如何使用HP8753ES确定直通连接的延迟

打开跟踪统计信息（可能在标记功能键下）并读取延迟的平均值。
该值应该是100ps /英寸的直通适配器（如果直通具有聚四氟乙烯绝缘，而不是空气，则更像是140 ps /英寸。）因此您可以只测量通过的物理长度进行比较。



     以下为原文

  turn on trace statistics (maybe under the marker function keys) and read the mean value of the delay.

The value should be on the order of 100ps/inch of thru adapter (if the thru has a teflon insulation, not air, it is more like 140 ps/inch.)  so you can just measure the physical length of the thru for comparison.

感谢您的回复。
在标记功能下有一个统计按钮但不幸的是它显示峰到峰但没有延迟。
我发现我可以在平均频率上放置一个标记并点击“Marker-Delay”，然后进入“Scale”然后“Electrical Delay”并显示延迟，但它出现在11.695ps任何其他建议？



     以下为原文

  Thanks for your reply.

Under Marker Function there is a stats button but it displays peak to peak but not delay unfortunately.
I found I can place a marker at the mean frequency and hit 'Marker-Delay', then go the 'Scale' then 'Electrical Delay' and the delay is displayed but it is coming out at 11.695ps
 
Any other suggestions?

格式是什么？
如果格式为“延迟”，则平均值应为平均延迟。



     以下为原文

  what was the format? If the format is in "delay", the mean value should be the mean delay.

在延迟模式下，使用标记统计数据时，我的平均延迟为-996.67fs。
这可能不正确，我不知道还有什么可以做，因为我已经准确校准了



     以下为原文

  When in delay mode, using marker stats I get a mean delay of -996.67fs. This could not be correct, I'm not sure what else to do as I have calibrated acurately otherwise

你做延迟标记后，你做了延迟模式吗？
如果是这样，平均延迟是标记 - 延迟给你的“电延迟”和平均延迟之和。
此外，您必须消除短路的延迟（通常约10-20秒）



     以下为原文

  did you put on the delay mode after you did the marker to delay?  If so, the mean delay is the sum of the "electrical delay" that marker-to-delay gave you and the delay of the mean.  Also, you have to remove the delay of the short (usually around 10-20 psec)

这就是我所做的：按Preset执行1端口校准附加直通和短按格式延迟按Marker Delay按Marker Stat On我得到544.06ps，除以2给出272.03ps，带走short给出245.84ps。
虽然这比以前的值更合理，但我仍然预计它会在100ps左右，这纯粹是因为我读到它们通常都在这个值附近。
这个值看起来合理吗？
我遗漏了哪些明显的步骤？
接下来，我将尝试使用此通过值进行2端口校准，然后尝试测量50欧姆带状线，看看我是否得到50欧姆。



     以下为原文

  Here is what I have done:
Press Preset
Perform 1 Port Calibration
Attach Thru and Short
Press Format Delay
Press Marker Delay
Press Marker Stat On

I get 544.06ps, divided by 2 gives 272.03ps, take away short gives 245.84ps.

While this is more reasonable than previous values I still had expected it to be around 100ps, purely because I read they normally are around that value. Does this value seem reasonable? Are there any obvious steps I have left out?

Next I will try a 2 port calibration with this thru value then try to measure a 50ohm stripline and see if I get 50ohms.

如果直通是N型，可能没问题，否则听起来太长了。
通过的物理长度是多少（用尺子测量）。
什么是连接器类型？
中心导体和外导体之间的电介质是什么（空气，特氟隆？）。
N型推力往往很长，SMC往往很短，身体上。
另外，减去2倍的短路延迟。
如果是N型，请确保您使用正确的性别延迟，因为两性有不同的延迟。



     以下为原文

  Might be OK if the thru is type N, otherwise it sounds too long. What is the physical length of the thru (Measure with a ruler). What is the connector type? what is the dielectric between the center and outer conductor (air, teflon?).

