开云体育

  1. HP-Agilent-Keysight-Equipment
  2. Messages
Expanded Topics Messages
Date
Re: Add option 002 to 3245A?...

 

Dave,
No connection with the 4284/4285s that I am aware of, but for the 3245A, Xdevs has a good set of documents for this (including CLIP, which is very complete and good res, and includes option 002), high res pics, and a very thorough overview of the unit.
Radu.?


On Fri, Aug 19, 2022, 9:08 PM Dr. David Kirkby, Kirkby Microwave Ltd <drkirkby@...> wrote:
On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 14:06, Richard Parrish <Richard@...> wrote:
The options on the 3245A are plug-n-play.? Just plug them in and they work.? I've had dozens and have added opt 002 to plain units.? You can't have option 001 & 002 together, its either one or the other.? Unfortunately, finding either an opt 002 board or a 3245A with opt 002 is next to impossible.? If you happen to find one, buy it quick, it won't be there long.
Richard

Are the circuit diagrams available? I found an option 002 board (accessory control) for the 4284A or 4285A LCR meters. Since I have both meters, I was tempted to make a copy of the board. These would be one hell of a lot easier with the circuit diagram, as it would be less error prone than trying just to copy the traces. Unfortunately the only circuit I have is in the 4285A manual, and that is unreadable (even one from Artek, although that's more readable than another copy). That board is quite simple - just 74 series logic chips, a fuse and a few decoupling capacitors. I realize other boards are not so easy to copy.

Re: [email protected]

 

What sort of strange breed of HP instrument is this?
[email protected]

Robert Carroll
 

开云体育





Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

20220819_171012.jpg

Re: Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.

 

开云体育

Having re-read the David Stockton presentation again, that along with the fact that these days we have high IP3 MMICs with very low noise figures and good return loss, it makes sense to look more closely at these devices. Tuning for minimum on the bench is much less risky and negative noise figures should be a thing of the past.

?

I can see that my winter will be a little less boring.

?

Interesting discussion, thanks everyone. The expensive box that Keysight sell will be rather like the R&S FSWP, nothing more than a dream.

?

Regards

?

Conrad PA5Y

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of n8zmTWH via groups.io
Sent: 19 August 2022 21:14
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.

?

Hi Conrad…

?

Actually, even the expensive box that Keysight sells to do the cal boils down to just comparing the unknown source to one that is traceable,? and simply adding the difference to the known ENR. So you are on the right track. As you know, the problem at low NF’s is quite simply that the magnitude of the accumulated uncertainties can become equal to or greater than the value of the NF.

?

You moonbounce guys also already know that an impedance mismatch between the antenna and the preamp input can really offset the benefits of a preamp tuned to perfection on the bench. Stockton hinted at this in his paper.

?

Tom, N8ZM

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Conrad, PA5Y
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 12:50 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.

?

Hello Tom, yes, I already read all this material (again) as well as the SM5BSZ stuff. As usual Leif’s pages are well worth a read. I will just compare with the calibrated Noise Com NC-346A that I have. It is good enough. The stuff that I do is sub-0.4dB which as you know is very tricky. Above 432 system analysis with celestial sources seems a whole lot more reliable. I am fortunate to live in a quiet location.

?

Anyway, it was good to refresh my memory. All brought about due to the acquisition of an HP-8790B and to help a friend with his home brew noise source.

?

Regards


Conrad PA5Y

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of n8zmTWH via groups.io
Sent: 19 August 2022 17:21
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.

?

This link will take you to a paper by David Stockton, GM4ZNX, the architect of the HP 8973 series Noise Figure analyzers, and and Ian White GM3SEK . In it, they discuss the errors in NF measurements, including ENR calibration.

?

?

The title of the paper to look for is:

?

GM4ZNX-GM3SEK_Noise-Figure-Measurment_EME2012-Long.pdf

?

There is also a procedure for NF measurement using a network analyzer that does not require knowing the ENR, as the VNA determines the DUT gain, thus eliminating the need for the Y-factor. It can be a bit more tedious, and there is, as always, a devil in the details, but it is very accurate. Dr. Dunsmore covers it in his microwave measurements handbook.

?

?

Tom, N8ZM

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Tom Lee
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 7:17 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.

?

Hi Charles,

Can you point us to where you saw this claim? Like David Kirby, I'm skeptical, but I'd like to see the details of the argument. It is true that, since noise factor is dimensionless, a purely ratiometric measurement process is in principle possible. But details matter.

