000 01666nab a2200325 a 4500
001 021484
003 CO-UCACDB
005 20230801172334.0
005 20080312. 04:11:06 p.m., cml
005 20080312. 04:53:16 p.m., cml
005 20090609. 16:34:15, lcifu
005 20091019. 16:58:24, lcifu
008 080312s2007 ck a r 000 0 spa d
040 _aCO-UCAC
_cCO-UCAC
041 _aspa
043 _ack
100 1 _9104551
_aElkamchouchi, Hassan
245 1 0 _aAutomating the electromagnetic simulation procedure and its possible "fatal" consequences /
_cHassan Elkamchouchi y Gehan Abouelseoud
336 _2rdacontenido
_aTexto
337 _2rdamedio
_aNo mediado
338 _2rdasoporte
_avolumen
500 _aSOLICITAR EL ARTICULO EN EL PROGRAMA DE ELECTRONICA Y TELECOMUNICACIONES
506 _aElectrónica y Telecomunicaciones
506 _aSistemas
520 _aThe purpose of this paper is to show how the tendency to fully automate the electromagnetic simulation procedure without attention to the physical nature of the problem, as well as understanding the numerical procedure used, may lead a designer to making wrong decisions. Promising designs may be aborted, while others that should be aborted may be moved on to the prototyping step, causing loss of time and money. The study is based on reputable simulators: IE3D and Fidelity from Zeland, and the microstripes simulador from Flomerics
650 0 7 _aELECTROMAGNETISMO
_9194507
773 0 _tIEEE Antennas & Propagation Magazine
_dBogotá : CINTEL, 2007
_gVol.49, no. 2 (abr. 2007) ; p. 133-142
_x1045-9243
942 _2ddc
_cAS
999 _c12763
_d12763