微波EDA网,见证研发工程师的成长!
首页 > 研发问答 > 微波和射频技术 > 电磁仿真讨论 > Simulation with IE3D

Simulation with IE3D

时间:03-25 整理:3721RD 点击:
I simulated a planar structure two times. At the first time from 2 to 3 GHz(meshing at 3 GHz) and the second from 2.3 to 2.6 GHz(meshing at 2.6 GHz). I get two reults, which are a lot different.

Could somebody tell me, which one is more accurate?

Thanks!

what r the results are ?
can it be that there was an error at one of the sim ?
give more info

I got two different resonance frequencies from two runs. I don't know,which one is more accurate.

Therefore my question is: if I want to get the most exact simulationresult between 2.3 and 2.6 GHz, how do I choose the meshing frequency and the freqency range of simulation?

Thanks!

Meshing is a complicated process. More mesh i.e. higher freq mesh settings generally means higher accuracy. To have confidence, usually do a mesh about x1.5 of mesh at highest freq and if it deviates from the result meshed at the highest frequency, you will need to revise your mesh to a denser one. However, it may compromise your simulation time and take up more memory. Try to mesh denser at the edges to increase accuracy and see if it make any differences.

Hope this helps.

Element7k

try to change mesh freq to 10GHZ
The result should be close.

pay attention to the mesh parameter controlling the number of cells per wavelength. Assuming that the same value is used in the two cases (mesh frequency at 3GHz and 2.6GHz), the two results should not be substantially different. Therefore, it is better to do a convergence study, that is, keep the mesh frequency fixed, and increase the number of cells per wavelength.

definitely 2.3 to 2.6 will be more accurate as having small freq band more ceels are attributed while solver is running giving more accurate results
alternately for largere band u can increase no. of freq. divisions accuracy will improve

上一篇:Slice view in HFSS
下一篇:最后一页

Copyright © 2017-2020 微波EDA网 版权所有

网站地图

Top