UOSM怎么使用每个端口上的不同连接器进行校准

假设您的设备是被动的，而不是像隔离器那样的任何非倒数，那么S21将与S12相同，即使连接器不同。
即使一个是波导而另一个是同轴的，这也是正确的。
戴夫。



     以下为原文

  Assuming that your device is passive,  and not anything non reciprocal like an isolator,  then S21 will be the same as S12, even if the connectors are different. This would be true even if one was waveguide and the other coaxial. 

Dave.

我知道这个帖子很旧，但我有另一个问题。
我想在Agilent N5230A VNA中定义一个UOSM校准套件。
UOSM校准算法是像SOLT还是我必须选择的算法？
如果我定义直通，我总是要指定偏移量，但是使用这个未知的直通套件我没有任何直通规格。
我该怎么办？
非常感谢。



     以下为原文

  I know this thread is old, but I have another question. 
I want to define in the Agilent N5230A VNA a UOSM calibration kit. Does the UOSM calibration algorithm is like SOLT or which one I have to choose?
If I define the thru I always have to specify the offsets, but with this unknown thru kit I don't have any specification of the thru. What should I do? 
Thanks a lot.

> {quote：title = LabDevo写道：} {quote}>我知道这个帖子已经老了，但我有另一个问题。
>我想在Agilent N5230A VNA中定义一个UOSM校准套件。
UOSM校准算法是像SOLT还是我必须选择的算法？
>如果我定义了直通，我总是要指定偏移量，但是使用这个未知的直通套件我没有任何直通规格。
我该怎么办？
>非常感谢。
不同的VNA制造商似乎对同一校准技术使用不同的名称。
在Rohde和Schwarz术语中，Agilent / Keysight称之为“负载”的是“匹配”。
来自http://www.rohde-schwarz.de/de/Produkte/messtechnik-testsysteme/netzwerk-analysatoren/ZVA-|-Merkmale-|-103-|-3491-|-19420.html + R＆amp;S®
ZVA不仅提供经典的TOSM校准（通过，开放，短路，匹配）.... +然后在下一段+ UOSM校准技术非常类似于TOSM技术但允许使用未知的通过（“U”
）作为校准标准，即不需要知道其参数（例如长度或衰减）的通道。+因此，USOM基本上是Agilent / Keysight称之为未知的通道。
该算法由Ferrero和Pisani开发，他们的论文+双端口网络分析仪校准使用未知的'thru'+ http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?reload=true&arnumber=173410所以
恕我直言，安捷伦/是德科技的术语更合适。
如果Anritsu有相同技术的另一个名字，我不会感到惊讶。
请记住，R + S使用的校准套件定义与Keysight不同。
C0是相同的，但C1，C2和C2都相差1000倍，因此在从R​​ + S格式转换为Keysight格式时要小心。
我没有R＆amp; S VNA，但R＆amp; S非常友好地为我们的ZNB ZNBT和ZNC系列VNA提供了仿真器，因此我可以选择我想要的型号，并拥有与VNA一样的GUI。
在这些VNA的固件中，有几个Keysight套件的定义。
如果您有其中一个模型，则可以看到Keysight定义和R + S定义之间的区别。
R＆amp; S使用偏移长度，而不是延迟，并以比Keysight更直观的方式定义损失！
戴夫



     以下为原文

  > {quote:title=LabDevo wrote:}{quote}
> I know this thread is old, but I have another question. 
> I want to define in the Agilent N5230A VNA a UOSM calibration kit. Does the UOSM calibration algorithm is like SOLT or which one I have to choose?
> If I define the thru I always have to specify the offsets, but with this unknown thru kit I don't have any specification of the thru. What should I do? 
> Thanks a lot.

Different manufacturers of VNAs seem to use different names for the same calibration technique. What Agilent/Keysight call a "load" is a "match" in Rohde and Schwarz terminology. 

From

http://www.rohde-schwarz.de/de/Produkte/messtechnik-testsysteme/netzwerk-analysatoren/ZVA-|-Merkmale-|-103-|-3491-|-19420.html

+The R&S®ZVA not only offers classic TOSM calibration (Through, Open, Short, Match) ....+

then in the next paragraph

+The UOSM calibration technique is very similar to the TOSM technique but allows the use of an unknown through ("U") as a calibration standard, i.e. a through whose parameters (e.g. length or attenuation) need not be known.+ 

So essentially the USOM is what Agilent/Keysight call an unknown thru. The algorithm was developed by Ferrero and Pisani, in their paper 

+Two-port network analyzer calibration using an unknown 'thru'+ 
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?reload=true&arnumber=173410

So IMHO, the Agilent/Keysight term is more appropriate. I would not be surprised if Anritsu have yet another name for the same technique. 

Remember that the cal kit definitions used by R+S are different from Keysight. C0 is the same, but C1, C2 and C2 all differ by a factor of 1000, so take care when converting from R+S format to Keysight format. 

I don't have an R&S VNA, but R&S have very kindly provided me an emulator for their  ZNB ZNBT and ZNC series of VNAs, so I can pick what model I want, and have a GUI just like that VNA. In the firmware of those VNAs, there's the definitions for several Keysight kits. If you have one of those models, you can see the difference between the Keysight definitions and R+S definitions. 

R&S use offset lengths, not delays, and define loss in a somewhat more intuitive way than Keysight! 

Dave