You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
For common surfaces such as (obviously) a planar surface, regular pyramids, or V-grooves, the possible ray paths are limited, specifically at normal incidence but even at small non-normal angles of incidence. Using TMM calculations with local angles of incidences for the different faces in the surface is much faster than ray-tracing and for many cases will be just as accurate, or give a good approximation for e.g. optimising anti-reflection coatings. This could be implemented for internal surfaces as well, but would be most relevant for the front surface, since there is usually a range of wavelengths where light does not reach the back surface at all.
To do:
Add functions for (semi-)analytical ray-tracing
Add relevant user options for controlling this behaviour
Add tests
Add documentation, specifying for which interfaces this method has been checked and is accurate (depending on angle of incidence!)
Quantify when this is a good substitute for Monte-Carlo ray-tracing simulations
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
For common surfaces such as (obviously) a planar surface, regular pyramids, or V-grooves, the possible ray paths are limited, specifically at normal incidence but even at small non-normal angles of incidence. Using TMM calculations with local angles of incidences for the different faces in the surface is much faster than ray-tracing and for many cases will be just as accurate, or give a good approximation for e.g. optimising anti-reflection coatings. This could be implemented for internal surfaces as well, but would be most relevant for the front surface, since there is usually a range of wavelengths where light does not reach the back surface at all.
To do:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: