According your personal experience and knowledge about these two CAD tools (HFSS and CST), what are their strengths and weaknesses as well as their advantages and disadvantages in design of RF/microwave circuit including for example antennas, amplifiers, filters or any circuit.
solving methods, toolset and CAD capabilities. It is rumored that while HFSS has faster CPU code, CST is better GPU-accelerated, but I did not check myself.
You do not solve amplifiers in wave simulators. But you can connect both to external circuit simulation projects.
It depends mainly on the geomtery of the structure and the required accuracy of the solution.
-The Ansoft HFSS frequency domain solver converges much faster than the CST time domain solver.
- HFSS based RF circuit and 3-D EM fields co-simulation significantly speeds up MRI coil design, because the simulation time no longer depends strongly on simulated port numbers and the length of the smallest mesh cell. To obtain reliable CST data, the CST solver accuracy requires a steady state monitor setting that is better than −60 dB, and the mesh size must be manually decreased step-by-step to ensure full coverage of the results.
Both based simulation techniques as given bellow:
HFSS is based on Finite Element Method (FEM)
CST is based upon Finite Integration in Technique (FIT)
I should mention, while Kumar is right, both suits have multiple solvers.
There is FEM solver in CST, and time-domain "transient" solver in HFSS.
both have eigenmode solvers and characteristic mode analysis with MOM.
HFSS was traditionally popular for ferrite device design. But it's code has stalled somewhere in 90's, and didn't advance. Neither eigenmode, nor transient is capable solving ferrite anisotropy, and driven'mode can not be gpu-accelerated.
It was advertised that CST can do both, solve ferrites better and faster with GPU. And CST supports all components of Polder's tensor import from say, Matlab, or other software, while HFSS only generates Polder Tensor internally, or imports just 4 components. Generally, only nonuniform DC field solved in Maxwell is imported in HFSS, making its solution somewhat inconsistent with magnetization not depending on that field. (See works by P. Queffelec group from U. De Bretagne)
Hello,
Both software are equally good, because they work on different computational numerical techniques. As I have used both software, one thing which is noticeable, is the PIC solver. If design of structure is included with electron beam, then CST software has numerous ways to modulate the structure and find the presence of electron beam as well as interaction of electron beam and RF. For antenna design, HFSS is good. HFSS is based on Finite Element Method (FEM) which is more accurate for designing antennas while CST is based upon Finite Integration in Technique (FIT) and is also popular among antenna designers due to ease in simulations. So, you can go for anyone, but for microwave tubes, use CST simulation tool.
Thanks,
Hello,
Both software are good for RF design. But there are some difference between them. HFSS works based on Finite Element Method (FEM), where CST works based upon Finite Integration in Technique (FIT). In HFSS you have to design the environment like radiation box in your own and assign them. But in CST you have to only design the structure. CST automatically assumes the Radiation box.
You can choose any one.
Best Regards
Anik Ghosh
Both are used for RF circuit design but the methodologies are different-
CST follows Finite Integration in Technique (FIT) method.
HFSS follow Finite Element Method (FEM).
CST BASED ON FINITE INTEGRATION TECHNIQUE (FIT)
ANSYS HFSS BASED ON FINITE ELEMENT METHOD (FEM)
IN CST RADIATION BOX IS AUTOMATICALLY SELECTED .
IN LATEST VERSION OF HFSS (2019) AUTOMATIC RADIATION BOX FACILITY IS THERE .
NOW USE THOSE SOFTWARE AS PER YOUR USE.
CST is more user friendly than the HFSS where we have to find and do many things on our own as the radiation box. The navigation tree structure of the CST makes it easy to understand for someone who is not familiar with the RF domain.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Correction