Software Solutions for Antenna Design Exploration: A Comparison of Packages, Tools, Techniques and Algorithms for Various Design Challenges

Vic Grout, Mobayode Akinsolu, Bo Liu, Pavlos Lazaridis, Keyur Mistry, Zaharias D. Zaharis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Numerous software packages exist for solving antenna design optimization problems, with many of these employing a variety of approaches, leading, in turn, to variations in optimization performance. Antenna designers, often not fully schooled in optimization, can be confused as to which algorithm in which software package should be used. A wrong choice can cause the failure of the optimization or the expending of considerable time on the computationally expensive 3D electromagnetic (EM) simulations involved. While it is true that the various algorithms, combined with the variety of complex challenges found in different real-world scenarios make a direct comparison among tools difficult, a robust attempt at such an evaluation is overdue.

LanguageEnglish
Article number8699103
Pages48-59
Number of pages12
JournalIEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine
Volume61
Issue number3
Early online date25 Apr 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2019

Fingerprint

antenna design
Antennas
computer programs
Software packages
optimization
design optimization
antennas
electromagnetism
evaluation
causes
simulation

Cite this

@article{db7e97fd56984d57ae4dd4ec1f880737,
title = "Software Solutions for Antenna Design Exploration: A Comparison of Packages, Tools, Techniques and Algorithms for Various Design Challenges",
abstract = "Numerous software packages exist for solving antenna design optimization problems, with many of these employing a variety of approaches, leading, in turn, to variations in optimization performance. Antenna designers, often not fully schooled in optimization, can be confused as to which algorithm in which software package should be used. A wrong choice can cause the failure of the optimization or the expending of considerable time on the computationally expensive 3D electromagnetic (EM) simulations involved. While it is true that the various algorithms, combined with the variety of complex challenges found in different real-world scenarios make a direct comparison among tools difficult, a robust attempt at such an evaluation is overdue.",
keywords = "Antenna design, CST microwave studio, HFSS, Matlab, FEM, FDTD, FEKO, Genetic Algorithms, optimization algorithms, Trusted Region Framework optimization, Surrogate-model-assisted evolutionary algorithm, Differential evolution (DE), particle swarm optimisation (PSO), Radiation pattern shaping",
author = "Vic Grout and Mobayode Akinsolu and Bo Liu and Pavlos Lazaridis and Keyur Mistry and Zaharis, {Zaharias D.}",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1109/MAP.2019.2907887",
language = "English",
volume = "61",
pages = "48--59",
journal = "Transactions of the IRE Professional Group on Radio Telemetry and Remote Control",
issn = "1045-9243",
publisher = "IEEE Computer Society",
number = "3",

}

Software Solutions for Antenna Design Exploration : A Comparison of Packages, Tools, Techniques and Algorithms for Various Design Challenges. / Grout, Vic; Akinsolu, Mobayode; Liu, Bo; Lazaridis, Pavlos; Mistry, Keyur; Zaharis, Zaharias D.

In: IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 61, No. 3, 8699103, 01.06.2019, p. 48-59.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Software Solutions for Antenna Design Exploration

T2 - Transactions of the IRE Professional Group on Radio Telemetry and Remote Control

AU - Grout, Vic

AU - Akinsolu, Mobayode

AU - Liu, Bo

AU - Lazaridis, Pavlos

AU - Mistry, Keyur

AU - Zaharis, Zaharias D.

PY - 2019/6/1

Y1 - 2019/6/1

N2 - Numerous software packages exist for solving antenna design optimization problems, with many of these employing a variety of approaches, leading, in turn, to variations in optimization performance. Antenna designers, often not fully schooled in optimization, can be confused as to which algorithm in which software package should be used. A wrong choice can cause the failure of the optimization or the expending of considerable time on the computationally expensive 3D electromagnetic (EM) simulations involved. While it is true that the various algorithms, combined with the variety of complex challenges found in different real-world scenarios make a direct comparison among tools difficult, a robust attempt at such an evaluation is overdue.

AB - Numerous software packages exist for solving antenna design optimization problems, with many of these employing a variety of approaches, leading, in turn, to variations in optimization performance. Antenna designers, often not fully schooled in optimization, can be confused as to which algorithm in which software package should be used. A wrong choice can cause the failure of the optimization or the expending of considerable time on the computationally expensive 3D electromagnetic (EM) simulations involved. While it is true that the various algorithms, combined with the variety of complex challenges found in different real-world scenarios make a direct comparison among tools difficult, a robust attempt at such an evaluation is overdue.

KW - Antenna design

KW - CST microwave studio

KW - HFSS

KW - Matlab

KW - FEM

KW - FDTD

KW - FEKO

KW - Genetic Algorithms

KW - optimization algorithms

KW - Trusted Region Framework optimization

KW - Surrogate-model-assisted evolutionary algorithm

KW - Differential evolution (DE)

KW - particle swarm optimisation (PSO)

KW - Radiation pattern shaping

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85066983014&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1109/MAP.2019.2907887

DO - 10.1109/MAP.2019.2907887

M3 - Article

VL - 61

SP - 48

EP - 59

JO - Transactions of the IRE Professional Group on Radio Telemetry and Remote Control

JF - Transactions of the IRE Professional Group on Radio Telemetry and Remote Control

SN - 1045-9243

IS - 3

M1 - 8699103

ER -