Type N thrus tend to be long, SMC tend to be very short, physically.

Also, subtract 2x the delay of the short.  If it is type N, make sure you are using the right delay for the sex, as the two sexes have different delays.

物理长度为0.545英寸，类型为SMA。
电介质是空气。
我用我测量的直通值进行了两端口校准，并且无法准确测量50欧姆线。
我要重复一切来检查。



     以下为原文

  The physical length is 0.545inch and the type is SMA. The dielectric is air. I did a two port cal with the thru value I measured and wasn't able to accurately measure a 50ohm line. I'm going to repeat everything to check.

我完全像以前一样重复这个过程，测量平均值为2.9ns。
我无法获得可重复的测量结果。



     以下为原文

  I repeated the process exactly as before and measured 2.9ns as the mean. I can't get a repeatable measurement.

我同意你的测量没有意义。
你能发布测量图吗？
发布S11跟踪，日志mag，相位和延迟的图（我猜是三个图）。
将标记放在1和5 GHz。
另外，你说这是一个SMA，但SMA有特氟隆电介质;
你我3.5毫米。
拍摄你的照片并发布。



     以下为原文

  I'll agree your measurements don't make sense.

Can you post a plot of your measurements.  Post a plot of the S11 trace, log mag, phase, and delay (three plots, I guess).  Put markers at 1 and 5 GHz.

Also, you said this is an SMA thru but SMA has teflon dielectric; do you me 3.5 mm.  Take a picture of your thru and post that as well.

logmag图显示了meas't的严重问题。
它应该接近0 dB + -0.2，但每个分区显示100 dB。
要么你有一个可怕的1端口校准（例如负载真的是开放的）。
关闭cal并发布结果。
也许我们可以从中看出，如果vna坏了或者它只是一个糟糕的校准



     以下为原文

  The logmag plot shows serious problems with the meas't. It should be nearly 0 dB +-0.2 but you show 100 dB per division.  Either you have a terrible 1 port cal (such as the load is really an open) .  Turn off cal and post the results. Maybe we can tell from that if the vna is broken or it is just a bad calibration

我设法说服微波电子研究部的人来看看。
他们似乎也认为这是校准标准。
如果我要购买一个新套件，我不会得到什么。
vna有7毫米连接器，但它带有7毫米到sma连接器，sma电缆和3.5毫米校准套件。
虽然3.5mm和sma兼容，但我想消除任何可能的错误或损坏，并摆脱这种不匹配。
仅提供3.5mm或7mm套件。
我应该继续目前的设置并购买新的3.5mm校准套件吗？
我想可能更好的是获得一些7mm到3.5mm的电缆并将我的dut上的连接器更换为3.5mm然后使用3.5mm校准套件？



     以下为原文

  I managed to convince someone from microwave electronic research dept to come and have a look. They also seem to think it is the calibration standards. If I was to purchase a new kit, I am not what to get. The vna has 7mm connectors, however it came to me with 7mm to sma connectors attached, sma cables and a 3.5mm calibration kit. Although 3.5mm and sma are compatible I would like to eliminate any possible errors or damage and get rid of this mismatch.

Only 3.5mm or 7mm kits are available. Should I just continue with my current set up and buy a new 3.5mm cal kit?
I was thinking it may be better to get some 7mm to 3.5mm cables and change the connectors on my dut to 3.5mm then use the 3.5mm cal kit?

3.5和SMA兼容8753的频率，两者都很好。
校准套件仅为3.5 mm。
如果使用SMA电缆，请务必检查两端并确保它们没有弯曲或损坏，因为它们可能会损坏校准套件。
如果您想要格外小心，请在7.mm至SMA adatpters上使用3.5 mm电缆。



     以下为原文

  3.5 and SMA are compatible for the frequencies of the 8753, and either are fine. Cal kits are only in 3.5 mm.  If you use SMA cables, just be sure to inspect the ends and make sure they are not bent or damaged, as they can damage the cal kit.  If you like to be extra careful, use 3.5 mm cables on your 7.mm to SMA adatpters.