-- Cheers,
Tom

-- 
Prof. Thomas H. Lee
Allen Ctr., Rm. 205
350 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-4070

On 8/19/2022 01:33, charles.edmonds@... wrote:

Hi, about 18 months ago I put the below on a Keysight forum expecting some helpful replies. Sadly I have not had a single reply as yet. (The concept of doing the measurement without the ENR being known is to compare derivatives of things not absolute values. This is the point where my mathematical cabilities implode).

Measuring the ENR of a Noise Source

Hi, I have read that it is possible to accurately measure the noise figure of a device without having a calibrated noise source. This is done by including an extra amplifier and an attenuator in the process. If the amplifier gain and the attenuator loss are very accurately known then knowing the exact ENR of the noise source is not necessary. The?device noise figure can?be?then determined as accurately as doing the normal Y-factor method with a calibrated noise source.

?

If this is correct then surely the next step would be to do the normal Y-factor process and change the ENR of the un-calibrated noise source in the calculation until the result given is the same as in the above procedure. So now the ENR of the un-calibrated noise source is known.

?

So how accurate could this result be? Could it be claimed that the un-calibrated noise source is now calibrated or only measured?

?

Would it be possible to create a spreadsheet to calculate all this using only the noise marker readings from something like an old 859xE or 856xE spectrum analyzer? (As an aside I don't think this would work using an E440xB spectrum analyzer would it?)?

?

My thought is that a hobbyist could buy 3 of the small amplifier modules seen on auction sites, the best being the ones that use the SBB5089 MMIC, as it have the right gain and a fairly flat frequency response. Also needed would be a termination and 2 attenuators. On one of the amplifiers the termination would be placed on the input and one of the attenuators placed on the output. This would be the un-calibrated noise source. The other preamplifiers would be the one normally used on the front end of the spectrum analyzer for a Y-factor method? measurement and the last is the DUT to be measured.

?
Re: Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.

 

开云体育

Yes, at least two noise receivers, to cover the frequency range of the instrument. So long as those receivers can see the noise output of the cold source, a NF measurement is possible. ?Actually, the PNA-X has a lot of measurement functions, including non-linear characterization.

?

Why would you ignore the vector error correction? An accurate measure of the DUT gain and other s-parameters is essential to the proper calculation of the NF using the cold source method. Keysight claims that the uncertainty using the PNA-X’s cold source technique cuts the uncertainty compared to the Y-factor method to less than ?, mostly because the DUT gain is known more accurately.

?

Tom, N8ZM

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dr. David Kirkby, Kirkby Microwave Ltd
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 3:44 PM
To: HP Agilent Keysight <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.

?

On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 16:20, <n8zmTWH@...> wrote:

There is also a procedure for NF measurement using a network analyzer that does not require knowing the ENR, as the VNA determines the DUT gain, thus eliminating the need for the Y-factor. It can be a bit more tedious, and there is, as always, a devil in the details, but it is very accurate. Dr. Dunsmore covers it in his microwave measurements handbook.

?

?

Tom, N8ZM

?

The Keysight PNA-X series instruments that allow noise figure measurements, also have spectrum analysis functions. They have noise receivers.

?

?

Once you have calibrated instruments like that, able to measure noise power quantitatively, then you don't need a calibrated noise source. Ignoring the vector error correction, you have not gained anything, as you have just moved the point at which calibration is required.

?

Dave

Re: Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.

 

On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 16:20, <n8zmTWH@...> wrote:
There is also a procedure for NF measurement using a network analyzer that does not require knowing the ENR, as the VNA determines the DUT gain, thus eliminating the need for the Y-factor. It can be a bit more tedious, and there is, as always, a devil in the details, but it is very accurate. Dr. Dunsmore covers it in his microwave measurements handbook.

?

?

Tom, N8ZM

?
The Keysight PNA-X series instruments that allow noise figure measurements, also have spectrum analysis functions. They have noise receivers.


Once you have calibrated instruments like that, able to measure noise power quantitatively, then you don't need a calibrated noise source. Ignoring the vector error correction, you have not gained anything, as you have just moved the point at which calibration is required.

Dave

Re: Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.

