This question is probably more for MATLAB staffs but I am open to any response.
I am conducting research to compare the results of radiation patterns and electromagnetic behaviors of various antenna arrays. Specifically, for the same array, I am interested in simulations that consider the entire array structure, which includes multiple antenna elements and their excitations, versus simulations of individual array elements followed by superimposing their patterns, EM fields, and phase fronts.
I reviewed the MATLAB documentation on Modeling Mutual Coupling in Large Arrays Using Embedded Element Pattern , which provided a clear example of full-wave Method of Moments (MoM) simulation approaches compared to the superposition of isolated elements. Additionally, the Method of Moments Solver for Metal and Dielectric Structures documentation explained that multiple excitation feeds create a voltage matrix that interacts with the iteration matrix. This process exemplifies the full-wave MoM approach, incorporating the entire array structure and excitation points concurrently.
However, I also came across this PDF, Smart RF Design of Digitally Controlled RF Transmitters and Receivers from MathWorks themselves. On page 15 of the slides, it says:
"Phased Array System Toolbox computes the array pattern using the superposition of the pattern of each individual element – ULA, URA, UCA and conformal arrays use the same pattern for all elements – Heterogeneous arrays have different patterns for different elements"
The statement in the PDF seems to contradict the documentation provided, suggesting that the array pattern is computed using the superposition of each individual element instead of a full-wave Method of Moments (MoM) approach.
After reading, now I am confused, if I simply do the following:
% Create the first Custom3D object using triangulation
customShape = shape.Custom3D(tr);
% Create the second Custom3D object using triangulation
customShape2 = shape.Custom3D(tr2);
% Create the third Custom3D object using triangulation
customShape3 = shape.Custom3D(tr3);

%assign locations to the Custom3D objects
[~]= translate(customShape,[0 0 0]);
[~]= translate(customShape2,[1 0 0]);
[~]= translate(customShape3,[0 0 1]);

%creat the array using the combined Custom3D objects
antShapearray = customShape + customShape2 + customShape3;
antarray = customAntenna(Shape=antShapearray);
[~] = createFeed(antarray,[0 0 0; 1 0 0; 0 0 1],[1 1 1]);

%obtain EM results
show(antarray)
pattern(antarray,freq)

Does MATLAB analyze the antenna array as a whole, or does it analyze each geometry individually and then superimpose the results?

Many thanksThis question is probably more for MATLAB staffs but I am open to any response.
I am conducting research to compare the results of radiation patterns and electromagnetic behaviors of various antenna arrays. Specifically, for the same array, I am interested in simulations that consider the entire array structure, which includes multiple antenna elements and their excitations, versus simulations of individual array elements followed by superimposing their patterns, EM fields, and phase fronts.
I reviewed the MATLAB documentation on Modeling Mutual Coupling in Large Arrays Using Embedded Element Pattern , which provided a clear example of full-wave Method of Moments (MoM) simulation approaches compared to the superposition of isolated elements. Additionally, the Method of Moments Solver for Metal and Dielectric Structures documentation explained that multiple excitation feeds create a voltage matrix that interacts with the iteration matrix. This process exemplifies the full-wave MoM approach, incorporating the entire array structure and excitation points concurrently.
However, I also came across this PDF, Smart RF Design of Digitally Controlled RF Transmitters and Receivers from MathWorks themselves. On page 15 of the slides, it says:
"Phased Array System Toolbox computes the array pattern using the superposition of the pattern of each individual element – ULA, URA, UCA and conformal arrays use the same pattern for all elements – Heterogeneous arrays have different patterns for different elements"
The statement in the PDF seems to contradict the documentation provided, suggesting that the array pattern is computed using the superposition of each individual element instead of a full-wave Method of Moments (MoM) approach.
After reading, now I am confused, if I simply do the following:
% Create the first Custom3D object using triangulation
customShape = shape.Custom3D(tr);
% Create the second Custom3D object using triangulation
customShape2 = shape.Custom3D(tr2);
% Create the third Custom3D object using triangulation
customShape3 = shape.Custom3D(tr3);

%assign locations to the Custom3D objects
[~]= translate(customShape,[0 0 0]);
[~]= translate(customShape2,[1 0 0]);
[~]= translate(customShape3,[0 0 1]);

%creat the array using the combined Custom3D objects
antShapearray = customShape + customShape2 + customShape3;
antarray = customAntenna(Shape=antShapearray);
[~] = createFeed(antarray,[0 0 0; 1 0 0; 0 0 1],[1 1 1]);

%obtain EM results
show(antarray)
pattern(antarray,freq)

Does MATLAB analyze the antenna array as a whole, or does it analyze each geometry individually and then superimpose the results?

Many thanks This question is probably more for MATLAB staffs but I am open to any response.
I am conducting research to compare the results of radiation patterns and electromagnetic behaviors of various antenna arrays. Specifically, for the same array, I am interested in simulations that consider the entire array structure, which includes multiple antenna elements and their excitations, versus simulations of individual array elements followed by superimposing their patterns, EM fields, and phase fronts.
I reviewed the MATLAB documentation on Modeling Mutual Coupling in Large Arrays Using Embedded Element Pattern , which provided a clear example of full-wave Method of Moments (MoM) simulation approaches compared to the superposition of isolated elements. Additionally, the Method of Moments Solver for Metal and Dielectric Structures documentation explained that multiple excitation feeds create a voltage matrix that interacts with the iteration matrix. This process exemplifies the full-wave MoM approach, incorporating the entire array structure and excitation points concurrently.
However, I also came across this PDF, Smart RF Design of Digitally Controlled RF Transmitters and Receivers from MathWorks themselves. On page 15 of the slides, it says:
"Phased Array System Toolbox computes the array pattern using the superposition of the pattern of each individual element – ULA, URA, UCA and conformal arrays use the same pattern for all elements – Heterogeneous arrays have different patterns for different elements"
The statement in the PDF seems to contradict the documentation provided, suggesting that the array pattern is computed using the superposition of each individual element instead of a full-wave Method of Moments (MoM) approach.
After reading, now I am confused, if I simply do the following:
% Create the first Custom3D object using triangulation
customShape = shape.Custom3D(tr);
% Create the second Custom3D object using triangulation
customShape2 = shape.Custom3D(tr2);
% Create the third Custom3D object using triangulation
customShape3 = shape.Custom3D(tr3);

%assign locations to the Custom3D objects
[~]= translate(customShape,[0 0 0]);
[~]= translate(customShape2,[1 0 0]);
[~]= translate(customShape3,[0 0 1]);

%creat the array using the combined Custom3D objects
antShapearray = customShape + customShape2 + customShape3;
antarray = customAntenna(Shape=antShapearray);
[~] = createFeed(antarray,[0 0 0; 1 0 0; 0 0 1],[1 1 1]);

%obtain EM results
show(antarray)
pattern(antarray,freq)

Does MATLAB analyze the antenna array as a whole, or does it analyze each geometry individually and then superimpose the results?

Many thanks antenna array, array simulation MATLAB Answers — New Questions

​