PNA-X为数据访问点2节省噪声参数

数据访问2用于平滑。
你的意思是平滑还是平均？
平均是数据访问点0，应始终包含在内。



     以下为原文

  data access 2 is for smoothing.  Did you mean Smoothing or Averaging?  Averaging is data access point 0, and should always be included.

谢谢Dr_joel。
当我们使用保存数据手动保存数据时我们得到的数据文件与显示的噪声系数轨迹相匹配，其中包括平均值。
当我们使用Labview以编程方式保存数据时，结果似乎是数据的最后一次扫描，而不是显示的平均结果。
如果我们使用Labview再次查询，我们会得到平均结果。
似乎先前的数据保存在内存中，需要刷新才能获得平均结果。
谢谢，杰夫



     以下为原文

  Thanks Dr_joel. 

When we save data manually using Save Data As we get a data file that matches the displayed noise figure trace which includes averaging. When we save the data programatically using Labview the results seem to be the last sweep of the data and not the averaged result as displayed. If we query again using Labview we get the averaged results. It seems as though the previous data is saved in memory and needs to be flushed out to get the averaged results.

Thanks,
Jeff

你可能会检查你的labview程序。
它们不是包含非平均数据的“数据缓冲区”。
平均值发生在DSP级别，因此如果数据已经平均，则非平均数据不再可用。
您的labview程序是否有可能以隐藏的方式重新开始平均并进行一次扫描？
如果是这样，那么你必须改变程序不要这样做。
确保正确平均数据的最佳方法是重新开始平均，然后发送“组”命令以进行一组与平均数相同的扫描。
而且，我想再次确定我们是在谈论平均而不是平滑？
平滑是格式化功能，格式化程序在校正数据旁边具有不同的附加数据缓冲区。
此外，您在寻找噪声系数数据还是噪声参数数据？
我将仔细检查噪声参数数据，因为它是一种直到最近才可用的新数据格式，所以可能有些不对劲。



     以下为原文

  you might check your labview program.

Their is no "data-buffer" that contains non-averaged data.  The averaging takes place at the DSP level so that if the data has been averaged, the non-averaged data is no longer available.

Is there any chance your labview program, in a hidden way, restarts the averaging and takes a single sweep?  If so, then you must change the program to not do that. 

The best way to ensure proper averaged data is to restart the averaging and then send a "groups" command to take a group of sweeps that is the same size as the average number.  

And, again, I want to be sure we are speaking about averaging and not smoothing?  Smoothing is a formatting function and the formatter does have a different, additional data buffer besided the corrected data.

Further, are you looking for Noise Figure data, or noise parameter data?  I will double check on noise parameter data as it is a new data format that hasn't been available until recently, so maybe something is amiss there.