 

On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 04:01 AM, nigel adams wrote:
‘A meteorologist would say you’
Naw... Dr. Kirby didn't say that. He's a stickler for the proper spelling, and formatting, of scientific units and terms.?
Somehow, meteorologists must make the same kind of statements as metrologists.
Anyway thanks? to some sagacious, but excoriating, comments, I've installed the?siunitx.sty package. Now my computer can make errors in SI unit formatting for me. (That's the way it's all going anyway.)
Re: Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.

 

开云体育

Hi Conrad…

?

Actually, even the expensive box that Keysight sells to do the cal boils down to just comparing the unknown source to one that is traceable, ?and simply adding the difference to the known ENR. So you are on the right track. As you know, the problem at low NF’s is quite simply that the magnitude of the accumulated uncertainties can become equal to or greater than the value of the NF.

?

You moonbounce guys also already know that an impedance mismatch between the antenna and the preamp input can really offset the benefits of a preamp tuned to perfection on the bench. Stockton hinted at this in his paper.

?

Tom, N8ZM

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Conrad, PA5Y
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 12:50 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.

?

Hello Tom, yes, I already read all this material (again) as well as the SM5BSZ stuff. As usual Leif’s pages are well worth a read. I will just compare with the calibrated Noise Com NC-346A that I have. It is good enough. The stuff that I do is sub-0.4dB which as you know is very tricky. Above 432 system analysis with celestial sources seems a whole lot more reliable. I am fortunate to live in a quiet location.

?

Anyway, it was good to refresh my memory. All brought about due to the acquisition of an HP-8790B and to help a friend with his home brew noise source.

?

Regards


Conrad PA5Y

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of n8zmTWH via groups.io
Sent: 19 August 2022 17:21
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.

?

This link will take you to a paper by David Stockton, GM4ZNX, the architect of the HP 8973 series Noise Figure analyzers, and and Ian White GM3SEK . In it, they discuss the errors in NF measurements, including ENR calibration.

?

?

The title of the paper to look for is:

?

GM4ZNX-GM3SEK_Noise-Figure-Measurment_EME2012-Long.pdf

?

There is also a procedure for NF measurement using a network analyzer that does not require knowing the ENR, as the VNA determines the DUT gain, thus eliminating the need for the Y-factor. It can be a bit more tedious, and there is, as always, a devil in the details, but it is very accurate. Dr. Dunsmore covers it in his microwave measurements handbook.

?

?

Tom, N8ZM

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Tom Lee
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 7:17 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.

?

Hi Charles,

Can you point us to where you saw this claim? Like David Kirby, I'm skeptical, but I'd like to see the details of the argument. It is true that, since noise factor is dimensionless, a purely ratiometric measurement process is in principle possible. But details matter.

-- Cheers,
Tom

-- 
Prof. Thomas H. Lee
Allen Ctr., Rm. 205
350 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-4070
On 8/19/2022 01:33, charles.edmonds@... wrote:
Hi, about 18 months ago I put the below on a Keysight forum expecting some helpful replies. Sadly I have not had a single reply as yet. (The concept of doing the measurement without the ENR being known is to compare derivatives of things not absolute values. This is the point where my mathematical cabilities implode).
Measuring the ENR of a Noise Source
Hi, I have read that it is possible to accurately measure the noise figure of a device without having a calibrated noise source. This is done by including an extra amplifier and an attenuator in the process. If the amplifier gain and the attenuator loss are very accurately known then knowing the exact ENR of the noise source is not necessary. The?device noise figure can?be?then determined as accurately as doing the normal Y-factor method with a calibrated noise source.
?
If this is correct then surely the next step would be to do the normal Y-factor process and change the ENR of the un-calibrated noise source in the calculation until the result given is the same as in the above procedure. So now the ENR of the un-calibrated noise source is known.
?
So how accurate could this result be? Could it be claimed that the un-calibrated noise source is now calibrated or only measured?
?
Would it be possible to create a spreadsheet to calculate all this using only the noise marker readings from something like an old 859xE or 856xE spectrum analyzer? (As an aside I don't think this would work using an E440xB spectrum analyzer would it?)?
?
My thought is that a hobbyist could buy 3 of the small amplifier modules seen on auction sites, the best being the ones that use the SBB5089 MMIC, as it have the right gain and a fairly flat frequency response. Also needed would be a termination and 2 attenuators. On one of the amplifiers the termination would be placed on the input and one of the attenuators placed on the output. This would be the un-calibrated noise source. The other preamplifiers would be the one normally used on the front end of the spectrum analyzer for a Y-factor method? measurement and the last is the DUT to be measured.
?

