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

may i confirm the EM tools used in MWO is 2.5 D MOM?

Status
Not open for further replies.

egliu

Member level 4
Joined
Jan 15, 2003
Messages
71
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,286
Activity points
587
method of MWO EM tools

may i confirm the EM tools used in MWO is 2.5 D MOM?
 

backdoor_

Member level 2
Joined
Jun 1, 2001
Messages
42
Helped
4
Reputation
8
Reaction score
4
Trophy points
1,288
Activity points
217
Yes, you are correct.
They actaully like to call it planar 3D instead of 2.5D.
 

yingyang

Full Member level 2
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
126
Helped
2
Reputation
4
Reaction score
2
Trophy points
1,298
Activity points
862
2.5 D

The reason for calling 2.5D is that only planar green function is used and vertical variation is not consider.
 

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
But I assume it can handle multiple layers and vias? I hope so since that's what I have been looking at lately.
 

zgx

Member level 1
Joined
Feb 25, 2002
Messages
38
Helped
1
Reputation
2
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,286
Activity points
162
just as it can handle plane multilayers and vias, it is called 2.5D, but not 2D.
 

VSWR

Advanced Member level 3
Joined
Feb 7, 2002
Messages
749
Helped
103
Reputation
206
Reaction score
23
Trophy points
1,298
Activity points
5,425
MWO Multiple layer performance

Multiple layer performance and vias in MWO is not so accurate. CST MWS is *MUCH* better here based on our experience.


toonafishy said:
But I assume it can handle multiple layers and vias? I hope so since that's what I have been looking at lately.
 

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
If you have small vias, I don't see the reason MWS is much better. I think small via is a big trouble for time domain method.
 

egliu

Member level 4
Joined
Jan 15, 2003
Messages
71
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,286
Activity points
587
via size

In 2.5D ensemble, the via hole is assumed to be a infinite thin even you draw a big one. but I can not sure if the same assumption is in MWO.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Toggle Sidebar

Part and Inventory Search

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Top