agilent hfss

Hi friends;
I am a beginner in microwave engineering.
I would like to learn HFSS but i found two different version of this.
ANSOFT HFSS9 & HP HFSS5.5.
I would like to khonw:
what is the difference beetween them and which of them is the best.
Bests.

Ansoft should be the only provider of HFSS now by a statement in 2002 on the Agilent site. Agilent, if you do not know, is a spinoff of HP.


30 August 2002. Agilent High-Frequency Structure Simulator (HFSS) is no longer available from Agilent EEsof EDA, nor is HFSS technical support.

Ansoft Corporation is now the only source of HFSS and HFSS technical support.

Agilent HFSS User Documentation, Agilent EEsof EDA Knowledge Center

For the convenience of Agilent Technologies customers who are also users of HFSS, the last version of the Agilent HFSS user documentation and the HFSS entries in the Agilent EEsof EDA Knowledge Center remain online.

Hi,I use AnSOFT HFSS! I feel it is very good! I sugest you use it !

Hp hfss is more user friendly, but cost more memory at the same precision. In fact, the hp hfss is too old to do simulate.

Simulation in @gilent HFSS is very slow!
just as @gilent's momentum.
I prefer to design with @nsoft Hfss, it is really easy to use.
but i found that hfss 9.0 is slower than 8.0 or 8.5.

In the past (from 1990) HP marketed HFSS until version 4 (produced by Ansoft).
With version 5 there are two products: Ansoft HFSS and HP HFSS.
Now the only provider of HFSS is Ansoft.

Regards.

Hp HFSS is th older version of Ansoft HFSS.Orignally HFSS belonged to Agillent and was known as HP HFSS5.5.Later it was buy by Ansoft and the latest version of it is HFSS 9.

HP HFSS (v5) is not an older version of Ansoft HFSS.
Originally Ansoft created HFSS in 1989-1990 but the code was marketed by HP until version 4 (1994-1996).
Then, HP has developed his code (a new code, not a new version!) named HP HFSS v5;
instead Ansoft released a new version of HFSS 4,
Ansoft HFSS 5.

Regards.

Hi,

HP HFSS is an obsolete product, @gilent gave it up for some reason. However, in spite of being obsolete and out of the market, I still like very much one of its features - not realy a fundamental one but the one that helped a lot. They were using "depleted" AutoCad front end for drawing geometry. Indeed, on any course for using any EM simulator you will spend 80-90% of the time learning how to draw. Being a standard tool for drawing, AutoCad is familiar to lot of engineers (to me and my colleagues at least). At this stage (some 5-6 years ago) the state of the art in drawing front end was very low. The drawing editors were not user friendly and that idea seemed revolutionary to us.

Today, the state of the art of drawing interface is set much higher and some kind of standard way of defining and drawing geometry exists (I was amazed to see Ansoft HFSS 9.0 drawing - it looks like it was created in CST!).

flyhigh

I feel HFSS is very slow,but the application is more wide! CST is very fast and wide!

CTT and HFSS using deference method.
But many people give the CTS result not exact,why?
You can see the microwave enginering journal.

i endorse the view that Ansoft HFSS is definetly a better 3-D EM simulator than others like CST, old HP HFSS; It is recommended that HFSS be used only where 3-D structures are to be simulated as it is really heavy on the memory ; for planar structures ADS momentum is a good choice 8)

Hi, First I think Hfss is very useful in RF simulation, I don't know the first Hfss version. but I know the Hfss9.0 is very good

Ansoft HFSS 9 is recommended

before I used hfss8.0 for designing microwave cavity, computer results is good

Ansoft hfss 9.0 is better than hfss 8. ME looking for some tutorials on that.

Agilent momentum =>2.5D
Ansoft HFSS => 3D

Ansoft HFSS is much accurate than Agilent

i think HFSS 9.0 is good ,but is slow in some time!

I have tied both Ansoft9.0 and Hp 4.0.i found that Ansoft is more user friendly than Hp and also HP Drawing window is worse than Ansoft.

Ansoft HFSS is better.Now,there is nobody using HP HFSS!