Table 2 Optimization results for Circuit I.
From: Direct constraint control for EM-based miniaturization of microwave passives
Optimization approach | Performance parameters | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Design scenario I (F = [1.45 1.55] GHz) | Design scenario II (F = [1.47 1.53] GHz) | ||||||
Method | Setup | Footprint area A (mm2) | Violation of constraint γ1 (dB) | Violation of constraint γ2 (dB) | Footprint area A (mm2) | Violation of constraint γ1 (dB) | Violation of constraint γ2 (dB) |
Implicit constraint handling (penalty function approach) | β1 = 101, β2 = 101 | 241 | 0.03 | 6.8 | 264 | 0.07 | 3.5 |
β1 = 101, β2 = 102 | 259 | 0.06 | 5.3 | 264 | 0.07 | 3.5 | |
β1 = 101, β2 = 103 | 301 | − 0.01 | 1.9 | 272 | 0.02 | 2.1 | |
β1 = 101, β2 = 104 | 325 | 0.01 | 0.2 | 293 | 0.02 | 0.2 | |
β1 = 102, β2 = 101 | 247 | − 0.05 | 6.6 | 264 | 0.07 | 3.5 | |
β1 = 102, β2 = 102 | 258 | − 0.02 | 5.7 | 276 | 0.00 | 1.7 | |
β1 = 102, β2 = 103 | 318 | 0.01 | 1.0 | 292 | − 0.01 | 0.5 | |
β1 = 102, β2 = 104 | 319 | 0.00 | 0.3 | 297 | − 0.08 | 0.3 | |
β1 = 103, β2 = 101 | 247 | − 0.04 | 7.1 | 333 | − 0.00 | 0.5 | |
β1 = 103, β2 = 102 | 264 | − 0.03 | 53 | 335 | − 0.01 | 1.0 | |
β1 = 103, β2 = 103 | 318 | − 0.01 | 1.3 | 322 | − 0.02 | − 1.1 | |
β1 = 103, β2 = 104 | 319 | 0.00 | 0.2 | 301 | − 0.05 | 0.1 | |
β1 = 104, β2 = 101 | 242 | 0.00 | 6.9 | 323 | − 0.00 | 0.5 | |
β1 = 104, β2 = 102 | 258 | − 0.05 | 5.7 | 292 | − 0.06 | 0.8 | |
β1 = 104, β2 = 103 | 310 | − 0.03 | 1.4 | 325 | − 0.00 | 0.0 | |
β1 = 104, β2 = 104 | 317 | 0.00 | 0.4 | 302 | − 0.07 | 0.1 | |
Explicit constraint handling (this work) | 323 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 293 | − 0.05 | 0.3 | |
