| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
On May 13, 8:56*am, Roy Lewallen wrote:
K1TTT wrote: On May 11, 8:30 pm, Art Unwin wrote: When an array is in equilibrium then Maxwell's equations are exact. maxwell's equations are ALWAYS exact, it is digital models that are inexact and have limitations due to the approximations made and the numeric representations used. Inexactness of the solution isn't because the method is digital. The field equations solved by the digital methods simply can't be solved by other methods, except for a relatively few very simple cases. Many non-digital methods were developed over the years before high speed computers to arrive at various approximate solutions, but all have shortcomings. For example, I have a thick file of papers devoted to the apparently simple problem of finding the input impedance of a dipole of arbitrary length and diameter. Even that can't be solved in closed form. Solution by digital methods is vastly superior, and is capable of giving much more accurate results, than solution by any known method. Roy Lewallen, W7EL quantization of every number in a numeric simulation is but one of the contributions to inaccuracy. the limitations of the physical model is another, every modeling program i know of breaks the physical thing being modeled into small pieces, some with fixed sizes, some use adaptive methods, but then they all calculate using those small pieces as if they were a single homogonous piece with step changes at the edges... that also adds to inaccuracies. the robustness of the algorithm and the residual errors created are a bit part of getting more accurate results. There is no doubt that numerical methods have allowed 'solutions' of many problems that would be extremely difficult to find closed form solutions for, but they must always be examined for the acceptibility of the unavoidable errors in the method used. other non-digital methods also have their limitations. unless you are using the original differential or integral equations and satisfying all the boundary conditions, your method will introduce errors. weather that means you represent an odd shaped solid object by a sphere, or make other geometic replacements that give you simpler field configurations, you have introduced errors at some level. you must of course judge these methods by the same way to determine of the errors introduced by the simplyfied geometry or other methods used are acceptible for the problem at hand. |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| FA: Philbrick GAP/R Model K2-W Early Computer Tube Op-Amp | Boatanchors | |||
| FA: Philbrick GAP/R Model K2-W Early Computer Tube Op-Amp | Boatanchors | |||
| FA: Philbrick GAP/R Model K2-W Early Computer Tube Op-Amp | Boatanchors | |||
| FA: Philbrick GAP/R Model K2-W Early Computer VacuumTube Op-Amp | Boatanchors | |||
| FA: Radio Shack Model 100 laptop computer ++ | Equipment | |||