| Author |
Message |
Aircraft Maniac
Joined: 18 May 2002
Posts: 348
|
 13 Aug 2004 12:34 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
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
Last edited by Aircraft Maniac on 13 Aug 2004 15:57; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
djalli
Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 887
Helped: 15
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington DC 20500
|
| 13 Aug 2004 13:27 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
I am a beginer in last two but ADS is Ok for planar structures.
Other good RF simulators are Ansoft HFSS, Ansoft Designers.
----------------------------
Microwave Studio is popular
ADS is a full blown and mature package. So is HFSS and Ansoft Designer for a professional.
-----------------------
You can not be amatuer in RF. Amatuer you can say it for HAM radio, amatuer in microelectronics etc. RF comes with a level of complexity in designs.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yingyang
Joined: 26 Dec 2002
Posts: 216
|
| 13 Aug 2004 17:57 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| there is no better rf simulator. it all depends on your problem....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mhamed
Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 117
Helped: 8
|
| 13 Aug 2004 21:38 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
I don't know why you don't choose Ansoft Hfss!
I found it very good and powerful in simulation especially in waveguides.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flatulent
Joined: 19 Jul 2002
Posts: 4825
Helped: 282
Location: Middle Earth
|
| 14 Aug 2004 4:25 Re: 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.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aircraft Maniac
Joined: 18 May 2002
Posts: 348
|
| 14 Aug 2004 6:10 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
Thanks alot fellows....
Actually I am new to microwave stuff designing.....I am a IC design fella..fabrication side.... so I wanted to know which simulator is best for both professional and begineer level and why. i am interested in working in MMIC side....
Hope more people put in there responses....
Aircraft maniac
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marcomdd
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
Posts: 158
Helped: 3
Location: Rome
|
| 14 Aug 2004 9:29 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| @WR MWO2003 is much easy (for a beginner) to use that @DS.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hrkhari
Joined: 04 Mar 2004
Posts: 225
Helped: 3
|
| 15 Aug 2004 16:55 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
I believe that:
Si Based RFIC design:
ADS and SpectreRF would serve the purpose
GaAs Based MMIC design:
ADS and AWR is adequate.
Rgds
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Buddy
Joined: 13 Feb 2004
Posts: 34
|
| 17 Aug 2004 9:34 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
Nice question.
I use analog simulators to do the rf simulations instead. However, they don't take account to the slew rate caused by opamps (if you deal with active filters). Use something like Pspice will do. The accuracy is actually very close! 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vagarwal
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 49
Location: Asia
|
| 17 Aug 2004 16:21 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
Hi,
I feel ADS2003 is better equiped then AWR. However AWR is fast picking up and has some libraries that are not available with ADS. But then ADS has some features that make it worth. Anyway, just to quote a few differences...the tuner in MWO is faster then in ADS. In ADS em simulation is faster and the system also doesn't hang if the solution does not converge, unlike in AWR. Layout generation is equally good in both. ADS has a wider range of non-linear models and generic models then AWR.
Spectre RF is also a good solution as suggested above.
But finally, I would advocate ADS.
Regards.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DJ
Joined: 23 Jul 2004
Posts: 118
|
| 17 Aug 2004 21:26 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
I use AWR, ADS and also HFSS for MMIC design and complicated structures too. For MMIC actually you have to work with ADS or AWR. The main issue is the library for the componnent you have. The FAB you work with has to support and give you elements library. Look and see if they support ADS or AWR. If they support both then for beginner no question take the AWR. It is faster and very user friendly. When you look for complicated and more profesional tasks you almost must to work with ADS.
Sometimes you have to use HFSS(For Via modeling etc) nut normaly you don't have to use it.
D.J
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khouly
Joined: 20 Oct 2003
Posts: 2381
Helped: 324
Location: EGYPT
|
| 17 Aug 2004 22:12 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
i think @DS is very good in RF simulation , i always use it . it has a very large number of simulations "AC,TRAN , S, ...."
support many models for most devices
have amny synthizes tools "line calac , E syn "
it is a complete solution
thanks
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
toonafishy
Joined: 18 Jun 2002
Posts: 412
Helped: 17
|
| 18 Aug 2004 19:02 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| MWO is much easier to use. However, @DSstill has a more in depth system simulator.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Duncan_Widman
Joined: 17 Jun 2004
Posts: 7
|
| 20 Aug 2004 2:14 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
danelad, can you give a specific example of when you had to switch to ADS from AWR? What kind of limitation you ran into?
Thanks,
Duncan
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mhadidy
Joined: 21 Jul 2004
Posts: 19
|
| 21 Aug 2004 13:28 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| ADS Advanced Design System is very nice. I have a very good experience in it if you need further help. But it is somehow difficult to start
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
multanova51
Joined: 03 Mar 2002
Posts: 75
Helped: 3
Location: Vatican
|
| 22 Aug 2004 13:27 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
Hi
Here we go again.........
Is just like the differences between flavours and coffee and tea....
I worked with different MWO - ADS -Designer - Genesys
They are not that different....... most smaller mfg's and labs have to think on the $ issue. So this I think one of the most key issues.
rgds
Mike
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DJ
Joined: 23 Jul 2004
Posts: 118
|
| 22 Aug 2004 22:27 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
Duncan_Widman, for most of my MMIC design AWR do the Job as well as ADS. Sometimes we have active device model in AWR or ADS that force me to use the needed softwar. AWR as the other mentioned is easier and friendly user. I direct and teach students and teach them the AWR for schematic simulation fpor that reason. We like to use the momentum as the EM simulator also for MMIC design.
If you are looking for more complicated features ADS is like MATLAB. I'm sure you can find the way to force AWT also to do the Job.
