| Author |
Message |
boeysue
Joined: 23 Dec 2004
Posts: 190
Helped: 3
|
 03 Jan 2005 17:05 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| Many people use ADS to simulate the RF.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jia
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 7
|
| 21 Jan 2005 12:59 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| The ADS is better but it’s not easy to learn. Bye the way, The ADS also needs high-performance Pc, large memory and big $$$.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shark.cao
Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 7
|
| 23 Jan 2005 9:09 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| The ADS is better for microwave circuit design, the HFSS is good for antenna anasys
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cplia
Joined: 26 Jan 2005
Posts: 37
Helped: 6
Location: Europe
|
| 26 Jan 2005 20:38 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
CST Microwave Studio uses
the FIT method (finite integration technique) to discretize the computed
volume.
This mathematical technique, among other advantages, guarantees that
NON-physical solutions cannot exist. Other numerical techniques that solve
Maxwell equations, may produce results which do not come to close proximity with
measurements, i.e. filter modes predicted by software may not exist in reality
etc. This problem may appear in particular, for example, on numerical techniques that
solve high order differential equations and their solution roots do not necesserilly
correspond to the reality or cause instability problems etc..
So, from my experience someone who requires accuracy and reduction in the uncertainty factor, may choose MWS. However, the selection of
THE optimum simulation program is always an area of endless discussion..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ap2004
Joined: 28 Jan 2005
Posts: 4
|
| 28 Jan 2005 16:20 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| cplia wrote: |
CST Microwave Studio uses
the FIT method (finite integration technique) to discretize the computed
volume.
This mathematical technique, among other advantages, guarantees that
NON-physical solutions cannot exist. Other numerical techniques that solve
Maxwell equations, may produce results which do not come to close proximity with
measurements, i.e. filter modes predicted by software may not exist in reality
etc. This problem may appear in particular, for example, on numerical techniques that
solve high order differential equations and their solution roots do not necesserilly
correspond to the reality or cause instability problems etc..
So, from my experience someone who requires accuracy and reduction in the uncertainty factor, may choose MWS. However, the selection of
THE optimum simulation program is always an area of endless discussion.. |
The implication is that it is impossible to get non-physical soluitions to exist w/ FIT...HHHhhhmmmm... What do I do with the non-passive / non-causal sparameter results that show gain when looking at passive waveguide structures from CST simulations?
Or... how about this one... I have a small gap between structures (0.05 mm) CST has shown the results to be continous (i.e. connected)...
Both of these situations are easily solvable... as generally, they can also be described as "user errors"... Of course that also carries some self implecation that does not show up very well with one's yearly performance review.
The point is not that CST (or any other tool) is bad... instead, focus on how to use the tool... and the present limitation of a specific version for a specific application when setting up your problems. Thus to get away from the "endless" debate about which is better... and focus on "how to get the job done as best as possible with a specific tool".
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yesman
Joined: 31 Jan 2005
Posts: 11
Helped: 1
|
| 31 Jan 2005 13:06 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| Ansoft is the best. I have solved many problems in practical design.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cplia
Joined: 26 Jan 2005
Posts: 37
Helped: 6
Location: Europe
|
| 01 Feb 2005 19:39 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
The above mentioned issues, correctly stated, are user errors.
However, you should be careful, because for example, the
positive S11 in the response is NOT because of the FIT method
but because of the Fast Fourier Transformation between time and
frequency domain. Such, effect is a fundamental phenomenon
in signal processing, due to the trancated time response. MWS
can easily rectify this issue through the available options. It is
quite interesting to note also, that a resonant frequency is not
affected from this.
As far as the 0.5mm gap is concerned... this is a much easier
task to be solved, by applying manual meshing locally, if
required.
I quote the above information, so that people who are unware with
the principles of MWS have a better picture of solver's abilities.
However, as an ordinary used, I simply exchange ideas within
this forum for the benefit of everyone.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
colombo2
Joined: 02 Dec 2003
Posts: 35
|
| 02 Feb 2005 1:09 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| For planar structures like Baluns, spiral inductors, transformers, @DS M(at)omentum seems pretty alright.... I compared it to #fss and it is simpler and quicker....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cikyen
Joined: 11 Jun 2003
Posts: 63
|
| 24 Feb 2005 18:15 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| hey, anyone here try hspice RF before?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BrunoK
Joined: 10 Jan 2005
Posts: 48
Helped: 1
|
| 17 Mar 2005 16:27 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| I must agree with all of them who has suggested @DS. I do not agree that it is difficult to learn, on the other hand it's interface is splendid. Keep in mind that this comparison is done regarding to the RF simulations tools. No RF simluation tools can, in my opinion be considered easy. I know it is expensive but still it is the best. Cadence is good for layout of some specific components but i think it somtime is difficult to use.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nemoium
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 4
|
| 22 Mar 2005 12:15 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
what i know is ADS,many people use it~~~~
Added after 2 minutes:
another ,i think the best tool is the one whicn you can hold it fully~
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eladg
Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 205
Helped: 4
|
| 22 Mar 2005 23:39 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
the best program is the program that u know how to work with it and have it.
but etch program is good for other thing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
colombo2
Joined: 02 Dec 2003
Posts: 35
|
| 31 Mar 2005 9:28 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| The fastest harmonic balance and most stable one today in the market is EldoRF from Mentor Gr(at)phics. SpectreRF has a market lead in sales though but its technology is a bit old now and needs update. I know for a fact that C(at)dence is now building HB into its simulation environment
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IICCEE
Joined: 24 Dec 2001
Posts: 233
Helped: 2
|
| 06 Apr 2005 16:49 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
SOME SUGGEST:
There is not the best RF simulator.So you need to give some patient to study the detail of the RF design skill.
