Abstract
The advantages and limitations of the direct boundary element method (DBEM) and the method of fundamental solutions (MFS) are compared, will illustrating examples. The salient features of the two methods are discussed. The formulations are described with the aim of illustrating the relative merits of each. The evaluation covers robustness, numerical accuracy, model development and implementation, as well as the ease of applying the impedance boundary condition (IBC). As a test problem, the case of two circular conductors carrying a total impressed current per conductor is considered. A wide range of frequencies and separating distances is examined to show the behavior of each method for skin and proximity effect problems.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.