另一种选择是在任何SMA电缆上放置连接器保护器（3.5MM M-F适配器或3.5MM F-F用于可插入设备）。
然后，如果它磨损或损坏，您只需更换适配器，而不是整个电缆。
这也可以防止由于SMA连接器公差（特别是公SMA连接器）而损坏Cal Kit和任何带3.5MM连接器的DUT。
Spacecase



     以下为原文

  Another option is to put connector savers (3.5MM M-F adapter, or 3.5MM F-F for insertable devices) on any SMA cable. Then if this becomes worn or damaged you only have to replace the adapter, not the entire cable. This will also prevent damage to the Cal Kit and any DUT with 3.5MM connectors due to SMA connector tolerances (especially the Male SMA connector).

Spacecase

> {quote：title = sinead9099写道：} {quote}>我设法说服微波电子研究部的人来看看。
他们似乎也认为这是校准标准。
如果我要购买一个新套件，我不会得到什么。
vna有7毫米连接器，但它带有7毫米到sma连接器，sma电缆和3.5毫米校准套件。
虽然3.5mm和sma兼容，但我想消除任何可能的错误或损坏，并摆脱这种不匹配。
如果它是校准标准故障，我怀疑最好是尝试找出哪个标准有问题，然后购买它，而不是一个完整的套件？
也就是说，与完整套件的成本相比，校准套件中各个部件的成本相当高。
您可能只需要一些标准错误就可以购买套件。
但是两个标准出错的可能性非常低。
我有一个错误的负载 - 如果放在廉价的DVM上很容易看到，因为直流电阻不像50欧姆。
我认为最可能的问题是负载，因为开放或短路的问题更少。
DVM会检测严重错误。
我怀疑你可以发送用于校准的试剂盒，并要求安捷伦更换哪些组件有问题。
也就是说，做一个问题并解决问题可能会被视为两个工作。
我不知道。
我会尝试自己解决哪个标准有问题。
DaveEdited：drkirkby于2012年12月17日下午9:21



     以下为原文

  > {quote:title=sinead9099 wrote:}{quote}
> I managed to convince someone from microwave electronic research dept to come and have a look. They also seem to think it is the calibration standards. If I was to purchase a new kit, I am not what to get. The vna has 7mm connectors, however it came to me with 7mm to sma connectors attached, sma cables and a 3.5mm calibration kit. Although 3.5mm and sma are compatible I would like to eliminate any possible errors or damage and get rid of this mismatch.

If it is a calibration standard fault, I suspect it would be preferable to try to find what standard is at fault, and just buy that, rather than a complete kit? 

That said, the cost of the individual parts in a calibration kit are quite high compared to the cost of complete kit. You  might only need a couple of standards faulty to make it worth buying a kit. But the probability of two standards being faulty would be very low. 

I had a load which was faulty - it could easily be seen if put on a cheap DVM, as the DC resistance was nothing like 50 Ohms. I would have thought the most likely problem is a load, as there is less to go wrong with an open or short. a DVM would detect gross errors. 

I suspect you could send the kit for cal, and ask Agilent to replace what componet is faulty. That said, doing a cal and working out what is wrong might be charged as two jobs. I've no idea. I'd try to sort out what standard is at fault myself. 

Dave

Edited by: drkirkby on Dec 17, 2012 9:21 PM

我发送VNA进行校准，因为它在几年内没有完成。
事实证明，分析仪本身确实存在问题，因为它们无法校准。
我正在等待有关问题是什么以及是否可以修复的回复。



     以下为原文

  I sent the VNA off for calibration itself as it hadn't been done in a few years. Turns out there is actually something wrong with the analyser itself as they could not calibrate it. I'm waiting on a reply about what the problem is and if it is possible to repair.

感谢DrJoel和Spacecase的建议。



     以下为原文

  Thanks for the advice DrJoel and Spacecase.