.
for comparison. All the results show good agreement at early μc
0.01 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
time. However, the recorded Ez computed by the proposed B0
0 Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y)
method remains stable at later times while the result computed 0.5 Y(N) Y(Y) Y(N) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y)
1 Y(N) Y(N) Y(Y) Y(N) Y(N) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y)
by the method provided in [8] with ∆t=0.8∆tmax is unstable. 2 Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y) Y(Y)
Therefore, for the parameters selected, the present method 4
6
Y(N)
Y(N)
Y(N)
Y(N)
Y(N)
Y(N)
Y(N)
Y(N)
Y(N)
Y(N)
Y(N)
Y(N)
Y(Y)
Y(N)
Y(Y)
Y(N)
Y(Y)
Y(Y)
Y(Y)
Y(Y)
Y(Y)
Y(Y)
retains the same stability condition as the conventional HIE- 8 Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(Y) Y(Y)
10 Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(Y) Y(Y)
FDTD while the method provided in [8] must use a reduced 20 Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N) Y(N)
time step.

6 6.15

4 6.10
Proposed t=tmax
Ref. [8] t=0.7tmax PML
Ref. [8] t=0.8tmax
Recorded Ez (10-7 V/m)

2
6.05
TF/SF
Obs.

180 cells
6.00
2.05 2.10 2.15
0 B0
y Graphene E0
-2
z x Obs. PBC
-4
PML
-6
10 cells
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time (ps) (a)
Fig. 1. Recorded Ez computed by the proposed HIE-FDTD and the method 80
provided in [8] with different values of ∆t.
60
To further check the stability condition of the proposed 40
Farady Rotation angle (Deg)

method, we make simulations by changing the biased field e.g. 20

μc from 0.01 eV to 1eV and B0 from 0 to 20 T. The time stop is 0
set as 2×104∆tmax. Other parameters are set the same as those e. Pro. B0=1 T
e. Pro. B0=4 T
-20
in Fig. 1. Table I shows the computed result where the e. Pro. B0=8 T
Imag. Pro. B0=1 T
notation ‘Y’ means that the recorded field is stable while ‘N’ -40 Imag. Pro. B0=4 T

means unstable. To make a comparison, the results computed -60

Imag. Pro. B0=8 T
e. Anal. B0=1 T

by the method provided in [8] with ∆t=∆tmax are also given in -80
e. Anal. B0=4 T
e. Anal. B0=8 T
the brackets. It is seen that the proposed method is always Imag. Anal. B0=1 T
-100 Imag. Anal. B0=4 T
stable while the method provided in [8] is not. Moreover, the Imag. Anal. B0=8 T
-120
method in [8] becomes unstable with decreasing μc or 109 1010 1011 1012 1013
increasing B0. This is because the conductivity of the graphene Frequency (Hz)
decreases with decreasing μc and the coupling effect becomes (b)
stronger with increasing B0. We conjecture that one of the
reasons for the more restrictive stability condition for the Fig. 2. Real and imaginary parts of Faraday rotation angle computed by the

method in [8] might be that the lack of synchronicity of J and proposed method with different values of B0.

E in time and a strong coupling would exacerbate this issue.
We have run the proposed method for a wide range of To check the accuracy of the proposed method, the Faraday
parameter choices and found it always stable with ∆t=∆tmax. and Kerr rotations of graphene sheets are studied. In our
Therefore, we may draw a conclusion that the stability simulations, we set fmax=10 THz, μc=0.4 eV, other parameters
condition is verified numerically. We note a rigorous are set the same as those in Fig. 1. The total computational
analytical stability analysis [9] of the proposed method is very domain is 10×180×10 cells including 15-layer perfectly
challenging to the complexity of the model equations. matched layers (PMLs) [10] in the both end of y-direction as
depicted in Fig. 2. Total field/scatted field (TF/SF) is used to
introduce an x-polarized incident pulse. A periodic boundary

Authorized licensed use limited to: Carleton University. Downloaded on May 27,2021 at 10:54:13 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
condition (PBC) is used to model an infinitely wide graphene
sheet. It is seen that the computed results agrees well with the
analytical ones [1]. The imaginary part is close to zero in the
microwave band and increases in the THz band. This means
the transmitted wave changes from linear to elliptical
polarized with increasing frequency. The same result can also
be obtained for the Kerr rotation as shown in Fig. 3.
40
Kerr Rotation angle (Deg)
Tianjin University of Technology and Education under Grant
of KJ1739.
REFERENCES
[1] D. L. Sounas and C. Caloz, “Gyrotropy and nonreciprocity of graphene
for microwave applications,” IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Tech., vol.
60, no. 4, pp. 901-914, Apr. 2012.
[2] X. H. Wang, W. Y. Yin, and Z. Chen, “Matrix exponential FDTD
modeling of magnetized graphene sheet,” IEEE Antennas Wireless

e. Pro. B0=1 T, B0=4T, B0=8 T Propag. Lett., vol.12, pp. 1129-1132, Sep. 2013.
20 Imag. Pro. B0=1 T, B0=4T, B0=8 T [3] A. Taflove and S. C. Hagness, Computational Electrodynamics: The
0 Finite-Difference Time-Domain Method, 3nd Ed., Norwood, MA:
Artech House, 2005.
-20
[4] B. K. Huang, G. Wang, Y. S. Jiang, and W. B. Wang, “A hybrid implicit
-40 explicit FDTD scheme with weakly conditional stability,” Microw. Opt.
Technol. Lett., vol. 39, pp. 97-101, Oct. 2003.
-60
[5] J. Chen and J. Wang, “A 3D hybrid implicit explicit FDTD scheme with
109 1010 1011 1012 1013 weakly conditional stability,” Microw. Opt. Technol. Lett., vol. 48, pp.
Frequency (Hz) 2291-2294, Nov. 2006.
[6] J. Chen, J. Li, and Q. Liu, “Designing graphene-based absorber by using
Fig. 3. Real and imaginary parts of Kerr rotation angle computed by the HIE-FDTD method,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag, vol. 65, no.4,
proposed method with different values of B0. pp.1896-1902, Apr. 2017.
[7] M. L. Zhai, H. L. Peng, X. H. Wang, X. Wang, Z. Chen, and W. Y. Yin,
CONCLUDING REMARKS “The conformal HIE-FDTD method for simulating tunable graphene-
based couplers for THz applications,” IEEE Trans. THz Sci. Technol.,
A stability-improved HIE-FDTD for magnetostatic field vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 368-376, May 2015.
biased graphene has been introduced. Numerical results have [8] C. Tian and J. Chen, “Analysis of magnetically biased graphene
shown that it can be used to accurately simulate graphene- absorber using anisotropic HIE-FDTD method,” Journal of
Electromagnetic Waves and Applications, vol. 33, no.6, pp.722-733,
based structures with retaining the same stability condition as 2019.
the conventional HIE-FDTD. [9] S. Wang and F. L. Teixeira, ‘Some remarks on the stability of time-
domain electromagnetic simulations,’ IEEE Trans. Antennas
Propagation, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 895-898, 2004.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT [10] Z. Liu, Y. Chen, X. Sun, and Y. Liu, “Implementation of CFS-PML for
HIE-FDTD method,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol.11, pp.
This work was supported by the the Science Foundation of 381-384, 2012

Authorized licensed use limited to: Carleton University. Downloaded on May 27,2021 at 10:54:13 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.