The Impetus for the work presented here arose from the need that implicit FDTD method (ADI-FDTD) and explicit FDTD method (Conventional FDTD) method have distinguished advantage which is speed and precision respectively.

It was proved that ADI-FDTD method is less restrained by Courant-Friedrich Levy (CFL) stability condition, conventional FDTD on the other hand is affected by CFL condition which makes the method difficult to be applied in the solution of large electrical problems which makes the use of Perfectly Matched Layer Absorbing Boundary Conditions (PML ABC) more effective and advantageous in terms of accurate results.

Conversely, conventional FDTD method has proved to be generally more accurate than the ADI-FDTD method.

Numerical simulation of both ADI-FDTD and conventional FDTD method are presented. The results are compared to find the performance of each method in terms of precision and accuracy with respect to the CPU time and memory usage.

Keywords: Conventional FDTD, ADI-FDTD, Courant-Friedrich Levy (CFL) stability condition, Absorbing boundary conditions (ABC), Perfectly matched layer (PML).

Adamu Abubakar

Affiliation

Conference Tracks

Refine Results

PERFORMANCE COMPARISON BETWEEN (ADI-FDTD) AND CONVENTIONAL (FDTD)