N9912A错误：必须有2个相同连接器的校准套件

您好，我完全同意戴维斯的帖子。
我确实做了同样的经历。
在传输XML文件并对9912A进行冷启动后，您可以看到自制的CalKit。
我为Anritsu 3653套件做了这个。
同样的效果。
有时我会在列表中看到CalKit。
有时不是。
目前尚不清楚何时以及为何。
克里斯



     以下为原文

  Hello,

I can fully agree to Davids post.
I exactly made the same experience. After transfering the XML File and do a cold boot of the 9912A you can see the self made
CalKit.
I did this for an Anritsu 3653 Kit. The same effects. Sometimes I see the CalKit in the list. Sometimes not. It is not clear when and why.

Chris

这不是一个真正的错误，但你可以说UI可以使用改进。
如果您只有一个校准套件，它默认只选择该套件。
它没有向您展示模型;
只是使用它。
所以cal实际上是一个很好的cal。
如果您有多个，它会为您提供该套件的选项。
即使您有一个套件，也会向您展示该套件。
N9923A和更新的FieldFox型号都采用这种方式;
即使您只有一个，他们也会向您展示该套件。
N9912A的Cal与所有其他FieldFox型号不同。
此致，Afsi



     以下为原文

  This is not really a bug, though you can say the UI could use improvement. If you have only one cal kit, it just selects that kit by default. It does not show the model to you; just uses it. So the cal is actually a good cal. If you have more than one, it gives you the option of the kit. An improvement would be to show you the kit even if you have one kit. The N9923A and newer FieldFox models all behave this way; they show you the kit even if you have only one. N9912A's Cal is different than all other FieldFox models.

Regards,
Afsi

> {quote：title = am95405写道：} {quote}>这不是一个真正的错误，尽管你可以说UI可以使用改进。
我原以为大多数人会认为这是一个错误，但我想这是主观的。
>如果您只有一个校准套件，它默认只选择该套件。
它没有向您展示模型;
只是使用它。
>所以cal实际上是一个很好的cal。
如果您碰巧知道N9912A期待的套件，那就没关系了。
假设我有一个85031B和85050C APC7套件。
我应该用什么？
这是任何人猜测的。
> N9923A和更新的FieldFox型号都采用这种方式;
即使您只有一个，他们也会向您展示该套件。
N9912A的Cal与所有其他FieldFox型号不同。
CalReady是否像N9923A一样实施，以便仪器在开机时在测试端口校准？
或者总是需要使用机械校准套件或QuickCal进行校准？
>问候，> Afsi Dave



     以下为原文

  > {quote:title=am95405 wrote:}{quote}
> This is not really a bug, though you can say the UI could use improvement. 
I would have thought most people would consider it a bug, but I guess it is subjective. 

> If you have only one cal kit, it just selects that kit by default. It does not show the model to you; just uses it. 
> So the cal is actually a good cal. 

That is fine if you happen to know what kit the N9912A is expecting. Lets assume I have an 85031B and 85050C APC7 kits. What one should I use? It is anyones guess really. 

> The N9923A and newer FieldFox models all behave this way; they show you the kit even if you have only one. N9912A's Cal is different than all other FieldFox models.

Is the CalReady implemented like in the N9923A, so that the instrument is calibrated at the test port when switched on?  Or does one always need to do a calibration with either a mechanical cal kit or QuickCal? 

> Regards,
> Afsi

Dave

仅适用于N9912A：单端口Cal有CalReady。
因此RL或S11有Cal。
插入损耗或S21没有内置校准，因此用户必须执行标准化校准。编辑：am95405 2014年5月6日下午1:49



     以下为原文

  For N9912A only:
There is a CalReady for the one-port Cal. So RL or S11 has a Cal. There is no built-in cal for the insertion loss or S21, so the user must perform a normalization cal.

Edited by: am95405 on May 6, 2014 1:49 PM

> {quote：title = am95405写道：} {quote}>仅适用于N9912A：>单端口Cal有一个CalReady。
因此RL或S11有Cal。
插入丢失或S21没有内置校准，因此用户必须执行标准化校准。
>>编辑：am95405于2014年5月6日下午1:49谢谢。
好像我的N9912A健康状况不佳，所以我会把它寄回去。
我想我会去寻找N9914A或更好的。
也许安捷伦在某些时候会有一些CertiPrime装置。
除了频率范围和成本之外，4 GHz N9913A，6.5 GHz N9914A与N991xA组合分析仪系列中的其他仪器有很大差异吗？
（我可以在成本基础上忘记N9918A，因为它有3.5毫米连接器）。
任何组合分析仪的运行速度是否比N9912A快得多，我发现它很慢？
戴夫



     以下为原文

  > {quote:title=am95405 wrote:}{quote}
> For N9912A only:
> There is a CalReady for the one-port Cal. So RL or S11 has a Cal. There is no built-in cal for the insertion loss or S21, so the user must perform a normalization cal.
> 
> Edited by: am95405 on May 6, 2014 1:49 PM

Thank you. It seems like my N9912A is in poor health, so I will send it back. I think I am going to look for an N9914A or better. Maybe Agilent will have some CertiPrime units at some point. 

Apart from upper frequency range and cost, is there much difference between the 4 GHz N9913A, 6.5 GHz N9914A and the other instruments in the N991xA combination analyzer range? (I can forget the N9918A both on cost grounds and since it has 3.5 mm connectors). 

Are any of the combination analyzers significantly quicker to operate than the N9912A, which I found painfully slow? 

