Welcome to EDAboard.com

Welcome to our site! EDAboard.com is an international Electronic Discussion Forum focused on EDA software, circuits, schematics, books, theory, papers, asic, pld, 8051, DSP, Network, RF, Analog Design, PCB, Service Manuals... and a whole lot more! To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

Register Log in

2.5d simulator accuracy - some info

Status
Not open for further replies.

toonafishy

Full Member level 6
Joined
Jun 18, 2002
Messages
369
Helped
38
Reputation
76
Reaction score
12
Trophy points
1,298
Location
Earth
Activity points
3,187
vivaldi .hfss

I just finished a microstrip balun design and simulated it in M/W/O/(2.5D) and H/F/S/S (3D). The results were similar but not exactly the same. which got me thinking. In you experience, which 2.5D simulator results most closely matched your lab measurements of the final circuit. I'm thinking of M/W/O, S/o/n/n/e/t, Mo/m/e/n/t/u/m, E/n/s/e/m/b/l/e, etc. When I build it in the lab, I'll let you know how closely the results matched the sims.
 

loucy

Advanced Member level 1
Joined
Aug 26, 2001
Messages
414
Helped
24
Reputation
48
Reaction score
11
Trophy points
1,298
Activity points
4,657
I think the measurement is also very tricky. The error there should be taken into acount.
 

shou

Member level 4
Joined
Sep 5, 2001
Messages
77
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,286
Activity points
417
I also interesting in the accuracy of em tools such as H@f55 ,Mom, MW0 cT5 and 5snnet.
for antenna design, i think the @gi1ent Hf55 is accurate.
 

sugm

Member level 2
Joined
Dec 11, 2001
Messages
47
Helped
1
Reputation
2
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,288
Activity points
253
for 2.5D EM tool
accuracy
planar structure modeling
Ensemble, IE3D, Sonnet
planar antenna
IE3D
 

loucy

Advanced Member level 1
Joined
Aug 26, 2001
Messages
414
Helped
24
Reputation
48
Reaction score
11
Trophy points
1,298
Activity points
4,657
I think Momentum performs best in terms of accuracy.
 

shou

Member level 4
Joined
Sep 5, 2001
Messages
77
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,286
Activity points
417
what are you design using MOM,?
 

harkonnen

Member level 4
Joined
Apr 14, 2002
Messages
69
Helped
1
Reputation
2
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,288
Activity points
678
The accuracy all depends on many factors.
For example, is it a MMIC balun or a PCB microstrip balun?
Is the gap between the lines in the same magnitude as the thickness of the metal lines? It also comes down to fact if the skin depth is smaller than the metal thickness.

And most importantly: do you really know the exact geometry and dielectrics of your structure?

You have to take much care in evaluating your simulations and measurements.
The "best" simulator always is only "best" for a specific structure, application and goal (design time?).
 

filterman

Member level 2
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
52
Helped
1
Reputation
2
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,288
Activity points
512
1. Prof. David Pozar published a paper some years comparing those various tools:IE3D(Zeland),HFSS,Momentum, ensemble,etc.

He wrote that results were quite close, Momentum and IE3D were very accurate (but IE3D was much faster).
I designed a filter not long ago , and there were differences between Momentum, MWO and HFSS. we decided to follow the HFSS results for the production prototype.
Now the biggest difference was in the Return Loss parameter, which for filters is the most sensitive parameter in pass-band. There were differences in the rejection also , so we decided to implement HFSS version. But we still don't have results.
An collegue of mine compared MMIC passive simple components(caps,inductors,etc) and he claimed that Sonnet, MWO,Momentum, HFSS gave for simple cases very similar results compared to mesurements. so he is convinced that they all are the same.
Well for precise work you have to use the correct tool, and as we all know for certain work they should perform the same, but for other work each method has its advantages and cons.
 

eirp

Advanced Member level 1
Joined
Dec 11, 2001
Messages
466
Helped
29
Reputation
56
Reaction score
19
Trophy points
1,298
Location
Phase center
Activity points
5,142
filterman said:
1. Prof. David Pozar published a paper some years comparing those various tools:IE3D(Zeland),HFSS,Momentum, ensemble,etc.
Please, do you have these papers? Can you upload it??
Thanks in advance!

