Simulation RF
Simulation RF
(OP)
I want to know which one of these two shofts microwave office 2002 and Genesys 8.11 is the much harder.
thanks
thanks
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS Contact USThanks. We have received your request and will respond promptly. Come Join Us!Are you an
Engineering professional? Join Eng-Tips Forums!
*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail. Posting Guidelines |
|
Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.
Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:
Register now while it's still free!
Already a member? Close this window and log in.
RE: Simulation RF
I use both. MW office is much easier to learn, much convienient user interface. But Genesys has some wizards to design circuits. So you can use these wizards, and can go to MWO to compare the results. Sometimes, Genesys gives wrong results. For example, I designed a filter at center freq. 14 GHz, but in EM simulations, I saw 14.5 GHz, 500 Mhz discrepancy is really much. You have to be carefull when using Genesys.
I think this explanation is enough.
regards,
lkuzu
RE: Simulation RF
RE: Simulation RF
When You use EM simulations You will always have freq. shift. For example in ADS differences between model simulation and momentum, on freq. like 14 GHz are usually 1 - 2 GHz. I always trust momentum. Model analysis I use only to estimate start parameters.
To max232:
To compare two softwares You have to take into account:
-user interface
-for em simulation which method is used (Mom or TDFD or ...) its important for possibilities and memory of Your computer. Of course if You need it.
-what kind of application You will run on it (available models, possibility of exporting and importing of results, models, etc.)
Then You have o decide yourself what suits You the best. Personally I think that MW office is quite good when we talk about possibilities and interface. Also I know results of some simulations compared with ADS and HFSS. Results from MWoffice were almost identical with measurements of designed device when ADS and HFSS were rather far away from the truth.
Buding.