					


				
				
				
			

			
			

	

	
			

			

				
					

				
				
			

			

				

					

				

			

			
			
			

			


				
	



		
			
		
			
				
	
		
	

		
			

			
			

			
			
				
				

					

						
							
							

							Re: Add option 002 to 3245A?...
							
						
					

				

				

			
			

				

					


						
							

								
								
							

						
					

					

						
							


						
						 
						
							
							
						
						
					

				

			

			

			

				
On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 14:06, Richard Parrish <Richard@...> wrote:









The options on the 3245A are plug-n-play.? Just plug them in and they work.? I've had dozens and have added opt 002 to plain units.? You can't have option 001 & 002 together, its either one or the other.? Unfortunately, finding either an opt 002 board or a
 3245A with opt 002 is next to impossible.? If you happen to find one, buy it quick, it won't be there long.



Richard

Are the circuit diagrams available? I found an option 002 board (accessory control) for the 4284A or 4285A LCR meters. Since I have both meters, I was tempted to make a copy of the board. These would be one hell of a lot easier with the circuit diagram, as it would be less error prone than trying just to copy the traces. Unfortunately the only circuit I have is in the 4285A manual, and that is unreadable (even one from Artek, although that's more readable than another copy). That board is quite simple - just 74 series logic chips, a fuse and a few decoupling capacitors. I realise other boards are not so easy to copy. 

				
				
				
			

			
			

	

	
			

			

				
					

				
				
			

			

				

					

				

			

			
			
			

			


				
	



		
			
		
			
				
	
		
	

		
			

			
			

			
			
				
				

					

						
							
							

							Re: Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.
							
						
					

				

				

			
			

				

					


						
							

								
								
							

						
					

					

						
							


						
						 
						
							
							
						
						
					

				

			

			

			

				









开云体育




Hello Tom, yes, I already read all this material (again) as well as the SM5BSZ stuff. As usual Leif’s pages are well worth a read. I will just compare with the calibrated Noise Com NC-346A that I
 have. It is good enough. The stuff that I do is sub-0.4dB which as you know is very tricky. Above 432 system analysis with celestial sources seems a whole lot more reliable. I am fortunate to live in a quiet location.


?


Anyway, it was good to refresh my memory. All brought about due to the acquisition of an HP-8790B and to help a friend with his home brew noise source.


?


Regards




Conrad PA5Y


?







				
					
					

					


From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
On Behalf Of n8zmTWH via groups.io

Sent: 19 August 2022 17:21

To: [email protected]

Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.




?


This link will take you to a paper by David Stockton, GM4ZNX,
 the architect of the HP 8973 series Noise Figure analyzers, and and Ian White GM3SEK . In it,
 they discuss the errors in NF measurements, including ENR calibration.


?




?


The title of the paper to look for is:


?


GM4ZNX-GM3SEK_Noise-Figure-Measurment_EME2012-Long.pdf


?


There is also a procedure for NF measurement using a network analyzer that does not require knowing the ENR, as the VNA determines the DUT gain, thus eliminating
 the need for the Y-factor. It can be a bit more tedious, and there is, as always, a devil in the details, but it is very accurate. Dr. Dunsmore covers it in his microwave measurements handbook.


?


?




Tom, N8ZM




?






From: 
[email protected] <[email protected]>
On Behalf Of Tom Lee

Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 7:17 AM

To: [email protected]

Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.






?


Hi Charles,



Can you point us to where you saw this claim? Like David Kirby, I'm skeptical, but I'd like to see the details of the argument. It is true that, since noise factor is dimensionless, a purely ratiometric measurement process is in principle possible. But details
 matter.



-- Cheers,

Tom






-- 


Prof. Thomas H. Lee


Allen Ctr., Rm. 205


350 Jane Stanford Way


Stanford University


Stanford, CA 94305-4070






On 8/19/2022 01:33, 
charles.edmonds@... wrote:






Hi, about 18 months ago I put the below on a Keysight forum expecting some helpful replies. Sadly I have not had a single reply as yet. (The concept of doing the measurement without the ENR
 being known is to compare derivatives of things not absolute values. This is the point where my mathematical cabilities implode).




