微波EDA网,见证研发工程师的成长! 2025濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閸涘﹥鍙忛柟缁㈠枟閸庡顭块懜闈涘缂佺嫏鍥х閻庢稒蓱鐏忣厼霉濠婂懎浜惧ǎ鍥э躬婵″爼宕熼鐐差瀴闂備礁鎲¢悷銉ф崲濮椻偓瀵鏁愭径濠勵吅闂佹寧绻傚Λ顓炍涢崟顓犵<闁绘劦鍓欓崝銈嗙箾绾绡€鐎殿喖顭烽幃銏ゅ川婵犲嫮肖闂備礁鎲¢幐鍡涘川椤旂瓔鍟呯紓鍌氬€搁崐鐑芥嚄閼搁潧鍨旀い鎾卞灩閸ㄥ倿鏌涢锝嗙闁藉啰鍠栭弻鏇熺箾閻愵剚鐝曢梺绋款儏濡繈寮诲☉姘勃闁告挆鈧Σ鍫濐渻閵堝懘鐛滈柟鍑ゆ嫹04闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁惧墽鎳撻—鍐偓锝庝簼閹癸綁鏌i鐐搭棞闁靛棙甯掗~婵嬫晲閸涱剙顥氬┑掳鍊楁慨鐑藉磻閻愮儤鍋嬮柣妯荤湽閳ь兛绶氬鎾閳╁啯鐝曢梻浣藉Г閿氭い锔诲枤缁辨棃寮撮姀鈾€鎷绘繛杈剧秬濞咃絿鏁☉銏$厱闁哄啠鍋撴繛鑼枛閻涱噣寮介褎鏅濋梺闈涚墕濞诧絿绮径濠庢富闁靛牆妫涙晶閬嶆煕鐎n剙浠遍柟顕嗙節婵$兘鍩¢崒婊冨箺闂備礁鎼ú銊╁磻濞戙垹鐒垫い鎺嗗亾婵犫偓闁秴鐒垫い鎺嶈兌閸熸煡鏌熼崙銈嗗12闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁惧墽鎳撻—鍐偓锝庝簼閹癸綁鏌i鐐搭棞闁靛棙甯掗~婵嬫晲閸涱剙顥氬┑掳鍊楁慨鐑藉磻閻愮儤鍋嬮柣妯荤湽閳ь兛绶氬鎾閳╁啯鐝栭梻渚€鈧偛鑻晶鎵磼椤曞棛鍒伴摶鏍归敐鍫燁仩妞ゆ梹娲熷娲偡閹殿喗鎲奸梺鑽ゅ枂閸庣敻骞冨鈧崺锟犲礃椤忓棴绱查梻浣虹帛閻熴垽宕戦幘缁樼厱闁靛ǹ鍎抽崺锝団偓娈垮枛椤攱淇婇幖浣哥厸闁稿本鐭花浠嬫⒒娴e懙褰掑嫉椤掑倻鐭欓柟杈惧瘜閺佸倿鏌ㄩ悤鍌涘 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁惧墽鎳撻—鍐偓锝庝簼閹癸綁鏌i鐐搭棞闁靛棙甯掗~婵嬫晲閸涱剙顥氬┑掳鍊楁慨鐑藉磻閻愮儤鍋嬮柣妯荤湽閳ь兛绶氬鎾閻樻爠鍥ㄧ厱閻忕偛澧介悡顖氼熆鐟欏嫭绀€闁宠鍨块、娆戠磼閹惧墎绐楅梻浣告啞椤棝宕橀敐鍡欌偓娲倵楠炲灝鍔氭繛鑼█瀹曟垿骞橀懜闈涙瀭闂佸憡娲﹂崜娑㈡晬濞戙垺鈷戦柛娑樷看濞堟洖鈹戦悙璇ц含闁诡喕鍗抽、姘跺焵椤掆偓閻g兘宕奸弴銊︽櫌婵犮垼娉涢鍡椻枍鐏炶В鏀介柣妯虹仛閺嗏晛鈹戦鑺ュ唉妤犵偛锕ュ鍕箛椤掑偊绱遍梻浣筋潐瀹曟﹢顢氳閺屻劑濡堕崱鏇犵畾闂侀潧鐗嗙€氼垶宕楀畝鍕厱婵炲棗绻戦ˉ銏℃叏婵犲懏顏犵紒杈ㄥ笒铻i柤濮愬€ゅΣ顒勬⒒娴e懙褰掓晝閵堝拑鑰块梺顒€绉撮悞鍨亜閹哄秷鍏岄柛鐔哥叀閺岀喖宕欓妶鍡楊伓闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁炬儳缍婇弻锝夊箣閿濆憛鎾绘煕閵堝懎顏柡灞诲€濆畷顐﹀Ψ閿旇姤鐦庡┑鐐差嚟婵敻鎳濇ィ鍐ㄧ厴闁瑰鍋涚粻鐘绘⒑缁嬪尅鏀绘い銊ユ楠炲牓濡歌閸嬫捇妫冨☉娆忔殘閻庤娲栧鍫曞箞閵娿儺娓婚悹鍥紦婢规洟姊绘担铏瑰笡濞撴碍顨婂畷鏉库槈濮樺彉绗夊┑鐐村灦鑿ゆ俊鎻掔墛缁绘盯宕卞Ο鍝勵潔濡炪倕绻掗崰鏍ь潖缂佹ɑ濯撮柤鎭掑劤閵嗗﹪姊洪棃鈺冪Ф缂佺姵鎹囬悰顔跨疀濞戞瑦娅㈤梺璺ㄥ櫐閹凤拷
首页 > 研发问答 > 微波和射频技术 > 天线设计和射频技术 > Difference of resonant frequency between theory and simulation

