Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

A simulation file validation issue. #5

Open
youxch opened this issue Apr 15, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

A simulation file validation issue. #5

youxch opened this issue Apr 15, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@youxch
Copy link
Owner

youxch commented Apr 15, 2024

hair-an
A set of data was randomly selected and subjected to full wave simulation. But the expected results of the model were not obtained, and I don't know where the problem lies. Here's my object built by CST2022. I appreciate it if you could take your time to review the simulation file and see if you can identify the problem.
The data I choose is from file"Output_Max.txt",line 2.
7.000 71.000 40.000 -6.500 8.000 9.000 2.400 3.415 1015.000 9.002
By calculation, the actual value should be
l= 71.0 w= 40.0 wu1= 2.0 wu2= 32.0 wu4= 6.0 lu1= 3.87 wu3= 2.4 lu2= 5.81 wf= -6.5 h= 7
fL=2400MHz, fH=3415MHz Gain=9.002dBi
You can get my file by clicking this URL
https://github.com/hair-an/CST-repetition-file-of-Inverse-design-of-patch-antennas

@youxch
Copy link
Owner Author

youxch commented Apr 15, 2024

Thank you for your feedback. I have conducted a simulation validation using the parameters you provided, and the actual values indeed match your calculations. Below are the model structure, reflection coefficient, and realized gain at 2.45 GHz, which show very little difference from the predicted values. Please review them.
373e2d3b0425ebb6b9884021ad0bd84
f8af56ea25ce182419761d8a2a50248
a3e8b6cdd42d95d7989da018f5ccb57

@hair-an
Copy link

hair-an commented Apr 16, 2024

Thank you for your reply, It was my carelessness that caused errors in the simulation. After correctly placing the feeding position, although there were still some differences, a result similar to yours appeared, perhaps it may due to the size of the ground? Anyway it proves that the DLmodel is correct and your work is Inspired.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants