EM/Circuit Co-Simulation AWR: Microwave Office and CST

EM/Circuit Co-Simulation
AWR: Microwave Office
and CST: Microwave Studio
Agenda
•
Who is Applied Wave Research – AWR ?
•
EM Tools
– 2.5D Versus 3D
– CST Integration
– Auto Extraction for EM/Circuit Co-Simulation
•
Demonstrations
AWR - Corporate
•
A successful, fast growing EDA Company
– Winning and gaining market share (primarily against ADS)
– Over 800 customers, 150 universities, and 6000 design seats
•
Headquarters in El Segundo, California, USA and London, UK
– ~ 100 Employees
– AWR Recently acquired
from Finland
• A leading RF/RFIC simulation company
•
Worldwide Sales Channel
– 15 Distributors & resellers around Europe
– Direct sales in USA, UK, Finland, France
– 50% of AWR sales from Europe and Asia
•
Major funding rounds in 2003 and 2006
– Investors include CMEA Ventures & Synopsys and Intel
Our Mission:
Dramatically Increase the Productivity of High
Frequency Electronic Product Development
AWR - Global Customers
DEFENCE/AEROSPACE
COMMUNICATIONS
FOUNDRIES/OTHER
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Rohde & Schwarz
Selex Sensors (ex BAE Systems)
Selex Comms
Finmeccanica
EADS
Thales
Saab
Elisra
Rafael
Siemens
Alcatel Espace
Ericsson Defense
ESL Defence
Northrop Grumman
Boeing
Grintek
Qinetiq
Lockheed Martin
Chelton Group
Nokia
Ericsson Comms
Alcatel Comms
Motorola
Sony
Philips
Siemens
Lucent
Flextronics
Level 3
Broadcom
Skyworks
RFMD
Maxon
Panasonic
Fujitsu
L3/TRL Technologies
ST Micro
Philips Semi
Filtronic
Infineon
UMS
OMMIC
Epcos
Triquint Tx/Or
Jazz Semi
TSMC
NEC
M/A Com
Matsushita
Toshiba
Denso
Mitsubishi
Cisco
Over 800 customers, 6000 design seats &
1000s of successful end products
AWR - Management Team
Seasonedmanagement
managementteam
team
•• Seasoned
DaneCollins
Collins––CEO**
CEO**
–– Dane
Dr.Joe
JoePekarek
Pekarek––CTO
CTO
–– Dr.
TedMiracco
Miracco––VP
VPSales
Sales***
***
–– Ted
– Dr. Steve Maas – Chief Scientist
– Ron Patston – VP AP Sales*
– Sherry Hess – VP Marketing
• Experienced development team
– 40+ R&D with 15 have Ph.D.s
– 12 AE and support engineers
• Most with HF design experience
• EDA-savvy board
– Jim Solomon – Cadence Founder
The Most Experienced EDA Team in the
Analog, RF and Microwave Design Arena
(*)Agilent/EESof (**)Cadence veteran
(***)Both
AWR - A Unique Design Environment
Traditional EDA Systems
AWR 2007
Single Database
VSA
ID=M1
SWPVAR=0
PADJ=-10*log10(_Z0)
PBASE=sweep(stepped(-60,-20,2))
QAM_SRC
PWR=PBASE+PADJ
ID=A1
MOD=16-QAM
OUTLVL=PWRdB
OLVLTYP=SymbolEnergy
CTRFRQ=1900MHz
RATE=_DRATE
SRC
MEAS
NL_S
ID=S1
NET="AMP1900SystemsTest"
AWGN
ID=A3
PSD=-49+PADJdB
PHASE
ID=A4
SHFT=99Deg
QAM_RX
ID=A2
1
R
D
IQ
5
TP
ID=2
TP
ID=6
TP
ID=3
BER
ID=5
SWPVAR=PBASE
SWPTYP=Auto
2
VSA
ID=M1
SWPVAR=0
BER
3
4
TP
ID=4
PADJ=-10*log10(_Z0)
PBASE=sweep(stepped(-60,-20,2))
QAM_SRC
PWR=PBASE+PADJ
ID=A1
MOD=16-QAM
OUTLVL=PWRdB
OLVLTYP=SymbolEnergy
CTRFRQ=1900MHz
RATE=_DRATE
SRC
MEAS
NL_S
ID=S1
NET="AMP1900SystemsTest"
AWGN
ID=A3
PSD=-49+PADJdB
PHASE
ID=A4
SHFT=99Deg
QAM_RX
ID=A2
1
R
D
IQ
5
TP
ID=2
Netlists
Datafiles
Very Slow!