In my work,I favorite to use the MWO and design.,and zealand and hfss.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tshankar501
Joined: 26 Dec 2004
Posts: 53
Location: Arizona, US
|
| 06 Apr 2005 17:35 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| Ofcourse there is not a best RF simulator you could talk of. It all depends on the end product of your application. For filter designs at RF, I can Ansoft is the better. But it boils to the end product of your application.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cygnet
Joined: 31 Oct 2003
Posts: 68
Helped: 4
|
| 07 Apr 2005 3:46 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
It all depends on what you are simulating. Is it antennas, filters, amplifiers, complete modulated systems? I generally find that the simplest for your use is best. One of my friends who runs a business has all of his needs met with a ten year old version of Eagleware Genesys.
Added after 41 seconds:
besides,
DS is good for planar simulations but nothing beats HFSS in 3D simulations.
Added after 2 minutes:
Ansoft HFSS is very good and powerful for simulating antennas.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khouly
Joined: 20 Oct 2003
Posts: 2444
Helped: 335
Location: EGYPT
|
| 23 Apr 2005 1:18 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
for system level design @DS is the best
see this link
http://eesof.tm.agilent.com/pdf/st_ppt.pdf
khouly
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alpacinoliu
Joined: 14 Nov 2004
Posts: 65
Helped: 2
|
| 23 Apr 2005 8:24 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
why do no body mention ansoft ?
i think ansoft i s the best
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OEIC
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 32
Helped: 4
|
| 23 Apr 2005 11:18 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| I just use ADS 2004 .
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sxg
Joined: 04 Apr 2005
Posts: 25
|
| 24 Apr 2005 13:02 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| how about the RFsim99 and HyperLynx
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kokabanga
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 44
Helped: 4
|
| 02 May 2005 10:41 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| Aircraft Maniac wrote: |
Hi everyone,
I would like your opinion on which RF simulator is better from the 3 below:
@DS 2003
@WR MWO2003
CST microw(at)ve Studio 5
I would also like to know why which one is better and lastly which one is good for professional /beginer level.
Aircraft Maniac |
ADS rocks man!..it is easy to use
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RFSimulator
Joined: 24 Jan 2004
Posts: 176
Helped: 15
Location: Europe
|
| 02 May 2005 14:22 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
You can not compare
CST MWS 5 with ADS or MWO.
ADS and MWO are circuit and system simulators, MWS is a 3D field simulator.
This are two completly different simulators with completly different appications.
As a matter of fact ADS amd MWS even work together now.
F.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
irashid007
Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Posts: 3
Helped: 1
|
| 10 May 2005 8:44 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
Hi,
My choice is @ DS and I hope you will conclude after all these suggestions by
different people and enlighten us with ur final verdict???
It may help us also.
Thanks
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
masud_809
Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Posts: 104
Helped: 11
|
| 05 Oct 2006 4:36 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
very complete simulation:
ADS
and for the beginners, the manual to get started with this, has been posted in many topics.
Added after 1 minutes:
and also
microwave studio
it's better for circuits.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
maudape
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 6
|
| 25 Oct 2006 21:24 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
Hi! I'm also looking for people how now how to simulate planar antenna structure as rectangular patch antenna on the Microwave Office 2004.
Thanks
maudape
| sinatra wrote: |
Any one knows about a any free software that can also do this type of simulations??
S. |
Added after 8 minutes:
Hi! I'm an advanced student of electronical engineering doing now my thesis. It's about an array of microstrip or patch antenna elements for band L. I need to simulate it. I'm trying now with MWO 2004, but I had problems when I ask for the antenna plot graph. It appears some kind of errors.
What is your experience in simulating antennas? Could you give me any advice or help. They would be appreciated!
Thanks
maudape
| Mica188 wrote: |
Hi,
In my case, I need to simulate antennas. I will try the free demo version of SuperNec from Poynting. I wonder if it exist any softwares then that. I need some suggestions beause I'm a beginner too. Once I'm familiare with the antenna part, I need to simulate the whole system. I mean the generator (transmitter or receiver) which related to the transmisson line and then pug to the antenna and see the results ( output results). Any suggestions will appericate.
Thanks,
Mica |
Added after 13 minutes:
Hi! I'm an advanced Student of Electronical Engineering. I'm doing my thesis. It's about an array of patch antenna for band L. I'm trying to simulate it on an adequate software. Now I'm trying with MWO 2004. But I find troubles when trying to get the Antenna Plot Graph results.
Could you give me some advice about how to simulate and model antenna on CADs?
Thanks
maudape
| IICCEE wrote: |
SOME SUGGEST:
There is not the best RF simulator.So you need to give some patient to study the detail of the RF design skill.
In my work,I favorite to use the MWO and design.,and zealand and hfss. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dabillt
Joined: 10 Nov 2005
Posts: 2
|
| 02 Dec 2006 3:35 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
As for free EM problem simulators, you may want to try LC by CRAY. Not quite satisfied me when i used it but it's free! It utilizes FDTD to solve 3D problems.
Hint: It requires a Linux platform.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hanjiemy
Joined: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 54
|
| 09 Dec 2006 12:17 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
if RF cirsuit sim, the RFDE and SpectreRF are ok.
if inductor design, the ansoft q3d/hfss and momentum are ok.
if system design, ads is ok.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ayesha928
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Posts: 22
Helped: 1
|
| 08 Jan 2007 3:41 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| i guess HFSS is the best choice
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
paracyt
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 3
|
| 09 May 2008 5:01 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| i have learned that there is no single RF simulator that you can use to do all you need to do. it is best to find some combination. maybe 2 or 3.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
