4 ms·

High dynamic range (i.e. low noise figure, high linearity, and especially shielding) and low phase noise will always be expensive. They are independent of soft

High dynamic range (i.e. low noise figure, high linearity, and especially shielding) and low phase noise will always be expensive. They are independent of software and Moore’s law. The design software is not cheap either, as typical software skills are only 1/3 the knowledge required to develop that stuff. Also need circuit theory, EM, scientific computing, etc. There will probably never be an open source equivalent. I have an RF/Microwave lab at home with HP VNA, spectrum analyzer, power meters, signal generators, and Tek scopes and curve tracer. Also Microwave Office and Altium. Yes, that stuff is expensive, but has also never been cheaper to buy. An 8566B spectrum analyzer can be had for $2k, and is far better than shit from Rigol. That 8566B cost $85k in 80s/90s dollars.

CamperBob2 7y ago
There will probably never be an open source equivalent. That may be a little pessimistic. QUCS development seems to have stalled, but they were certainly on the right track. Given the kind of sponsorship that, say, KiCad enjoys from CERN, I would expect some pretty awesome RF engineering tools to emerge.
- madengr 7y ago
  QUCS is nowhere near equivalent to Microwave Office or ADS; those each have well over 100k man-hours of code development. Harmonic balance, transient for distributed circuits, envelope and system simulation, layout, 2D and 3D EM, and hundreds of models, all tightly integrated. Not to mention all the MMIC and RFIC PDKs. It’s fine for hobby use, but if you need to make $ and get designs out the door, you need to use the real stuff. I tried KiCad, but using Altium for 25 years, it just doesn’t have the functionality I need. Lacks basic things such as assigning nets to arbitrary polygons, which is a must for RF.
- pkaye 7y ago
  Is QUCS the current best open source equivalent? I used to do hardware long time ago and might play around again as a side project.

CamperBob2 7y ago

There will probably never be an open source equivalent. That may be a little pessimistic. QUCS development seems to have stalled, but they were certainly on the right track. Given the kind of sponsorship that, say, KiCad enjoys from CERN, I would expect some pretty awesome RF engineering tools to emerge.

madengr 7y ago
QUCS is nowhere near equivalent to Microwave Office or ADS; those each have well over 100k man-hours of code development. Harmonic balance, transient for distributed circuits, envelope and system simulation, layout, 2D and 3D EM, and hundreds of models, all tightly integrated. Not to mention all the MMIC and RFIC PDKs. It’s fine for hobby use, but if you need to make $ and get designs out the door, you need to use the real stuff. I tried KiCad, but using Altium for 25 years, it just doesn’t have the functionality I need. Lacks basic things such as assigning nets to arbitrary polygons, which is a must for RF.
pkaye 7y ago
Is QUCS the current best open source equivalent? I used to do hardware long time ago and might play around again as a side project.