{"id":163398,"date":"2021-10-26T11:13:03","date_gmt":"2021-10-26T11:13:03","guid":{"rendered":"\/forum\/forums\/topic\/problems-when-i-use-a-different-frequency-range-in-global-monitor-properties-than-the-source-limits\/"},"modified":"2021-10-26T15:55:20","modified_gmt":"2021-10-26T15:55:20","slug":"problems-when-i-use-a-different-frequency-range-in-global-monitor-properties-than-the-source-limits","status":"closed","type":"topic","link":"https:\/\/innovationspace.ansys.com\/forum\/forums\/topic\/problems-when-i-use-a-different-frequency-range-in-global-monitor-properties-than-the-source-limits\/","title":{"rendered":"Problems when I use a different frequency range in global monitor properties than the source limits"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

Hi, <\/p>\n

I am trying to use a script I downloaded from lumerical's webpages which uses the advanced absorption (Pabs) monitor analysis group to plot the absorption in different particles (with different materials). Because I have a small mesh I had to limit the range in the global monitor properties compared to the source (I kept the source limits the same, so that the refractive index fit is the same as my other simulations). If I didn't limit the range the simulation took to much memory or had to low resolution in frequency. <\/p>\n

My problem is that it seems like the fit to the refractive index is different in the monitors from what is shown in material explorer (see figure).<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n\"different_index.png\"
\n<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","class_list":["post-163398","topic","type-topic","status-closed","hentry"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t