作者: E. Episkopou , S. Papantonis , W. J. Otter , S. Lucyszyn
DOI: 10.1109/TTHZ.2012.2208456
关键词: Commercial software 、 Software 、 Waveguide 、 Surface plasmon 、 Frequency domain 、 Electronic engineering 、 Benchmark (computing) 、 Electrical engineering 、 Terahertz radiation 、 Computer science 、 Resonator
摘要: Frequency-domain solvers are used extensively for modeling arbitrary metal-based terahertz structures. Four well-known commercially available electromagnetic (EM) software packages include HFSS™, CST Microwave Studio®, EMPro, and RSoft. However, there a number of operational issues that relate to how they can be obtain more meaningful accurate results. Even experienced users these similar may not fully appreciate some the subtle ambiguities in defining boundaries material parameters use THz applications. To this end, detailed comparative study has been undertaken, consultation with all four vendors. First, order avoid introducing ambiguities, frequency dispersion materials clearly defined from first principles; both intrinsic effective forms. Different models then introduced `metal-like' materials. act as benchmark structures, conventional air-filled metal-pipe rectangular waveguides, associated cavity resonators spoof surface plasmon waveguide have simulated, using raft different approaches; view illustrating quantifiable weaknesses commercial simulating This paper highlights intuitive logical approaches give incorrect results and, where possible, makes recommendations most appropriate solutions hitherto given Technical Notes.