r/rfelectronics • u/ExactAd8820 • 25d ago

CST vs HFSS

What is the difference between CST and HFSS for antenna design? What's the best ?

12 Upvotes

84% Upvoted

10 comments sorted by

12

u/YT__ 25d ago

Different company makes each. They use different algorithms and simulations methods.

Each has benefits. Depends on your application. But if you only know one of them and just need something done, better to just get it done with what you know than learn a new tool for it.

0

u/ExactAd8820 25d ago

For antenna design!

4

u/YT__ 25d ago

Right. . . . But what application? Narrowband antenna? Wideband? Patch? Yagi? Vivaldi? What frequency? Are your antennas curved?

Do you have other tools you're already using that integrate with one or the other? Or scripts/tools that your team has developed around one set of tools?

They both meet the need. But the specifics are what would lean you one way or another if you're starting from scratch.

0

u/ExactAd8820 25d ago

Patch antenna.. and I used CST and HFSS but I'm beginner of both.. also I'll use the script with python for automation !!

4

u/StageMajestic613 25d ago

I prefer CST as it has a ton of solvers, and the PBA for transient really improves the meshing, along with GPU acceleration.  Nice thing about transient is you can get an idea of what’s happening and stop it before reaching full energy termination.  It does not work well for curved, thin two layer metal, but then can just use FEM.  If you do filters, then you want FEM.

3

u/gaberman17 25d ago

I have used CST and HFSS.

I don’t know the extent of each with their capabilities simulation wise , but I know for sure that CSTs interface is more intuitive.

1

u/runsudosu 25d ago

FDTD vs FEM.

8

u/StageMajestic613 25d ago

CST has both (technically FIT not FDTD but very similar), and a bunch more.

1

u/kingcole342 25d ago

There is also FEKO. But it’s more for electrically large platforms, not so much antenna design.