Dave

>除了频率范围和成本之外，4 GHz N9913A，6.5 GHz N9914A与N991xA组合分析仪系列中的其他仪器有很大差异吗？
（我可以在成本基础上忘记N9918A，因为它有3.5毫米连接器）。
没有不同。
正如您所指出的，只是频率和成本。
N9913 / 4/5/6/7 / 8A的功能，选件可用性等相同。
>任何组合分析仪的运行速度是否比N9912A快得多，我发现它很慢？
从什么角度来看很慢？
Afsi



     以下为原文

  > Apart from upper frequency range and cost, is there much difference between the 4 GHz N9913A, 6.5 GHz N9914A and the other instruments in the N991xA combination analyzer range? (I can forget the N9918A both on cost grounds and since it has 3.5 mm connectors). 

No difference. Just frequency and cost, as you noted.  Features, option availability, etc, are the same across the N9913/4/5/6/7/8A.
 
> Are any of the combination analyzers significantly quicker to operate than the N9912A, which I found painfully slow? 
Slow from what standpoint?

Afsi

> {quote：title = am95405写道：} {quote} >>除了频率上限和成本之外，4 GHz N9913A，6.5 GHz N9914A与N991xA组合分析仪系列中的其他仪器有很大差异吗？
（我可以在成本基础上忘记N9918A，因为它有3.5毫米连接器）。
>>没有区别。
正如您所指出的，只是频率和成本。
N9913 / 4/5/6/7 / 8A的功能，选件可用性等相同。
谢谢。
>> N9912A是否比任何组合分析仪都快得多，我发现它很慢？
>从什么角度看慢？
慢慢启动。
慢速加载网络分析仪应用程序。
加载校准套件等等。我很欣赏不可能将8核3 GHz Xeon处理器放在电池供电的仪器中，但N9912A对我来说似乎很慢。
我*不是*谈论测量的实际时间，这显然在很大程度上取决于IF带宽，频点数等。我刚刚开启了上世纪建造的8720D。
我可以在推动电源开关的16秒内进行测量。
我想你可以说8720D有一个小时的预热期，所以它要慢得多。
但是N9912A对我来说似乎很慢。
戴夫



     以下为原文

  > {quote:title=am95405 wrote:}{quote}
> > Apart from upper frequency range and cost, is there much difference between the 4 GHz N9913A, 6.5 GHz N9914A and the other instruments in the N991xA combination analyzer range? (I can forget the N9918A both on cost grounds and since it has 3.5 mm connectors). 
> 
> No difference. Just frequency and cost, as you noted.  Features, option availability, etc, are the same across the N9913/4/5/6/7/8A.

Thank you. 

> > Are any of the combination analyzers significantly quicker to operate than the N9912A, which I found painfully slow? 
> Slow from what standpoint?

Slow to boot up. Slow to load the network analyzer application. Slow to load the calibration kits....etc etc. I appreciate it is not possible to put an 8 core 3 GHz Xeon processor in a battery powered instrument, but the N9912A seems painfully slow in use to me. I am *not* talking about the actual time for the measurement, which is obviously set to a large extent by the IF bandwidth, number of frequency points etc. 

I just switched on my 8720D, which was built in the last century. I can make measurements within 16 seconds of pushing the power switch. I guess you could argue the 8720D has a warmup period of an hour, so it is much slower.  But still the N9912A seems slow to me. 

Dave

>慢启动。
慢速加载网络分析仪应用程序。
加载校准套件等等。我很欣赏不可能将8核3 GHz Xeon处理器放在电池供电的仪器中，但N9912A对我来说似乎很慢。
我*不是*谈论测量的实际时间，这显然在很大程度上取决于IF带宽，频点数等。我没有对N9912A和N9914A进行基准测试，但我确实在我的
台。
根据我的经验......启动时间类似。
加载应用时间类似。
加载校准套件时间类似。
您应该意识到，加载应用时间和加载校准套件时间仅在第一次时很慢。
首次使用后，切换应用程序或加载校准向导时速度非常快。
因此，不要在使用后关闭FieldFox，将其置于睡眠模式（按电源键一次），或者如果您有交流电源，只需将其打开即可。
仅供参考，作为回应你对痛苦缓慢的评论，这是一个选择。
您可以将重型台式分析仪运送到您的现场，找到交流电源，接通电源，使用它，然后在回程中进行相同的包装，或者您可以携带一个使用电池运行的小型手持设备但可能需要
分钟开机。
而手持设备既是VNA又是SA。
Afsi



     以下为原文

  > Slow to boot up. Slow to load the network analyzer application. Slow to load the calibration kits....etc etc. I appreciate it is not possible to put an 8 core 3 GHz Xeon processor in a battery powered instrument, but the N9912A seems painfully slow in use to me. I am *not* talking about the actual time for the measurement, which is obviously set to a large extent by the IF bandwidth, number of frequency points etc. 

I've not benchmarked the N9912A versus N9914A , but I do have both at my desk.  Based on my experience ...boot-up time is similar. Loading app time is similar. Loading cal kit time is similar. What you should realize is that loading app time and loading cal kit time are slow ONLY the first time.  After first use, it's very fast when you switch apps or load the cal wizard. So instead of shutting down the FieldFox after use, put it in sleep mode (press the power key once) or if you have AC power, just leave it on. 

Just FYI, as a response to your comment on painfully slow, it's a choice. You can haul a heavy benchtop analyzer to your field site, locate AC power, power it up, use it, and then do the same packing on the return trip, or you can carry a little handheld that runs on a battery but perhaps takes a minute to boot up. And a handheld that's both a VNA and an SA. 

Afsi