使用9 GHz 3.5 mm校准套件进行20 GHz校准会有多糟糕？

在其中“变频情人”只有没有TDR功能的6 GHz的VNA线“边缘电容多项式的系数”，我愿意尽力来衡量他的PCB与我的20 GHz的VNA它具有TDR功能。
再后来乔尔说他的板需要20GHz的VNA，这意味着我被卡住，因为我只具有一个9千兆赫校准套件（85033E），其只具有固定的负载（没有滑动负载）。
但我想知道这会有多糟糕。
看一下我的9 GHz 85033E校准套件中开口的边缘电容系数，我注意到它们与26.5 GHz 85052B校准器相同。
（C0 = 49.433，C1 = -310.13C2 = 23.168C3 = -0.1596）。
这种情况让我相信它们几乎肯定是相同的部分 - 也许9 GHz频率被拒绝26.5 GHz，但这些必须是非常相似或相同的部分。
由于8720D不允许一个指定的电感值，我也不会太惊讶，如果在VNA的偏移量和/或电容系数改变85033E和85052B之间的包了一下 - 我没有检查这一点。
但是，如果1）我选择了85052B校准套件，它内置在我的8720D / 2固件）用于宽带负载到20GHz什么样的性能（或缺乏）将预期？
我想知道如果我将VNA校准到20 GHz，尽管没有滑动负载，它是否能解决频率爱好者的PCB问题。
DaveEdited：drkirkby于2013年1月25日晚上11:23



     以下为原文

  In the thread "Coefficients of fringing capacitance polynomial", where "Frequency Lover" only has a 6 GHz VNA without the TDR function, I offered to try to measure his PCB with my 20 GHz VNA which has the TDR function.  

Then later Joel said his board needs a 20 GHz VNA, which means I'd be stuck as I only have a 9 GHz cal kit (85033E), which only has a fixed load (no sliding load). But I wondered how bad this would be.  

Looking at the fringing capacitance coefficients of the opens in my 9 GHz 85033E cal kit, I note they are the same as in the 26.5 GHz 85052B cal it. (C0=49.433, C1=-310.13 C2=23.168 C3=-0.15966). That sort of leads me to believe they are almost certainly the same parts - perhaps the 9 GHz ones are rejected 26.5 GHz ones, but these must be very similar or identical parts.  

Since the 8720D does not allow one to specify inductance values, I would not be too surprised if the offset and/or capacitance coefficients in that VNA vary a bit between the 85033E and the 85052B kits - I have not checked this. But if  

1) I selected the 85052B calibration kit, which is built into the firmware of my 8720D/
2) Used a broadband load to 20 GHz

what sort of performance (or lack of) would be expected?

I was wondering if it could sort out Frequency Lover's PCB issue if I calibrated the VNA to 20 GHz, despite not having a sliding load.  

Dave

Edited by: drkirkby on Jan 25, 2013 11:23 PM