Differences between HFSS Simulation Result and Agil ent's AD
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
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
ADS's simulating gives good results only for planar structures.
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.
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)
Did somebody compared IE3D, Momentum, Hffss,etc?
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 .