![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 13 January 2015 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
The title of this page, /info/en/?search=EM_simulation_software, is EM Simulation Software. However, every technical definition of simulation involves time, and I don't think any of these programs involve time. The programs will allow one to calculate expected performance of antennas, other EM devices by mathematically modeling the device and using EM tools and computers. But none of this involves time. Brunnegd ( talk) 19:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Some of EM simulators do include time, i.e. FDTD algorithms. Some others are not (frequency-domain simulators). Frequency is the reciprocal of time, so technically the simulation results in time and frequency domains are interchangeable. The page has become obscure and devoid of FDTD simulators after The Banner user has arbitrarily deleted many entries. I has reverted his edits, so it must be fine now.
This article is not a reliable source of information. First of all it is more an overview than a comparison. Whether or not the listed properties of the softwares are relevant for a system/software decision is questionable. Secondly, the continous editing work of The Banner has stripped it from many relevant offers in this area, so that, as a result, the list has became biased and has actually adopted a more dramatic "advertising" flavour than ever before. I do work for one of those left out companies and have a quite decent overview over the relevant players in this market. The persistence of The Banner in editing this article makes me believe that further edits to this article from others are pointless. Therefore i would like to ask for a deletion of this article Martin Timm ( talk) 15:35, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello. As a WP:COI (I'm an employee of the company that produces CST Studio Suite), I'm posting this here.
Name | License | Windows | Linux | 3D | GUI | Convergence detector | Mesher | Algorithm | Area of application |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CST Studio Suite | commercial, academic | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Automatic, adaptive | FDTD/ FIT, FEM, MLFMM, MoM, SBR, PIC [1] | General purpose – statics, low-frequency, microwaves and RF, terahertz, photonics, particle accelerators, electronics |
A wide variety of packages are currently available, and some of the most popular EM software packages include [...] CST ( http://www.cst.com) microwave studio that utilizes the finite integration technique (FIT).
the three codes whose application is discussed in this book, viz. CST, FEKO and HFSS, have further established themselves as amongst the market leaders
Stephen Murray at CST ( talk) 09:25, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Pinging @ The Banner: who has taken good care of this article in the past, to garner their input. Spintendo 16:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
There are many notable EM simulation tools which are not listed, like: Sonnet, EMX, ADS, EMPRO or CST as mentioned above. The article is not useful and in some sense even misleading if the most used softwares are not listed. The definition of EM simulation software might allow to add many other softwares which nowadays use EM simulation to extend or to supersede conventional parasitic extraction. I know for sure that Mentor Graphics has EM simulator in their xACT tool (probably even in its predecessor PEX) for many years. Cadence also offers now EM simulation in their
RF package. Synopsis also offers a tool for parasitic extraction with built-in
field solver. Unfortunately I do not have time to add all these in sufficient quality and references.
Tzg6sa (
talk)
11:41, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
Why would there be a requirement for a software to have a wikipedia page in order to be on the list. The people searching for this page are obviously interested in knowing all the possible software packages, me included. This page is subject to censorship.Erik 17:44, 12 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
ErikBuer (
talk •
contribs)
After being confused by this article, I added a clarification explaining that "notable" means that a software package has a wikipedia page. This was quickly removed as being "superfluous". I don't understand why - the general meaning of notable has nothing to do with whether something has a wikipedia page or not. Why not be clear about what the criteria are for inclusion on the list, so that a random visitor will understand what he/she is looking at?
Latest additions to this page with several different entries for various configurations of the same software package EMWorks contradict the spirit of Wikipedia. I represent QuickField but sure every package in this list may provide several pages of advertisements instead of one short paragraph. If we go this way - this informative page will become huge and useless. Let's keep our product descriptions short and informative, it is Wikipedia, not advertisement portal! Vp1962 ( talk) 18:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 13 January 2015 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
The title of this page, /info/en/?search=EM_simulation_software, is EM Simulation Software. However, every technical definition of simulation involves time, and I don't think any of these programs involve time. The programs will allow one to calculate expected performance of antennas, other EM devices by mathematically modeling the device and using EM tools and computers. But none of this involves time. Brunnegd ( talk) 19:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Some of EM simulators do include time, i.e. FDTD algorithms. Some others are not (frequency-domain simulators). Frequency is the reciprocal of time, so technically the simulation results in time and frequency domains are interchangeable. The page has become obscure and devoid of FDTD simulators after The Banner user has arbitrarily deleted many entries. I has reverted his edits, so it must be fine now.
This article is not a reliable source of information. First of all it is more an overview than a comparison. Whether or not the listed properties of the softwares are relevant for a system/software decision is questionable. Secondly, the continous editing work of The Banner has stripped it from many relevant offers in this area, so that, as a result, the list has became biased and has actually adopted a more dramatic "advertising" flavour than ever before. I do work for one of those left out companies and have a quite decent overview over the relevant players in this market. The persistence of The Banner in editing this article makes me believe that further edits to this article from others are pointless. Therefore i would like to ask for a deletion of this article Martin Timm ( talk) 15:35, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello. As a WP:COI (I'm an employee of the company that produces CST Studio Suite), I'm posting this here.
Name | License | Windows | Linux | 3D | GUI | Convergence detector | Mesher | Algorithm | Area of application |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CST Studio Suite | commercial, academic | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Automatic, adaptive | FDTD/ FIT, FEM, MLFMM, MoM, SBR, PIC [1] | General purpose – statics, low-frequency, microwaves and RF, terahertz, photonics, particle accelerators, electronics |
A wide variety of packages are currently available, and some of the most popular EM software packages include [...] CST ( http://www.cst.com) microwave studio that utilizes the finite integration technique (FIT).
the three codes whose application is discussed in this book, viz. CST, FEKO and HFSS, have further established themselves as amongst the market leaders
Stephen Murray at CST ( talk) 09:25, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Pinging @ The Banner: who has taken good care of this article in the past, to garner their input. Spintendo 16:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
There are many notable EM simulation tools which are not listed, like: Sonnet, EMX, ADS, EMPRO or CST as mentioned above. The article is not useful and in some sense even misleading if the most used softwares are not listed. The definition of EM simulation software might allow to add many other softwares which nowadays use EM simulation to extend or to supersede conventional parasitic extraction. I know for sure that Mentor Graphics has EM simulator in their xACT tool (probably even in its predecessor PEX) for many years. Cadence also offers now EM simulation in their
RF package. Synopsis also offers a tool for parasitic extraction with built-in
field solver. Unfortunately I do not have time to add all these in sufficient quality and references.
Tzg6sa (
talk)
11:41, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
Why would there be a requirement for a software to have a wikipedia page in order to be on the list. The people searching for this page are obviously interested in knowing all the possible software packages, me included. This page is subject to censorship.Erik 17:44, 12 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
ErikBuer (
talk •
contribs)
After being confused by this article, I added a clarification explaining that "notable" means that a software package has a wikipedia page. This was quickly removed as being "superfluous". I don't understand why - the general meaning of notable has nothing to do with whether something has a wikipedia page or not. Why not be clear about what the criteria are for inclusion on the list, so that a random visitor will understand what he/she is looking at?
Latest additions to this page with several different entries for various configurations of the same software package EMWorks contradict the spirit of Wikipedia. I represent QuickField but sure every package in this list may provide several pages of advertisements instead of one short paragraph. If we go this way - this informative page will become huge and useless. Let's keep our product descriptions short and informative, it is Wikipedia, not advertisement portal! Vp1962 ( talk) 18:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)