4.7 Article

A general approach for high order absorbing boundary conditions for the Helmholtz equation

Journal

JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL PHYSICS
Volume 242, Issue -, Pages 387-404

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcp.2013.01.032

Keywords

Helmholtz equation; Absorbing boundary conditions; Bayliss-Turkel ABC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

When solving a scattering problem in an unbounded space, one needs to implement the Sommerfeld condition as a boundary condition at infinity, to ensure no energy penetrates the system. In practice, solving a scattering problem involves truncating the region and implementing a boundary condition on an artificial outer boundary. Bayliss, Gunzburger and Turkel (BGT) suggested an Absorbing Boundary Condition (ABC) as a sequence of operators aimed at annihilating elements from the solution's series representation. Their method was practical only up to a second order condition. Later, Hagstrom and Hariharan (HH) suggested a method which used auxiliary functions and enabled implementation of higher order conditions. We compare various absorbing boundary conditions (ABCs) and introduce a new method to construct high order ABCs, generalizing the HH method. We then derive from this general method ABCs based on different series representations of the solution to the Helmholtz equation - in polar, elliptical and spherical coordinates. Some of these ABCs are generalizations of previously constructed ABCs and some are new. These new ABCs produce accurate solutions to the Helmholtz equation, which are much less dependent on the various parameters of the problem, such as the value of k, or the eccentricity of the ellipse. In addition to constructing new ABCs, our general method sheds light on the connection between various ABCs. Computations are presented to verify the high accuracy of these new ABCs. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available