#109 : reply to a newcomer
Δημοσιεύτηκε: 03 Σεπ 2020, 19:30
.
=
 From: "******* ********" <***********@gmail.com>
 Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2020 08:43
 Subject: Re: SParameter Uncertainties in Network Analyzer Measurements
=
 no, I am not aware of this discussion. anyway thanks for share that link.

errors of "error" models :
https://groups.io/g/nanovnausers/topic/34237712

 I would like to understand the OnePort Error Model and Calibration
 (OnePort, 3Term Error Model).
 I`m using the attached file

[ Network Analyzer Error Models and Calibration Methods by Doug Rytting ]

 Do you know how it works? see page 11/43 (pdf).
=
 To: "******* ********" <***********@gmail.com>
 Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2020 15:51
=
Dear Mr. ********,
Yes, of course we are aware in our group of Doug's papers.
Well, it is a pity that you don't want to follow the suggested
discussion. Because, it was only after the intensive thinking
enforced by the demands of our participation in this very
discussion that our point of view, regarding the kind of these
measurements, was finally made absolutely clear.
Anyway, we could theoretically conclude from this discussion
the following essentials:
 (c) gin&pez@arg (ccby4.0) 2019 : start          
(0) We can adopt a socalled by us "virtual"real twoport
Sparameter "error" model, that is one consisting of a
VirtualMeasurement "Port": one that you can't see it as
really existing around, in order to connect a cable to it, and
the other, indeed a really existing one, just because you can
see it and connect a cable to it: the familiar (Under)Test Port.
(1) To arrive at this model you have * u n a v o i d a b l y *
begin with the real fourport consisting of the familiar Ports:
Input, Incident, Reflected, and (Under) Test  once again:
"real", because you can really see its four real ports and
connect cables to them.
(2) As usual, you have to write down the familiar four linear
Sparameter equations for this fourport and then after some,
rather lengthy indeed, mathematical manipulation to form
just one equation relating those familiar g and G ratios of
signalsamples of ReflectedtoIncident waves g for the
VirtualMeasurement Port and G for the Real(Under)Test Port.
(3) This equation involves 3 parameters and express the
gMeasurement in terms of G(Under)Test, but since it is also
an invertible equation, you can also express the desired
G(Under)Test, that is of an Unknown Load, in terms of
gMeasurement that is of the Known Network Analyzer
Readings you can see, also write down and/or collect,
as G = G(g).
(4) The involved 3 parameters, which are complicated
expressions of the fourport Sparameters mentioned above,
are those wellknown (HP) "errors"  although unfortunately
enough: widelynonunderstandable until now.
(5) Well, after all that said, not only here but especially in
the aforementioned discussion currently with 292 messages
it is also an unavoidable conclusion that for many years until now,
Doug and his colleagues at HP, also produced, under various
additional assumptions, moreorless approximate equations
G ~= G(g) for the multiports of more than four ports they
considered.
 end : (c) gin&pez@arg (ccby4.0) 2019           
That is all.
Sincerely yours,
Nikolitsa Giannopoulou
Petros Zimourtopoulos
ARG IAOI NFI
Antennas Research GroupInformal Association of IndividualsNo Finance InvolvedAustriaEU
:#109
 https://groups.io/g/nanovnausers/message/17132
.
=
 From: "******* ********" <***********@gmail.com>
 Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2020 08:43
 Subject: Re: SParameter Uncertainties in Network Analyzer Measurements
=
 no, I am not aware of this discussion. anyway thanks for share that link.

errors of "error" models :
https://groups.io/g/nanovnausers/topic/34237712

 I would like to understand the OnePort Error Model and Calibration
 (OnePort, 3Term Error Model).
 I`m using the attached file

[ Network Analyzer Error Models and Calibration Methods by Doug Rytting ]

 Do you know how it works? see page 11/43 (pdf).
=
 To: "******* ********" <***********@gmail.com>
 Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2020 15:51
=
Dear Mr. ********,
Yes, of course we are aware in our group of Doug's papers.
Well, it is a pity that you don't want to follow the suggested
discussion. Because, it was only after the intensive thinking
enforced by the demands of our participation in this very
discussion that our point of view, regarding the kind of these
measurements, was finally made absolutely clear.
Anyway, we could theoretically conclude from this discussion
the following essentials:
 (c) gin&pez@arg (ccby4.0) 2019 : start          
(0) We can adopt a socalled by us "virtual"real twoport
Sparameter "error" model, that is one consisting of a
VirtualMeasurement "Port": one that you can't see it as
really existing around, in order to connect a cable to it, and
the other, indeed a really existing one, just because you can
see it and connect a cable to it: the familiar (Under)Test Port.
(1) To arrive at this model you have * u n a v o i d a b l y *
begin with the real fourport consisting of the familiar Ports:
Input, Incident, Reflected, and (Under) Test  once again:
"real", because you can really see its four real ports and
connect cables to them.
(2) As usual, you have to write down the familiar four linear
Sparameter equations for this fourport and then after some,
rather lengthy indeed, mathematical manipulation to form
just one equation relating those familiar g and G ratios of
signalsamples of ReflectedtoIncident waves g for the
VirtualMeasurement Port and G for the Real(Under)Test Port.
(3) This equation involves 3 parameters and express the
gMeasurement in terms of G(Under)Test, but since it is also
an invertible equation, you can also express the desired
G(Under)Test, that is of an Unknown Load, in terms of
gMeasurement that is of the Known Network Analyzer
Readings you can see, also write down and/or collect,
as G = G(g).
(4) The involved 3 parameters, which are complicated
expressions of the fourport Sparameters mentioned above,
are those wellknown (HP) "errors"  although unfortunately
enough: widelynonunderstandable until now.
(5) Well, after all that said, not only here but especially in
the aforementioned discussion currently with 292 messages
it is also an unavoidable conclusion that for many years until now,
Doug and his colleagues at HP, also produced, under various
additional assumptions, moreorless approximate equations
G ~= G(g) for the multiports of more than four ports they
considered.
 end : (c) gin&pez@arg (ccby4.0) 2019           
That is all.
Sincerely yours,
Nikolitsa Giannopoulou
Petros Zimourtopoulos
ARG IAOI NFI
Antennas Research GroupInformal Association of IndividualsNo Finance InvolvedAustriaEU
:#109
 https://groups.io/g/nanovnausers/message/17132
.