Measuring the ENR of a Noise Source










Hi, I have read that it is possible to accurately measure the noise figure of a device without having a calibrated
 noise source. This is done by including an extra amplifier and an attenuator in the process. If the amplifier gain and the attenuator loss are very accurately known then knowing the exact ENR of the noise source is not necessary. The?device noise figure can?be?then
 determined as accurately as doing the normal Y-factor method with a calibrated noise source.


?


If this is correct then surely the next step would be to do the normal Y-factor process and change the ENR of the
 un-calibrated noise source in the calculation until the result given is the same as in the above procedure. So now the ENR of the un-calibrated noise source is known.


?


So how accurate could this result be? Could it be claimed that the un-calibrated noise source is now calibrated or
 only measured?


?


Would it be possible to create a spreadsheet to calculate all this using only the noise marker readings from something
 like an old 859xE or 856xE spectrum analyzer? (As an aside I don't think this would work using an E440xB spectrum analyzer would it?)?


?


My thought is that a hobbyist could buy 3 of the small amplifier modules seen on auction sites, the best being the
 ones that use the SBB5089 MMIC, as it have the right gain and a fairly flat frequency response. Also needed would be a termination and 2 attenuators. On one of the amplifiers the termination would be placed on the input and one of the attenuators placed on
 the output. This would be the un-calibrated noise source. The other preamplifiers would be the one normally used on the front end of the spectrum analyzer for a Y-factor method? measurement and the last is the DUT to be measured.










?











					


				
				
				
			

			
			

	

	
			

			

				
					

				
				
			

			

				

					

				

			

			
			
			

			


				
	



		
			
		
			
				
	
		
	

		
			

			
			

			
			
				
				

					

						
							
							

							Re: Add option 002 to 3245A?...
							
						
					

				

				

			
			

				

					


						
							

								
								
							

						
					

					

						
							


						
						 
						
							
							
						
						
					

				

			

			

			

				
I’ve asked around for an option 002 for my 3245A for a while now and had no success finding one. But as has been said, all you need to do is plug it in.

- Keith

				
				
				
			

			
			

	

	
			

			

				
					

				
				
			

			

				

					

				

			

			
			
			

			


				
	



		
			
		
			
				
	
		
	

		
			

			
			

			
			
				
				

					

						
							
							

							Re: Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it?
							
						
					

				

				

			
			

				

					


						
							

								
								
							

						
					

					

						
							


						
						 
						
							
							
						
						
					

				

			

			

			

				
Maury used to be the source for noise calibration equipment. They made several different models of hot-cold fixed terminations that were well calibrated including the thermal gradient from the termination resistor to the coaxial connector or waveguide on the outside.? I own a few of them.? They got out of that business after the founder (Maury) passed away.

At Cal-Tech, the specialists in super low noise LNAs for radio astronomy have created a noise calibration system that uses liquid Helium as the cold source temperature. They do measure all complex impedances with a VNA.
It is now spun off to a separate for-profit company.

				
				
				
			

			
			

	

	
			

			

				
					

				
				
			

			

				

					

				

			

			
			
			

			


				
	



		
			
		
			
				
	
		
	

		
			

			
			

			
			
				
				

					

						
							
							

							Anyone looking for a Tek 577/177 curve tracer? 436A power meters?
							
						
					

				

				

			
			

				

					


						
							
								
								
									walter shawlee
								
							
						
					

					

						
							


						
						 
						
							
							
						
						
					

				

			

			

			

				
I just got two in good physical shape, but haven't started to go through them yet.


(I don't have any internal need for these (already have one), so before I pour


time and effort into them, I thought I'd check to see if there's any interest.


?


The 177's are installed, but no package adapters came with them. Also got in


a working Tek 475 and 485, both with bright CRTs. going through them now.?


?


Lots of cheap goodies have been posted up the the stuff page in the surprise, R+D parts and?


$1 and $2 sections, might be something useful to you. see:


https://www.sphere.bc.ca/test/stuffday.html


?


more items going up this weekend, including good hp 436A power meters and sensors.


all the best,


walter (walter2 -at- sphere.bc.ca)


sphere research corp.

				
				
				
			

			
			

	

	
			

			

				
					

				
				
			

			

				

					

				

			

			
			
			

			


				
	



		
			
		
			
				
	
		
	

		
			

			
			

			
			
				
				

					

						
							
							

							Re: Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.
							
