Welcome to EDAboard.com

Welcome to our site! EDAboard.com is an international Electronics 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.

Differences between HFSS Simulation Result and Agil ent's AD

Status
Not open for further replies.

zesong

Newbie level 5
Joined
Nov 15, 2003
Messages
10
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,281
Activity points
92
Dear Friends,

It will be great if anyone can advise me on the differences between the solver on HFSS Simulation and Agilent's ADS Momentum.

Will they produce the same "EXACT" Simulation Result if given the same
design?

Your Advice is needed.

Many Thanks in advance !
Best Regards,
Toh
 

Ghost Tweaker

Full Member level 1
Joined
Nov 11, 2003
Messages
95
Helped
2
Reputation
4
Reaction score
2
Trophy points
1,288
Activity points
992
Re: Differences between HFSS Simulation Result and Agil ent'

As far a I know, agilent momentum is 2.5D and thus limited to planar structures. But vertical interconnection between planes like vias are allowed. The result for this type of structure are more accurate and faster than with HFSS. With HFSS you can basically simulate any real 3D structure but it is less accurate and more time consuming than Momentum for planar structures...Thus it depends of your needs...

Hope it will help
 

borich_03

Full Member level 2
Joined
Oct 7, 2003
Messages
142
Helped
20
Reputation
42
Reaction score
6
Trophy points
1,298
Activity points
1,148
Re: Differences between HFSS Simulation Result and Agil ent'

ADS's simulating gives good results only for planar structures.
 

clk

Member level 1
Joined
Jun 5, 2001
Messages
32
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,286
Activity points
185
Re: Differences between HFSS Simulation Result and Agil ent'

I've used both software and I don't think @DS is more accurate and faster than HF@S. It depends on the structures you want to simulate and how long you want to wait for results. If you try to use @DS to simulate a circular inductor with ground patterning you will have to wait a long time for results...
Anyway, If you want to simulate planar structures use @DS because it is easier to learn. It is simple to design the models, to feed it and to post-process.
 

yorkyong

Junior Member level 3
Joined
Jun 20, 2003
Messages
26
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,281
Activity points
255
Yes, I agree with clk.
Momentum is time consuming, even in simulating planar structures. I prefer use @ds in schematic level design and verify them in Hfs or @nsoft edas(@nsemble)
 

filterman

Member level 2
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
52
Helped
1
Reputation
2
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,288
Activity points
512
Did somebody compared IE3D, Momentum, Hffss,etc?
 

XuQing

Member level 2
Joined
Feb 19, 2004
Messages
50
Helped
1
Reputation
2
Reaction score
1
Trophy points
1,288
Activity points
421
Re: Differences between HFSS Simulation Result and Agil ent'

filterman,

I have simulated a microstrip power divider using IE3D and HFSS. Simulation result of IE3D is better than HFSS's compared with testing data .
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Top