Jump to content

mel

Moderators
  • Content Count

    259
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

mel last won the day on October 26

mel had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About mel

  • Rank
    Super User

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Country
    South Africa
  • Are you University user?
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

1558 profile views
  1. The error is referring to the fact that the MLFMM is only for ELECTRICALLY large models, so models with at least 5 or more wavelengths in a direction. For the model you attached just switch off MLFMM. This will then be a standard MoM solution. P.S. You could do with finer meshing - maybe set a local mesh size on the metallic faces of the patches since they are the critical radiators.
  2. The Planar Multilayer Green's function is used to model your substrates and MLFMM is not supported together with the Green's Function. If you want to use MLFMM, you would have to use a finite substrate instead of infinite.
  3. If you add any voltage or current source the results will be available in POSTFEKO under Source data. It will also be in the OUT file. If not, please provide an example of where this data is not given?
  4. Inserting a capacitor onto a wire loop is very simple. Add a wire port and then add a load. You may need to split the loop and then Union the two parts again (or create multiple sections of loop which are Unioned together) to ensure you a vertex at the exact position where you want to place the port (load).
  5. The Output tab has more information: It seems your cir file does not meet the requirements. Have you worked through the ExampleGuide example "E.3.1 Dipole Matching Using a SPICE Network?"
  6. Yes, see "Automatic Meshing for Regions" in the Altair_Feko_User_Guide.pdf
  7. Feko will mesh the FEM tets according to the wavelength inside the medium, so definitely defining a conductivity will reduce the mesh size.
  8. You will need to do a full wave solution, so either MoM/FEM/MLFMM. Some suggestions: 1 Do a mesh convergence test on the reflector and target to determine what the coarsest mesh is you can use. You can vary the mesh sizes across the different parts/faces by using local mesh settings. I would suggest trying a mesh size of lambda/6.5 or maybe coarser. 2 It should be possible to replace the absorber with an equivalent cuboid of the same width and length but with some thickness inbetween the cone base and cone tip. The cones individual surface areas add many expensive dielectric triangles to the model. A single cuboid with width/length/height will be computationally cheaper. 3. Instead of running every model with all the available cores, rather run 2 models over half the angles with half the cores each. The model is not very large and the parallel efficiency is not perfect for increasing number of processes.
  9. Hi Marcus Is the reflector and sphere in a static position? So only the horn and absorber is moving?
  10. Hi Marcus Previously you stated:"To clarify the problems we face, please see attached .cfx (similar to our case), in such simulation, we spent several hours to simulate it." Today you stated:"Please see attached .out file run in our sever with 256 RAM. Even though we spent 1 hrs to solve it faster than our expectation." The *.out file shows a 1.1 hour solve time. Is this too long? Note that for S-parameters if you do not need S12 and S22 you can set the 2nd port on the S-parameter request to inactive. This will save you 1470.531 seconds (see out file) for the 2nd solution. The 2nd port will only act as a sink port then. Regarding the hallow sphere, I see stabilized MLFMM is activated. Note that it only applies to the metallic parts of the model and will run longer than for the case where stabilization is not active.
  11. Please attach the *.out file too.
  12. The workflow is not ideal. Let me not rather use that dreaded term:"...in the next version..." The solver runs a more in depth check of the whole mesh while Cadfeko does a very quick check and often misses these triangles. The workflow is to find the triangle numbers in the postprocessor (POSTFEKO) and go back to the preprocessor (CADFEKO) to find and fix them. Often the poor mesh is caused by poor CAD. Fixing the CAD is first prize, else you will need to fix the mesh. This video and this video should help.
  13. There was an issue with previous versions where a certain number of parallel processes did not report the triangle numbers to the out file. Please try a different number of parallel processes or just run the model with 1 process only. Then check the out file again if it reports the triangle numbers and find/view them in POSTFEKO.
  14. Are you sure you want to solve a model of size of around 17 mm from 16 to 23 Hz? Did you perhaps mean GHz? If so, then use 16e9 to 23e9 for the frequency.
  15. You can enable the Domain Green's Function (DGFM).
×
×
  • Create New...