| Author |
Message |
g86
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 208
Helped: 4
Location: On top of antenna :))
|
 05 Mar 2003 1:25 Choice of software for RF amplifire/oscillaror design |
|
|
|
Rank these software please
1. ADS
2. Genesys
3. MWO
4. Sonnet
5. MMICAD
6. Sernade
7. IE3D using Modua and tuchstone library
Must consider
1. $
2. accuracy
3. time
4. user frindly or not(degree of freedom)
5. Optimization and synthesis capability
6.complexity
Did I miss anything?   
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
multanova51
Joined: 03 Mar 2002
Posts: 72
Helped: 3
Location: Vatican
|
| 05 Mar 2003 8:33 |
|
|
|
Hi there
I do not want to be rude but questions like these have been put on this forum I think already ten times.
Why do'nt you look at the past history or look to the search feature ?
Regards 
Mike
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
g86
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 208
Helped: 4
Location: On top of antenna :))
|
| 05 Mar 2003 14:36 |
|
|
|
No they are of different types like and not this type. First of all I saw many discussions for antenna design and small no of discussions were made for amplifier or any active circuits. I think nobody discussed about MMICAD which also synthesis filters and simulates active devices and having an EM simulator in it, and also no discussions for IE3D mixed simulation. Look, I have seen almost all the threads like "Genesis vs. ADS" "HFSS vs. CST" but they could not satisfy my quary about amplifire/oscillator design.
But I am still looking for a serious comparison. Because i feel if sombody havs IE3D and touchstone files for a transistor or FET is available then using IE3D an LNA can be OPTIMIZED and no other softwares are required as long as you are interested in S-paramere response.
Anyway, thank you for seeing you here
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mwpro
Joined: 20 Apr 2001
Posts: 83
|
| 09 Mar 2003 9:16 |
|
|
|
| for circuit level sim, i recpmmend @ads. for em structure inside the design, I recommend ie3d + @ds. Forget about momentum.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
g86
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 208
Helped: 4
Location: On top of antenna :))
|
| 09 Mar 2003 14:44 |
|
|
|
I think this is somthing a very interesting choice. Now my question is how can I export IE3D data to ADS any option? I know export of touchston files to IE3D is possible.
I like your comment about momentum. It is really horrible!!
| mwpro wrote: |
| for circuit level sim, i recpmmend @@DS. for em structure inside the design, I recommend ie3d + @ds. Forget about momentum. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
g86
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 208
Helped: 4
Location: On top of antenna :))
|
| 09 Mar 2003 14:48 |
|
|
|
Just an observation:
I have seen PUFF is also a very strong tool to start with. What is to be done is to change .s2p file to make it suitable for PUFF.
Really good to start with and manual quick optimization for amps. Though it is not listed in the list of softwares i mentioned
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cheng
Joined: 01 Jan 1970
Posts: 111
Helped: 2
|
| 09 Mar 2003 21:27 Tools |
|
|
|
IE3D good on MMIC or RF design? Tasteless joke I guess....
A program that does not have sound calibration and is horrible in accuracy can NEVER be good in MMIC design...
Momentum is Slow but is times more accurate.
On oscilator and amplifier designs most of the tools on the list will do the job if the designer is any good. Else, the best simulator will derail.
ADS seems to score best to me in terms of integrity. ADS environment is like an environment one can do everything inside - from simple arithmetic to Matrix computation, plus calls to Vee and Matlab. No other tool's so integrated I reckon. Plus, one can export the design to CST MWS as well.
Indeed, the learning curve is somewhat longer though.
cheers,
cheng
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigBoss
Joined: 17 Nov 2001
Posts: 928
Helped: 47
|
| 10 Mar 2003 1:07 Re: Tools |
|
|
|
But the prices? ADS charges 20000 USD per user and per year..(including discount for my company ..) with LIMITED license..
Have you ever you tough that ?
Agilent should review their price policy..
For the simulation accuracy , I agree with you and not..
For some cases , ADS is ver accurate but for some problems, it doesn't converge.
For instance , transient simulation ADS is quite poor while Cadence is very accurate for this purpose.
IF Momentum is used in MICROWAVE Mode , yeah it's accurate. But takes many hours depending on layout complexity. I never forget that a simulation has taken time 36 hours for three silicon coils and some metal-to-metal capacitors.
Sorry , my time is limited.
But generally , ADS is not optimum choise and it will never be..
Regards ,
| cheng wrote: |
IE3D good on MMIC or RF design? Tasteless joke I guess....
A program that does not have sound calibration and is horrible in accuracy can NEVER be good in MMIC design...
Momentum is Slow but is times more accurate.
On oscilator and amplifier designs most of the tools on the list will do the job if the designer is any good. Else, the best simulator will derail.
@DS seems to score best to me in terms of integrity. @DS environment is like an environment one can do everything inside - from simple arithmetic to Matrix computation, plus calls to Vee and Matlab. No other tool's so integrated I reckon. Plus, one can export the design to CST MWS as well.
