Hawaslsh
Full Member level 3
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2015
- Messages
- 164
- Helped
- 5
- Reputation
- 10
- Reaction score
- 7
- Trophy points
- 1,298
- Location
- Washington DC, USA
- Activity points
- 3,422
The ~ 30% difference I think could have many
explantions (e.g. thickness, skin effects,
proximity effects)
Can you show the mesh details (mesh preview) in the radial stub region?
Yes, that would be much appreciated. Usually I have access to a few other tools, but working from home I can't simply walk over and restart the license servers. I attached a zip file with 6 files. Three DXF files: the 24 GHz Patch, the 5.8GHz Patch, and the 5.8 GHz slot. Also included are 3 s1p files which are the measured results for each of the structures.Can you upload the geometry in DXF format, so that we can double check using another EM solver?
Response frequency is identical...deep of S11 may have minor importance if is already below -10dB
I tried to add the solder mask in my prior work, but the 2.5D simulator I am using does a pretty poor job when the metal thickness is greater than a dietetic layer attempting to cover it. I followed up with our vendor for a more detailed datasheet on their LPI and an approximate thickness they would predict. Once I switch to a FEM solver I will start to include the layer.If we add solder resist, that shifts down the antenna resonance a lot!
Yes, i did use Axiem. We had good success with Axiem in regards to the patch antennas, so we made the drastic assumption it would be OK with the slot. I suppose that might have to do with the fact Axiem usually assumes an infinite ground plane, and our slot most definitely is not infinite. I tried the same problem is Analyst, Microwave office's FEM solver. It got closer to the measured value, but still quite a bit off from the measured results.Axiem (which probably you used also) get identical results as you, but HFSS with the same settings shows results identical as your measurements.
So in this particular case, I would trust more your measurements, than some simulations...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?