The most accurate full two-port calibration of a VNA Vector Network
Analyzer requires a Direct or Zero–Length Through connection. However,
it is not uncommon at all to have one or two cables and a DUT Device
Under Test with incompatible connectors, either of different type or
of the same type/sex, which enforce then the use of some kind of
barrel or adapter.
Thus, in this paper, we study these cases of
Indirect or Non-Zero Length Through, we estimate the effects of such connections on the measurement uncertainty by using our theory of Differential Error Regions and Intervals DERs/DEIs,
On 22/02/04 10:26 AM, gin-pez arg wrote:
...
The most accurate full two-port calibration of a VNA Vector Network Analyzer requires a Direct or Zero–Length Through connection. However, it is not uncommon at all to have one or two cables and a DUT DeviceYou need a kind of "dummy DUT". I usually take something with a more
Under Test with incompatible connectors, either of different type or
of the same type/sex, which enforce then the use of some kind of
barrel or adapter.
or less known electrical length and not too much loss.
Thus, in this paper, we study these cases ofWhy don't you just stick to the matrix equations that Helton and
Indirect or Non-Zero Length Through, we estimate the effects of such connections on the measurement uncertainty by using our theory of Differential Error Regions and Intervals DERs/DEIs,
Speciale already showed us in 1983? <https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-Complete-and-Unambiguous-Solution-to-the-Problem-Helton-Speciale/6ca55d0258bbd7a1470a125ebd0aa1f2dfec4e7f>
--
Jos
On Friday, February 4, 2022 at 11:50:37 PM UTC+1, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/04 10:26 AM, gin-pez arg wrote:Thank you for asking these and here are my replies:
...
The most accurate full two-port calibration of a VNA Vector NetworkYou need a kind of "dummy DUT". I usually take something with a more
Analyzer requires a Direct or Zero–Length Through connection. However, >>> it is not uncommon at all to have one or two cables and a DUT Device
Under Test with incompatible connectors, either of different type or
of the same type/sex, which enforce then the use of some kind of
barrel or adapter.
or less known electrical length and not too much loss.
Thus, in this paper, we study these cases ofWhy don't you just stick to the matrix equations that Helton and
Indirect or Non-Zero Length Through, we estimate the effects of such
connections on the measurement uncertainty by using our theory of
Differential Error Regions and Intervals DERs/DEIs,
Speciale already showed us in 1983?
<https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-Complete-and-Unambiguous-Solution-to-the-Problem-Helton-Speciale/6ca55d0258bbd7a1470a125ebd0aa1f2dfec4e7f> >
= "You need a kind of "dummy DUT". I usually take something with a more or less known electrical length and not too much loss."
- I don't think so.
If you are happy with it, then you really don't need what we said.
...
"Why don't you just stick to the matrix equations that Helton and Speciale already showed us in 1983?"
- Because, we were concerned ourselves with the uncertainties introduced by similar complete and unambiguous solutions.
But, once again: If you are happy with it, then you really don't need what we said.
On Saturday, February 5, 2022 at 11:01:43 PM UTC+1, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/05 3:42 PM, gin-pez arg wrote:
On Friday, February 4, 2022 at 11:50:37 PM UTC+1, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>> On 22/02/04 10:26 AM, gin-pez arg wrote:If you don't think so, you don't understand the calibration principles.
...Thank you for asking these and here are my replies:
The most accurate full two-port calibration of a VNA Vector NetworkYou need a kind of "dummy DUT". I usually take something with a more
Analyzer requires a Direct or Zero–Length Through connection. However, >>>>> it is not uncommon at all to have one or two cables and a DUT Device >>>>> Under Test with incompatible connectors, either of different type or >>>>> of the same type/sex, which enforce then the use of some kind of
barrel or adapter.
or less known electrical length and not too much loss.
