MWS vs. Sonnet

I hope EM3DS in Cheng's comment is not referring to a particular software, but all those 3D EM field solvers. Am I right?
I have to admit that it really caught my eyes.

Hi loucy,
I did mean EM3DS at w*w.memresearch.com.
cheers.

something new!
Can someone give a brief description on EM3DS.

Edited.

Hi all,
No one mentioned about EMPIRE (another 3d em simulator).
Can anybody give some idea about this software? I just heard this software.
regards,
lkuzu

hi all!
as an extension of discussion i suggest comparison of known 3d em software with remcom xfdtd.
i don't know this program. it is almost not mentioned here on elektroda.
but when we were going to buy cst mws, one guy had said the xfdtd has significant advantages.
it has the power mesh engine based on tetrahedras. it can simulate structure containing very great object and very small but important objects without accuracy losses. (he said). and so on.
has anyone some experience with this program?
best regards.
u_f_o

and about our theme: cst vs. sonnet.
we shouldn't compare programs with different spheres of the using (imho).
each has own advantages in own sphere. we have to study our task and decide which simulator to choose (3d or 2.5d).
cst long ago promised to include sonnet simulator in desing studio for layered structures simulation.
i hope this will soon occur.
best regards.
u_f_o

Edited.

Sooo.....
If all my design work is microstrip and stripline structures with layer to layer vias should I stick to 2.5D simulators? I have differing results M/W/O vs H/F/S/S and not quite sure which one to believe.

Edited.

thank you, wave-maniac.
info about CFDRC MAXWELL is very interesting for me. i'll read stuff on site of them. i ever earlier did not hear of this program.
you're right about xfdtd meshing - it has rectangular box as cell, really.
best regards.
u_f_o

I think the H@F@SS is the best.

for planar circuits, sonet is enough.

XFDTD's subgriding and user-defined mesh might be useful for some. The mesh file has some relatively simple format. You can generate it with your own program.
XFDTD is very limited. For example i couldn't find a way to define waveguide source; The 3D display takes a lot of time.

XFDTD's subgriding and user-defined mesh might be useful for some. The mesh file has some relatively simple format. You can generate it with your own program.
There are many things you can't see in XFDTD. For example i couldn't find a way to define waveguide source; The 3D display takes a lot of time.......

For the design of a microstrip antenna, which software is more accurate?
Ensemble or Sonnet? I use Ensemble but I don't know Sonnet....
Can Sonnet optimize the radiation pattern of a single patch antenna?
Thanks in advance
Lupin

Sonnet uses a closed box formulations and their Green's functions are simply series of sin and cos. Sonnet does have the open BC but I am not sure they consider the full spectra and not only the transversal modes for their "open" BC. To give you an example:
if you put a dipole in a waveguide (infinite) or in free-space you have different conditions in infinity - for the first case you have a traveling wave only and a discrete spestra, while in the second you have a Sommerfeld conditions at infinity and the full spectra included. So, I guess Sonnet is using the waveguide model while Ensemble (if my memory does not leak:)) is using the open-space formulation. Plus I think Ensemle is using a spatial domain GF, but that's of no importance for you at that point. So, my advise is to do it with 1. IE3D, 2. Ensemble, 3. .... IE3D is somewhat faster but at the end put the heavy machinery like HFSS for a checkup before production.
hope it helps

I heard that CST is the best. It is better than HFSS although I never ysed it.
Linda.

How can a person possibly claim sth. if he/she had never smelled it?
To say that CST is better than HFSS with no prior knowledge or experience is ludicurous or not for that forum.
Please stop the spam or get serious!