Jan 20, 2003 #1 E 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?
Jan 20, 2003 #2 B 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.
Jan 20, 2003 #3 E egliu Member level 4 Joined Jan 15, 2003 Messages 71 Helped 0 Reputation 0 Reaction score 0 Trophy points 1,286 Activity points 587 thanks
Jan 20, 2003 #4 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.
2.5 D The reason for calling 2.5D is that only planar green function is used and vertical variation is not consider.
Jan 20, 2003 #5 T toonafishy Full Member level 6 Joined Jun 18, 2002 Messages 368 Helped 38 Reputation 76 Reaction score 12 Trophy points 1,298 Location Earth Activity points 3,178 But I assume it can handle multiple layers and vias? I hope so since that's what I have been looking at lately.
But I assume it can handle multiple layers and vias? I hope so since that's what I have been looking at lately.
Jan 20, 2003 #6 Z 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.
Jan 20, 2003 #7 V VSWR Advanced Member level 3 Joined Feb 7, 2002 Messages 746 Helped 103 Reputation 206 Reaction score 24 Trophy points 1,298 Activity points 5,423 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. Click to expand...
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. Click to expand...
Jan 21, 2003 #8 L 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.
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.
Jan 21, 2003 #9 E 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.
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.