TP
ID=6
TP
ID=3
BER
ID=5
SWPVAR=PBASE
SWPTYP=Auto
2
BER
3
4
TP
ID=4
Unified
Data
Model
Very Fast!
Unmatched Interactivity & Productivity
AWR - Robust Open System Platform
AWR Harmonic Balance
Synopsys HSPICE®
AWR Design Capture
Composer Schematic I/F
CDL Netlister
Cadence Open Access
Silicon/GaAs libraries
Mentor Expedition
Mentor Boardstation
Cadence Allegro
Agilent ADS
AWR VSS
Cadence Spectre
Matlab
Cadence Spectre
AWR APLAC Simulators
Design
Capture
System
Design
Simulation/
Analysis
AWR Unified
Data Model
Layout
AWR Layout
GDSII import/export
Gerber import/export
DXF import/export
Cadence Open Access
Mentor Boardstation
Mentor Expedition
Cadence Allegro
AWR TestWave
AWR DRC
LVS/DRC
Extraction/
EM Socket
AWR EM Socket
CST
EMSight
Mentor Calibre
Cadence Diva
Cadence Assura
Helic
OEA
Optimal
Sonnet
Zeland
Flomerics
Ideal high-speed design “cockpit”
EM Tools - 2.5D Versus 3D
What are the Physics of EM simulation?
•
Numerical solution to Maxwell’s Equations in differential form
•
All commercial EM simulators use numerical techniques to solve the
same equations:
– Because for the vast majority of cases there is no direct analytical solution
– There are several methods of solving these equations, and therefore,
there are trade-offs in the chosen solution
• The problem get’s “simplified”
EM Tools - 2.5D Versus 3D
Techniques to Simplify Maxwell’s Equations
• Simplify the geometry
– Simplify the solver
• Could write a solver totally optimized for a very specific problem
– Very accurate and very fast
– Simplify the “geometry” of space
• Only consider subsets of space
– 3D vs. 2D
• Simplify the materials
– Simplify geometry/properties of the materials
• Isotropic, time-invariant materials
• Simplify the boundary conditions
– Nature and location of ground
– Open or closed boundary problem
EM Tools - 2.5D Versus 3D
Types of Field Solver
• Figure provided by, and with permission of:
– Dr Qianqian Fang
http://nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/~fangq/cv/CV_Qianqian_Fang.htm
EM Tools - 2.5D Versus 3D
Types of Field Solver
•
3 D Arbitrary – CST, Optimal O-Wave, HFSS
–
–
–
–
•
3D Planar - EMSight, Sonnet, Momentum, Zeland
–
–
–
–
•
Method of Moments
Planar circuits that Includes via structures
3D fields and currents are solved for
Surface mesh technique
2 ½ D Planar
–
–
–
–
•
Finite Element … Frequency Domain (Steady State Analysis)
Finite Difference … Time Domain (FDTD) Transient Analysis + FFT
Full 3D fields and currents are solved
Volume mesh technique
Full wave, FDTD
Planar circuits without via structures
3D fields are solved but only 2D currents are solved
Surface mesh techniques
2D Planar - Specific targeted modeling
–
–
–
Boundary element modeling (BEM) or Finite Element Modeling (FEM)
Static or Quasi static or Full wave
Cross section or planar mesh techniques
EM Tools - 2.5D Versus 3D
3D Planar EM Simulation (or 2.5D with via’s)
• Simplification to Maxwell’s Equations
– Currents in 3D (fixed in vias) & fields in 3D
– Surface Meshing technique on the surface of the metal structures
• Good to Excellent for 3D planar circuits
– ICs
– PCBs
– Modules
• All commercially available tools today use one of two Method of
Moments (MoM) techniques:
– Closed boundary MoM (AWR’s EMSight)
– Open boundary MoM
EM Tools - 2.5D Versus 3D
Disadvantages:
• Thick Metal
– i.e. GaAs Spiral Inductors
• Dielectric Bricks
– i.e. DRO pucks
• Arbitrary Mesh
– i.e. Radial Stubs
• True 3D structures
– Antennas, Parabolic Dishes
– Cavities
– Transitions
• Coax to Board
• Waveguide to Coax
EM Tools – AWR/CST Integration
AWR EM Socket now with CST Microwave Studio 2006B
Demonstration
EM Tools – Auto Extraction for Co-Simulation
Demonstration
Thank You