我不知道我的头脑中有多好的calpod负载，但我确信它提供了一个比通过路径更好的匹配（默认配置不使用时）。
用calpods和ECals实现的是我们不必复制完美的开启，短路和负载。
我们只需创建在史密斯圆图上合理分离并具有已知阻抗的状态。
所以我们称之为“负载”状态并不一定是一个好的负载（如机械宽带负载）。
然而，话虽这么说，你可以用2端口校正测量多路器件的程度在很大程度上取决于DUT本身。
让我们举一个3端口功率分配器的简单例子。
测量这种设备的最佳方法是使用3端口校准，但如果一次只能测量2个端口，那么良好的测量需要在未使用的端口上提供50欧姆的良好负载。
另一方面，如果你有一个多端口设备，不同路径之间存在一些内置隔离（如T / R模块），那么一个好的2端口测量不一定取决于良好的终端
未使用的端口。
因此，故事的寓意是，在理想的情况下，您应该始终使用n端口校准来测量n端口设备，但如果不可能，则使用calpod负载状态作为未使用端口的终端
不要让你的测量结果最差，实际上可能比不做任何事情要好一些。
以上来自于谷歌翻译
以下为原文
I don't know off the top of my head how good the load of a calpod is, but I'm sure it presents a better match than it's thru path (the default configuration when it is not being used). the thing to realize with calpods and ECals is that we don't have to replicate perfect opens, shorts and loads. we simply have to create states that are reasonably separated on the smith chart and have a known impedance. so what we call a "load" state isn't necessarily a good load (like a mechanical broadband load).
however, that being said, how well you can measure a mutliport device with a 2-port correction depends largely on the DUT itself. let's take a simple example of a 3 port power divider. the best way to measure such a device is to use a 3 port calibration, but if you can only measure 2 ports at a time, then a good measurement requires a good 50 ohm load on the unused port. On the other hand if you had a multiport device, where there was some built-in isolation between the different paths (like a T/R module), then a good 2-port measurement wouldn't necessarily depend on a good termination of the unused port(s).
So the moral of the story is that in an ideal situation you should always use an n-port calibration to measure an n-port device, but if that is not possible, then using the calpod load states as a termination for the unused ports shouldn't make your measurements any worst and it may actually be a little better than not doing anything.
我不知道我的头脑中有多好的calpod负载，但我确信它提供了一个比通过路径更好的匹配（默认配置不使用时）。
用calpods和ECals实现的是我们不必复制完美的开启，短路和负载。
我们只需创建在史密斯圆图上合理分离并具有已知阻抗的状态。
所以我们称之为“负载”状态并不一定是一个好的负载（如机械宽带负载）。
然而，话虽这么说，你可以用2端口校正测量多路器件的程度在很大程度上取决于DUT本身。
让我们举一个3端口功率分配器的简单例子。
测量这种设备的最佳方法是使用3端口校准，但如果一次只能测量2个端口，那么良好的测量需要在未使用的端口上提供50欧姆的良好负载。
另一方面，如果你有一个多端口设备，不同路径之间存在一些内置隔离（如T / R模块），那么一个好的2端口测量不一定取决于良好的终端
未使用的端口。
因此，故事的寓意是，在理想的情况下，您应该始终使用n端口校准来测量n端口设备，但如果不可能，则使用calpod负载状态作为未使用端口的终端
不要让你的测量结果最差，实际上可能比不做任何事情要好一些。
以上来自于谷歌翻译
以下为原文
I don't know off the top of my head how good the load of a calpod is, but I'm sure it presents a better match than it's thru path (the default configuration when it is not being used). the thing to realize with calpods and ECals is that we don't have to replicate perfect opens, shorts and loads. we simply have to create states that are reasonably separated on the smith chart and have a known impedance. so what we call a "load" state isn't necessarily a good load (like a mechanical broadband load).
however, that being said, how well you can measure a mutliport device with a 2-port correction depends largely on the DUT itself. let's take a simple example of a 3 port power divider. the best way to measure such a device is to use a 3 port calibration, but if you can only measure 2 ports at a time, then a good measurement requires a good 50 ohm load on the unused port. On the other hand if you had a multiport device, where there was some built-in isolation between the different paths (like a T/R module), then a good 2-port measurement wouldn't necessarily depend on a good termination of the unused port(s).
So the moral of the story is that in an ideal situation you should always use an n-port calibration to measure an n-port device, but if that is not possible, then using the calpod load states as a termination for the unused ports shouldn't make your measurements any worst and it may actually be a little better than not doing anything.
举报