Indeed, the learning curve is somewhat longer though.
cheers,
cheng |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jwei363
Joined: 10 Jun 2001
Posts: 36
|
| 10 Mar 2003 3:25 no use |
|
|
|
It's no use to compare different type of things.
ADS,MWO,APLAC for General system,circuit sim
CST MWS,IE3D,HFSS for EM sim
Serenade,Genesys for some kind of circuits sim
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
g86
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 208
Helped: 4
Location: On top of antenna :))
|
| 10 Mar 2003 12:31 Re: Tools |
|
|
|
Just wait ..... I'll post amplifier results simulated with IE3D and PUFF.
And must remember In my list these are not there. But still you can use them as a good tool (may not be best).
| cheng wrote: |
IE3D good on MMIC or RF design? Tasteless joke I guess....
A program that does not have sound calibration and is horrible in accuracy can NEVER be good in MMIC design...
Momentum is Slow but is times more accurate.
On oscilator and amplifier designs most of the tools on the list will do the job if the designer is any good. Else, the best simulator will derail.
@DS seems to score best to me in terms of integrity. @DS environment is like an environment one can do everything inside - from simple arithmetic to Matrix computation, plus calls to Vee and Matlab. No other tool's so integrated I reckon. Plus, one can export the design to CST MWS as well.
Indeed, the learning curve is somewhat longer though.
cheers,
cheng |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
g86
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 208
Helped: 4
Location: On top of antenna :))
|
| 10 Mar 2003 12:34 Re: no use |
|
|
|
I see. Just wait and see how IE3D simulates amps..I'll be posting here the results.
| jwei363 wrote: |
It's no use to compare different type of things.
@DS,MWO,APLAC for General system,circuit sim
CST MWS,IE3D,HFSS for EM sim
Serenade,Genesys for some kind of circuits sim |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
g86
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 208
Helped: 4
Location: On top of antenna :))
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
costox
Joined: 05 Mar 2002
Posts: 209
|
| 10 Oct 2003 20:26 Re: Choice of software for RF amplifire/oscillaror design |
|
|
|
Marks: 10 Good, 1: Bad
$ accuracy time user friendly or not(degree of freedom) Optimization and synthesis capability Complexity
@DS 1 7 5 8 9 8
Genesys 5 7 6 8 8 7
MWO 7 6 7 8 8 6
Sonnet ? 7 7 6 6 5
MMICAD 5 6 7 6 6 5
Sernade ? 6 7 7 7 7
IE3D using Modua and tuchstone library ? 6 ? ? ? ?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shou
Joined: 05 Sep 2001
Posts: 103
|
| 13 Oct 2003 10:44 Re: Choice of software for RF amplifire/oscillaror design |
|
|
|
| why do you think the accuracy of @ds is bad?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
costox
Joined: 05 Mar 2002
Posts: 209
|
| 13 Oct 2003 13:35 Re: Choice of software for RF amplifire/oscillaror design |
|
|
|
Shou,
The first column is $ (cost). Accuracy is 7 (not bad).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Needbias
Joined: 03 Mar 2002
Posts: 164
|
| 18 Oct 2003 9:53 |
|
|
|
| I think senrenda is also good
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flyhigh
Joined: 12 Nov 2003
Posts: 512
Helped: 25
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
|
| 13 Nov 2003 11:56 Re: Choice of software for RF amplifire/oscillaror design |
|
|
|
My preference was Serenade, some time ago MWO and Genesys were offering much less. I had no experience with ADS.
Now I work mostly with ADS, I find it extremely difficult to work with for everything you cannot figure out intuitively. It can be realy frustrating to simulate e.g. some nonlinear circuit sweeping over parameter and get quick response. Manuals are a nightmare and you can be lost in them easily. I regret my company stick with Agilent.
I was evaluating MWO for some time and are very happy about it, it is now a mature and good software, must have a lot to do with Steven Mass being on board! The only disadvantage I see is that EM simulator they have for the moment is not offering optimization possibility.
Working with Ansoft Designer 1.0 for a week gave me some impression on the progress thay made, it is a good-old Serenade that put some make-up to look like MWO. So far it is a good imitation, might improve in the future. Ensamble is a great EM tool included and filter tool is useful. Student version is available for free and has really great potential, it is legal!
Genesys is a fine piece of software with a strongest point in my opinion being S-Filter synthesis tool. I don't have any design experience in it.
Conclusions:
1. MWO
2. Ansoft Designer
3. ADS
4. Genesys
FlyHigh
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HO_220
Joined: 02 Dec 2002
Posts: 70
|
| 13 Nov 2003 12:25 Re: Choice of software for RF amplifire/oscillaror design |
|
|
|
hi.
ADS is the best.
bests.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IICCEE
Joined: 24 Dec 2001
Posts: 233
Helped: 2
|
| 22 Dec 2003 14:29 |
|
|
|
| I think the genesys and ADS are helpful for AMP and OSC design.Because they have the thinesis function.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pewang
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 139
Helped: 1
Location: China PRC
|
| 23 Dec 2003 2:01 |
|
|
|
| Serenade+Genesys will be better for such active circuit design.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