Eirp
 

loucy

Advanced Member level 1
Joined
Aug 26, 2001
Messages
414
Helped
24
Reputation
48
Reaction score
11
Trophy points
1,298
Activity points
4,657
Someone posted a conference paper written by the group of Pozar. I saw it in the disscussion on benchmarking, but I couldn't find it now. IE3D 4.? was used, I think. There is not much useful information on improving the accuracy of simulation.
 

sviodo

Member level 4
Joined
Jan 2, 2002
Messages
68
Helped
1
Reputation
2
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,288
Activity points
533
about 2.5D simulators:

In my experience properly used sonnet gives most accurate results just before momentum,
ie3d is good for "optimalization" because of very fast analysis but it's wise to finish project in one of above simulators.
Never used ensemble, no comment about this proggy then.

about 3D simulators:
I've just checked cst mw studio and i have to say that it's very usefull software for education purposes because of very friendly interface and easy postprocessing however hfss is much more PRO. If you use macros and you are able to bear strong cpu/ram requirements it's still the best choice. Moreover I don't agree with people who claim that this proggy lacks on accuracy.

With Regards,
 

filterman

Member level 2
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
52
Helped
1
Reputation
2
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,288
Activity points
512
D. M. Pozar, S. M. Duffy, S. D. Targonski, N. Herscovici, “A Comparison of Commercial Software Packages for Microstrip Antenna Analysis”, IEEE International Symposium on Antennas and Propagation, Salt Lake City, Utah, July 2000.
As you may observe it is not so old, they did not try to find the best, but to compare various criteria by tests run be experienced user and not by the companies themselves as is done regularly in comercial papers.
One interesting aspect was that software that might seem fast to learn for beginners might not be the fastest when used by experienced users of that software.
 

loucy

Advanced Member level 1
Joined
Aug 26, 2001
Messages
414
Helped
24
Reputation
48
Reaction score
11
Trophy points
1,298
Activity points
4,657
It seems to me that Sonnet and MWOffice give the same results when the circuit fits into a uniform rectangular grid. The main difference between these two is Sonnet provides a "diagonal fill" for irregular geometry, but this doesn't always improve the accuracy. Sonnet also offers some optimization features--sweeping some geometry parameters automatically.

When comparing Sonnet with IE3D or Momentum, there is always some shift in frequency, no matter how big the enclosure is in Sonnet, or whether the enclosure is simulated in IE3D.
 

Lupin

Full Member level 6
Joined
Jan 22, 2003
Messages
342
Helped
12
Reputation
24
Reaction score
9
Trophy points
1,298
Location
Italy
Activity points
3,235
I've realized microstrip patch antennas (probe-fed, single and multilayer structures), microsrtip and stripline components in UHF,L,S,X Bands.
The e.m. adopted code has been Ensemble 5,6,7,8 and CST Mws.
I can say that the measured data matches the predicted data in the most of the case.

Hope it can be useful.
Regards

Lupin
 

Lupin

Full Member level 6
Joined
Jan 22, 2003
Messages
342
Helped
12
Reputation
24
Reaction score
9
Trophy points
1,298
Location
Italy
Activity points
3,235
I've no idea bout HFSS.. can you say something about it and its accuray?

Thanks in advance
Lupin
 

toonafishy

Full Member level 6
Joined
Jun 18, 2002
Messages
369
Helped
38
Reputation
76
Reaction score
12
Trophy points
1,298
Location
Earth
Activity points
3,187
For HF$$ vs M*W*O* I find HF$$ underestimates the loss but M*W*O* underestimated the phase balance. This is for PCB microstrip stuff I'm working on.
 

eirp

Advanced Member level 1
Joined
Dec 11, 2001
Messages
466
Helped
29
Reputation
56
Reaction score
19
Trophy points
1,298
Location
Phase center
Activity points
5,142
BTW, IE3D 9.38 is out, fixing some minor bugs.
Z/e/l/a/n/d guys are very active with work on IE3D :lol:
Regards,
Eirp
 

filterman

Member level 2
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
52
Helped
1
Reputation
2
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,288
Activity points
512
EM software in general cannot calculate the influence of roughness on the loss, leading usually to optimistic loss.
To calculate loss they need to apply correction formulas based on experience or measurment. tHAT CAN CHANGE RESULTS BY 0-100% OR MORE.
 

shou

Member level 4
Joined
Sep 5, 2001
Messages
77
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,286
Activity points
417
All the eda tools are just a tool, they can make our design easily, but they can not instead of experiment.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Toggle Sidebar

Part and Inventory Search

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Top