Difference of resonant frequency between theory and simulation

时间:04-05 整理:3721RD 点击:
Hi all members! I'm a newbie in antenna design. I have a question hope every one help.

I'm designing a rectangular patch antenna. I used formulas in book Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design of Balanis. But when i simulate by using CST transient solver, the resonant frequency is quite different from the theory. Theory is 3.5 GHz and result of simulation is 3.36 GHz. I'm use FR-4 lossy for substrate. So i want to ask everyone why have a difference between theory and simulation in CST?
Thank you very much!

As a simulator executes each frame, it does so by stepping forward a small amount of time (a time-step).

The larger the time-step, the more 'coarse' the simulator results are. The more simulation departs from reality.

There is always some error in the simulation, because it is impractical to make the time-steps infinitely small.

The difference between 3.5 and 3.36 is only 4.17 percent.
See if it makes much difference when you change the time step.

Also as a secondary influence, change ohmic resistances in components.

Thank you for your help! But could you show me how can i change the time step in CST studio? I usually use default setting in transient solver!

Check this out:
https://www.edaboard.com/thread318946.html
https://www.edaboard.com/thread318299.html

Also you can try some other simulator, results can be different! At your frequency trial version limitations will be acceptable. Some simulators are better with antennas.

The best way i found to check if simulator is ok:

1. Find PCB of antenna with known substrate and center frequency
2. Measure antenna sizes using ruler
3. Put substrate parameters and antenna size to simulator

Then you will see if it is ok, and what simulator settings need to be tweaked.

If you have good equipment you can make test PCBs, measure their S-parameters and see if simulator results are ok.

Check FR4 data for simulation. If selected from menu in simulator it can be different from what you used for calculation.

Sorry, I have no experience with CST.

You may find related discussions, if you click the similar threads listed at the bottom of this page.

Or use the Search. Here is one thread which turned up.

https://www.edaboard.com/thread114189.html

I have tried to increase the line per wavelength. The S-parameter is deeper at resonant frequency but it is not change resonant frequency. I was thinked because dielectric of substrate change with frequency but seem this is not main cause :(
@Terminator3: Thank you so much. But my condition doesn't allow me do that. And my purpose is explain why it happen in CST :)
@Borber: I use data in CST to calculate.

I am not sure which equations/theory you have used, but all patch antenna equations I have seen are only approximate.

@volker@muehlhaus
I attached my CST file. In this have all my calculation dimension. Could you check or recalculate for help me? Thank you!
My purpose is design an Rectangular patch antenna use coaxial probe feed. F0 is 3.5. height of substrate is 1.6. substrate is FR4 lossy, epsilon is 4.3

Sorry, I am using other EM tools and don't have CST. What I was trying to say: don't expect that patch antenna design equations are accurate. They are based on approximations.

Thank you! I just a few worried because i don't know what is tolerance. May be 4% is ok with FR4 :D

Copyright © 2017-2020 微波EDA网 版权所有

网站地图

Top