Thus, in this paper, we study these cases ofWhy don't you just stick to the matrix equations that Helton and
Indirect or Non-Zero Length Through, we estimate the effects of such >>>>> connections on the measurement uncertainty by using our theory of
Differential Error Regions and Intervals DERs/DEIs,
Speciale already showed us in 1983?
<https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-Complete-and-Unambiguous-Solution-to-the-Problem-Helton-Speciale/6ca55d0258bbd7a1470a125ebd0aa1f2dfec4e7f> >
= "You need a kind of "dummy DUT". I usually take something with a more or less known electrical length and not too much loss."
- I don't think so.
You need at least one standard which is a through (among the five
standards that you need as a minimum).
If you are happy with it, then you really don't need what we said.That remark does not have any convincing (or even relevant) technical
or scientific content.
...None are "introduced" by the equations. Uncertainty is introduced by
"Why don't you just stick to the matrix equations that Helton and Speciale already showed us in 1983?"
- Because, we were concerned ourselves with the uncertainties introduced by similar complete and unambiguous solutions.
the calibration "standards" used (you need at least 5 of them and more
than five can help of course). The mathematical relations connecting
them to the error-network T-matrix do not introduce uncertainties,
they are only showing you how those errors propagate.
But, once again: If you are happy with it, then you really don't need what we said.You may have something to offer, but by reverting to advertisement
jargon you will not convince many readers here. You still have not
justified why anyone would be better served by what you "said", then
by the mathematically exact relations that have been well-known for
decades now.
All n-port calibration is basically just group theory of Sp(2n, C).
--
Jos
- - - - -
: )
Well, the judgment to the readers then!
On 22/02/05 3:42 PM, gin-pez arg wrote:
On Friday, February 4, 2022 at 11:50:37 PM UTC+1, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/04 10:26 AM, gin-pez arg wrote:Thank you for asking these and here are my replies:
...
The most accurate full two-port calibration of a VNA Vector NetworkYou need a kind of "dummy DUT". I usually take something with a more
Analyzer requires a Direct or Zero–Length Through connection. However, >>> it is not uncommon at all to have one or two cables and a DUT Device
Under Test with incompatible connectors, either of different type or
of the same type/sex, which enforce then the use of some kind of
barrel or adapter.
or less known electrical length and not too much loss.
Thus, in this paper, we study these cases ofWhy don't you just stick to the matrix equations that Helton and
Indirect or Non-Zero Length Through, we estimate the effects of such
connections on the measurement uncertainty by using our theory of
Differential Error Regions and Intervals DERs/DEIs,
Speciale already showed us in 1983?
<https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-Complete-and-Unambiguous-Solution-to-the-Problem-Helton-Speciale/6ca55d0258bbd7a1470a125ebd0aa1f2dfec4e7f> >
= "You need a kind of "dummy DUT". I usually take something with a more or less known electrical length and not too much loss."If you don't think so, you don't understand the calibration principles.
- I don't think so.
You need at least one standard which is a through (among the five
standards that you need as a minimum).
If you are happy with it, then you really don't need what we said.That remark does not have any convincing (or even relevant) technical
or scientific content.
...None are "introduced" by the equations. Uncertainty is introduced by
"Why don't you just stick to the matrix equations that Helton and Speciale already showed us in 1983?"
- Because, we were concerned ourselves with the uncertainties introduced by similar complete and unambiguous solutions.
the calibration "standards" used (you need at least 5 of them and more
than five can help of course). The mathematical relations connecting
them to the error-network T-matrix do not introduce uncertainties,
they are only showing you how those errors propagate.
But, once again: If you are happy with it, then you really don't need what we said.You may have something to offer, but by reverting to advertisement
jargon you will not convince many readers here. You still have not
justified why anyone would be better served by what you "said", then
by the mathematically exact relations that have been well-known for
decades now.
All n-port calibration is basically just group theory of Sp(2n, C).
--
Jos
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 384 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 61:32:38 |
| Calls: | 8,173 |
| Calls today: | 5 |
| Files: | 13,113 |
| Messages: | 5,864,459 |