Advertisement

Assessing the Impact of Large-Scale Computing on the Size and Complexity of First-Principles Electromagnetic Models

  • E. K. Miller

Abstract

There is a growing need to determine the electromagnetic performance of increasingly complex systems at ever higher frequencies. The ideal approach would be some appropriate combination of measurement, analysis, and computation so that system design and assessment can be achieved to a needed degree of accuracy at some acceptable cost. Both measurement and computation benefit from the continuing growth in computer power that, since the early 1950s, has increased by a factor of more than a million in speed and storage. For example, a CRAY2 has an effective throughput (not the clock rate) of about 10 11 floating-point operations (FLOPs) per hour compared with the approximate 10 5 provided by the UNIVAC-1. The purpose of this discussion is to illustrate the computational complexity of modeling large (in wavelengths) electromagnetic problems.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Burke, G. J., E. K. Miller, S. Chakrabarti, and K. Demarest (1989), “Using model-based parameter estimation to increase the efficiency of computing electromagnetic transfer functions”, IEEE Trans. Magnetics, 25(4), pp. 2807–2809.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Butler, C. M. and D. R. Wilton (1975), “Analysis of various numerical techniques applied to thin-wire scatterers, IEEE Trans. Antennas and Propagat., AP-22, pp. 534–540.Google Scholar
  3. Cangellaris, A. C. (1991), “Time-domain finite methods for electromagnetic wave propagation and scattering,” to be published in IEEE Trans. on Magnetics.Google Scholar
  4. Jameson, A. (1989), “Computational aerodynamics for aircraft design,” SCIENCE, 245, pp. 361–371.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lager, D. and R. J. Lytle (1975), “Fortran subroutine for the numerical evaluation of Sommerfeld integrals unter andern,” Lawrence Livermore Laboratory Report, UCRL-51821.Google Scholar
  6. Miller, E. K. (1991), “Solving bigger problems--by decreasing the operation count and increasing the computation bandwidth,” submitted to special issue of IEEE Proc. on Electromagnetics.Google Scholar
  7. Miller, E. K., G. J. Burke and E. S. Seiden (1971), “Accuracy-modeling guidelines for integral-equation evaluation of thin-wire scattering structures,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., AP-19, pp. 534–536.Google Scholar
  8. Miller, E. K. and M. A. Gilbert (1991), “Solving the Helmholtz equation using multiply-propagated fields,” to be published in International Journal of Numerical Modeling.Google Scholar
  9. Ratner, J. (1989), “Towards the teraflop machine”, presented at Workshop on Highspeed Simulation and Visualization, California Institute of Technology, June 19–21, Pasadena, CA.Google Scholar
  10. Shanks, Daniel (1955), “Nonlinear transformations of divergent and slowly convergent sequences,” Journal of Mathematics and Physics, The Technology Press, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, pp. 1–42.Google Scholar
  11. Tabet, S. N., J. P. Donohoe and C. D. Taylor (1990), “Using nonuniform segment lengths with NEC to analyze large wire antennas,” 6th Annual Review of Progress in Applied Computational Electromagnetics, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. K. Miller
    • 1
  1. 1.Los Alamos National LaboratoryGroup MEE-3, MS J580Los AlamosUSA

Personalised recommendations