Evaluation of reflection cross-section simulation CST Microwave Studio accuracy for geometrically typical objects

Аuthors

Damaratsky I. A.

Lyulka Desing Bureau, 13, Kasatkina str., Moscow, 129301, Russia

e-mail: IDamaratskiy@yandex.ru

Abstract

The aim of work was to evaluate CST I- and CST А-Solver module accuracy for calculating reflection cross-section (RCS) of objects with typical geometric form. The methodology of accuracy evaluating comprised: experimental measuring of RCS angular diagrams for work objects, diagrams calculating in CST I- and CST А-Solver, calculating of deviations between calculated and experimental diagrams per ranged characteristic coefficients, root-mean-square errors, average relative errors. Ranged characteristic coefficient characterized linear dependence degree between compared diagrams and ensured root-mean-square error and average relative error to be good evaluation of CST accuracy. In the work, it was supposed, that errors are good evaluations, if ranged characteristic coefficient value is equal or bigger, than 0.7. The work was executed for electromagnetic wave (EMW) with following frequencies: 2, 3, 4, 8, 10 GHz; both horizontal and vertical EMW polarization was considered to make the investigation complete.
Cylinder and corner reflector were work objects with experimental data measured in ITAE of Russian Academy of Sciences. So it was shown, that CST I- Solver and CST А-Solver calculate RCS for objects of typical geometric form with appropriate accuracy, which is conformed to accuracy of modern experiments. Difference between CST I-Solver accuracy and CST А- Solver accuracy was non-significant — at a level of 0,6dB. Since CST А-Solver demands of less time for calculating, than CST I-Solver, CST А-Solver is preferred to evaluate RCS for object of typical geometric form quickly and sufficiently exactly. CST I-Solver is preferred being demanded sufficiently exact evaluation of object RCS diagram character.

Keywords:

reflection cross-section, characteristic coefficient, root-mean-square error, accuracy

References

1. Vasil’chenko A., Shol’tz I., DeRaadV., Vandenbosh Gi. Technologii velectronnoi promishlennosti, 2008, no.3, pp. 52-56.
   
2. Papilov K.B. Elektronnyi zhurnal «Zhurnal radioelectroniki», 2011, no.4, availableat: http://jre.cplire.ru/koi/apr11/ 5/text.html
   
3. Kolegov A.N., Uzolin E.Yu. Electronika, izmeritel’naya tehnika, radiotehnika isvyaz: dokladi TUSURa, 2010, no. 2(22), part2, pp. 45-48.
   
4. KozlovM., Turner R.A. Comparison of Ansoft HFSS and CST Microwave Studio Simulation Software for Multi-channel Coil Design and SAR Estimation at7TMRI, PIERS Online, 2010, vol.6, no.4. pp. 395-399.
   
5. AnIntegral Equation Solver, Microwave Journal, August 2007. http://www.eurointech.ru/products/CST/CST_ MWJournal_Aug_2007.pdf
   
6. Lobanov B.S, Damaratskiy I.A., Mironov Yu.M. Elektronnyi zhurnal «Nauka iobrazovanie», BMSU, 2013, no.9, availableat: http://technomag.bmstu.ru/doc/ 623058.html
   
7. Borzov A.B., Sokolov A.V., Suchkov V.B. Uspehi sovremennoj radioelectroniki, 2004, no. 9-10, pp. 38-61.
   
8. Antifeev V.N., Borzov A.B., Suchkov V.B. Fizicheskie modeli radiolocationnih polej rasseyaniya objectov slozhnoi formi (Physical Models ofDispersion Radiolocation Fields for Complex Form Objects), Moscow, BMSU, 2003, 63p.
9. CST Microwave Studio 2012, Help, availableat: file:/// C:/Program%20Files%20(x86)/CST%20STUDIO% 20SUITE%202012/Online%20Help/cst_studio_ suite_help.htm#general/welcome_de.htm