We use AWR also for layout presentation. It has nice 3D. It is very nice to see multylayer LTCC structure using the AWR.
D.J
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
randyding
Joined: 14 Jan 2004
Posts: 53
|
| 22 Aug 2004 23:02 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| that really depend on what you do, ADS is good for most of RF simulation
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andrew_luo
Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 15
|
| 23 Aug 2004 11:47 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| i think ADS is more comlete than the rest two, but the most important is profesional knowledge , simulate softwares are just an assistant.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Duncan_Widman
Joined: 17 Jun 2004
Posts: 7
|
| 25 Aug 2004 0:19 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| danelad wrote: |
Duncan_Widman, for most of my MMIC design AWR do the Job as well as @DS. Sometimes we have active device model in AWR or @DS that force me to use the needed softwar. AWR as the other mentioned is easier and friendly user. I direct and teach students and teach them the AWR for schematic simulation fpor that reason. We like to use the momentum as the EM simulator also for MMIC design.
If you are looking for more complicated features @DS is like MATLAB. I'm sure you can find the way to force AWT also to do the Job.
We use AWR also for layout presentation. It has nice 3D. It is very nice to see multylayer LTCC structure using the AWR.
D.J |
Hi danelad,
Thanks for your response. It sounds like you know the software pretty well. As you may have seen from my other posts, I work at AWR, and I just wanted to follow up if there were times when you thought you had to switch to ADS. I think it's pretty rare that someone would have to do this.
Unfortunately I think some people get the impression that because Microwave Office is easy to learn, that it can't also be used for complex problems, which is not true at all.
Duncan
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dderijken
Joined: 17 Jun 2002
Posts: 52
Location: Europe ...
|
| 26 Aug 2004 11:43 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
My choice
1. CST
2. DS
3. MO
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
molloy
Joined: 14 May 2003
Posts: 59
Helped: 1
Location: Milan
|
| 26 Aug 2004 16:01 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
Duncan,
i believe the most important reason is difference between the momentum and em-sight. When you design and simulate a planar structure with em-sight you have to pay attention in the number of cells (they cant be odd), and in many other things. Besides if you are a structure with a dimension >> of the other one the simulator give no results. In Momentum you are quite sure the simulator works and gives you good results
regards
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DJ
Joined: 23 Jul 2004
Posts: 118
|
| 27 Aug 2004 1:15 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
Duncan_Widman,
We prefare to use Momentun, EM simulation of ADS. If we use AWR for the schematic simulation then we creat an S parameters from the ADS momentun to use it for the AWR.
D.J
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rainer
Joined: 22 Jul 2002
Posts: 45
Location: new york
|
| 30 Aug 2004 16:58 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
Hi,
you can't compare these three software because they are different.
@DS is a circuital software and it is a very good software but for a beginner is not advised. This software have got even a planar (2D and half) EM module;
@WR is another circuital software and it is a good software recommended for a beginner user. Do not use the planar EM simulator the results are not good;
@ST is a 3D EM simulator it is very good especially for radiating problem.
Another good 3D EM simulator is @FSS especially for planar problem.
Bye.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Duncan_Widman
Joined: 17 Jun 2004
Posts: 7
|
| 30 Aug 2004 21:37 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
Hi danelad, molloy,
Ok, I understand what you are saying - when I was designing MMICs I would use AWR for all the simulation, optimization, etc, and use a combination of IE3D and EMSight for the EM simulations.
We understand that designers to have strong preferences for their EM simulators - that's why we created the EM Socket, so that other EM simulators could plug seamlessly into AWR. Simulators from Sonnet, MEMS Research, Optimal, and OEA have been announced, and more are coming.
rainer - I'm sorry, but your statement about EMSight is contradicted by years of good results. If you are having issues with the results you're getting and you're a current customer, please send them into support(at)mwoffice.com. There are just a few guidelines to setting up a problem for accurate simulation in EMSight; if you haven't used a 'closed' simulator like Sonnet before it might be new to you, but it's easy to learn.
Best Regards,
Duncan
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
prodigal
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 5
|
| 31 Aug 2004 18:12 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
| MWO for beginners, @DS for advanced applications
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
martinthorn
Joined: 06 Sep 2003
Posts: 17
|
| 04 Sep 2004 21:00 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
My preference is @DS because it can do so much IF you have
deep enough pockets to pay for the licences !
- System level simulations can be done
- All sorts of time/frequency RF sims can be done
- DSP/digital simulations can be linked to RF simulations (can the others do this ?) if you have the ptolemy license
- EM simulation can be done
- Circuit layout
- VHDL output from digital circuits (haven't tried this though)
- Control of GPIB test gear : direct import of test results
- Design tools and guides.. many example files to start from
- and a lot more !
I could go on but then it would sound even more like an advert for the
simulator and I don't work for @gilent !
Martin
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mhamed
Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 117
Helped: 8
|
| 04 Sep 2004 23:40 Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
MWO2003 is good for a beginner RF designer but i think not for professional because it use moment-based for solving maxwel's equetion and so it is so slow when the problem get big...
i find mwstudio more better than MWO. it is faster and its response is acceptable.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FreeSpirit
Joined: 12 Sep 2004
Posts: 9
|
| 12 Sep 2004 13:18 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
Why don`t you choose Ansoft HFSS and Designer??
Are they not very strong?
i think Designer is lack of library!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ocb_skyline
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Posts: 3
|
| 14 Sep 2004 8:07 Re: Which RF simulator is Better ! ! ! |
|
|
|
hi everyone,
i m now using IE3D, version 9.0, software to simulate a quasi yagi antenna.....but the result shows great difference from FDTD software, with same antenna design. Is there anyone who can enlighten me why is this so?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
