| Author |
Message |
Leilon
Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 114
Helped: 8
|
 28 Jun 2009 10:39 cst antenna simulation |
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
I'm working on UWB antenna, I decided to simulate an article with HFSS and CST.
results of HFSS and CST are similar but different from Article.
Plz help me, what's problem?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
seqc1712
Joined: 11 Dec 2003
Posts: 202
|
29 Jun 2009 7:39 uwb antenna |
|
|
|
|
Hello,
check your HFSS model, wave port area of your HFSS model isn't correct defined!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leilon
Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 114
Helped: 8
|
29 Jun 2009 8:18 uwb antenna design |
|
|
|
|
Hi seqc1712,
what's problem?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e_m_c
Joined: 07 May 2008
Posts: 94
Helped: 14
Location: Land
|
29 Jun 2009 16:55 uwb antenna 2009 |
|
|
|
|
| What the thickness of dielectric substrate?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
AdSense
|
29 Jun 2009 16:55 Ads |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leilon
Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 114
Helped: 8
|
29 Jun 2009 17:26 antenna simulation models |
|
|
|
|
| it's 1.5mm.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e_m_c
Joined: 07 May 2008
Posts: 94
Helped: 14
Location: Land
|
29 Jun 2009 18:29 hfss similar |
|
|
|
|
OK, and what is W1 value?
Added after 35 minutes:
And is there specified in article which dielectric parameters were used in FR4 material properties? Under naming 'FR4' one can supose quite wide range of epsilon and dielectric loss parameters to use in simulation model.
If you could attach the article itself that would be most useful.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leilon
Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 114
Helped: 8
|
29 Jun 2009 21:13 hfss antenna simulation |
|
|
|
|
Hi,
this is Article
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mauloftin
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 262
Helped: 22
Location: CZ
|
30 Jun 2009 9:45 prameter effect the uwb antenna. |
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I dont know, where is the problem exactly. Article and simulation are very similar.
Try in CST use "adaptive mesh refinement" in "Transient Solver parameters" and you can see, that accuracy will be change.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
plasma
Joined: 20 Dec 2001
Posts: 577
Helped: 40
|
30 Jun 2009 20:15 cst antenna |
|
|
|
|
what about the connector you need it for measurement
did you simulate it with the connector?
pl
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leilon
Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 114
Helped: 8
|
01 Jul 2009 5:22 uwb antenna hfss |
|
|
|
|
Hi plasma,
No, I didnot. how do it?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
plasma
Joined: 20 Dec 2001
Posts: 577
Helped: 40
|
01 Jul 2009 19:11 hfss plasma |
|
|
|
|
you have to build connector I think SMA connector fit to this patch.
look at http://www.conec.com/section24/s1/sma.dimension.php3
and http://www.conec.com/section24/s1/new.display.php3?sec=24&page=1-24&chart=1-24&dia=1
this one SMA-50SAG6199BRX (you can cut the pin.)
pl
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e_m_c
Joined: 07 May 2008
Posts: 94
Helped: 14
Location: Land
|
02 Jul 2009 20:02 simulation on cst antnenna |
|
|
|
|
Attached are results of Method of Moments simulation of this antenna.
Chaning dielectric permittivity resonances will shift (used 4.7 is just approximate value from datasheet, while in reality at measurements there might be used anything in range 3.5-5.0 probably). Also losses will change the values level. Accounting of connector sure will add more details.
Hope such additional results will be useful for you.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leilon
Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 114
Helped: 8
|
02 Jul 2009 20:57 antenna simulation with cst |
|
|
|
|
Thanks E-M-C
it's useful and show that my simulation was right.
I add Coaxial cable to my model and my result become better (thanks Plasma).
my experience show for simulation of UWB antenna cable effect must be considered!
but yet my result is not exactly results of Article.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e_m_c
Joined: 07 May 2008
Posts: 94
Helped: 14
Location: Land
|
03 Jul 2009 2:21 ads +hfss+antenna +article |
|
|
|
|
I think if authors were using some specific feed-models - connectors/cables - they would include at least corresponding note in the article.
The difference you observe is caused more probably by calcualtion settings, meshing or somethign like this. With including more details you should get closer to measurement results (describe more resonances), but anyway it is quite difficult to simulate exacty measurements performed by another people - there might be many uncertainties in real antenna, when you can not touch it yourself it is very difficult to reach exact match.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