						
					

				

				

			
			

				

					


						
							

								
								
							

						
					

					

						
							


						
						 
						
							
							
						
						
					

				

			

			

			

				





开云体育
This link will take you to a paper by David Stockton, GM4ZNX, the architect of the HP 8973 series Noise Figure analyzers, and and Ian White GM3SEK . In it, they discuss the errors in NF measurements, including ENR calibration.
?
?
The title of the paper to look for is:
?
GM4ZNX-GM3SEK_Noise-Figure-Measurment_EME2012-Long.pdf
?
There is also a procedure for NF measurement using a network analyzer that does not require knowing the ENR, as the VNA determines the DUT gain, thus eliminating the need for the Y-factor. It can be a bit more tedious, and there is, as always, a devil in the details, but it is very accurate. Dr. Dunsmore covers it in his microwave measurements handbook.
?
?
Tom, N8ZM
?

				
					
					

					


From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Tom Lee
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 7:17 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.
?
Hi Charles,

Can you point us to where you saw this claim? Like David Kirby, I'm skeptical, but I'd like to see the details of the argument. It is true that, since noise factor is dimensionless, a purely ratiometric measurement process is in principle possible. But details matter.

-- Cheers,
Tom

-- 
Prof. Thomas H. Lee
Allen Ctr., Rm. 205
350 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-4070
On 8/19/2022 01:33, charles.edmonds@... wrote:
Hi, about 18 months ago I put the below on a Keysight forum expecting some helpful replies. Sadly I have not had a single reply as yet. (The concept of doing the measurement without the ENR being known is to compare derivatives of things not absolute values. This is the point where my mathematical cabilities implode).
Measuring the ENR of a Noise Source
Hi, I have read that it is possible to accurately measure the noise figure of a device without having a calibrated noise source. This is done by including an extra amplifier and an attenuator in the process. If the amplifier gain and the attenuator loss are very accurately known then knowing the exact ENR of the noise source is not necessary. The?device noise figure can?be?then determined as accurately as doing the normal Y-factor method with a calibrated noise source.
?
If this is correct then surely the next step would be to do the normal Y-factor process and change the ENR of the un-calibrated noise source in the calculation until the result given is the same as in the above procedure. So now the ENR of the un-calibrated noise source is known.
?
So how accurate could this result be? Could it be claimed that the un-calibrated noise source is now calibrated or only measured?
?
Would it be possible to create a spreadsheet to calculate all this using only the noise marker readings from something like an old 859xE or 856xE spectrum analyzer? (As an aside I don't think this would work using an E440xB spectrum analyzer would it?)?
?
My thought is that a hobbyist could buy 3 of the small amplifier modules seen on auction sites, the best being the ones that use the SBB5089 MMIC, as it have the right gain and a fairly flat frequency response. Also needed would be a termination and 2 attenuators. On one of the amplifiers the termination would be placed on the input and one of the attenuators placed on the output. This would be the un-calibrated noise source. The other preamplifiers would be the one normally used on the front end of the spectrum analyzer for a Y-factor method? measurement and the last is the DUT to be measured.
?

					


				
				
				
			

			
			

	

	
			

			

				
					

				
				
			

			

				

					

				

			

			
			
			

			


				
	



		
			
		
			
				
	
		
	

		
			

			
			

			
			
				
				

					

						
							
							

							looking for 5315A counter handle
							
						
					

				

				

			
			

				

					


						
							

								
								
							

						
					

					

						
							


						
						 
						
							
							
						
						
					

				

			

			

			

				
I am looking for the brown folding handle for the 5315A 100 MHz counters.
I believe it is HP p/n 5040-8058.

I recently acquired a nice 5315A with TCXO and Channel C options but it
is missing the handle--  which makes it more useful when put at an angle,
serving as a foot if using the unit on the bench.

Does anyone have a parts mule or extra handle floating around?  I suspect
people removed the handle when they put them on a shelf with other
instruments to reduce their occupied space.

I believe there is also a DMM from the same series that would likely
use this same handle.

Thanks!

Chris
-- 
Chris Elmquist

				
				
				
			

			
			

	

	
			

			

				
					

				
				
			

			

				

					

				

			

			
			
			

			


				
	



		
			
		
			
				
	
		
	

		
			

			
			

			
			
				
				

					

						
							
							

							Re: 8566B noticeable negative spikes in noise floor do you see this also?
							
						
					

				

				

			
			

				

					


						
							

								
								
							

						
					

					

						
							


						
						 
						
							
							
						
						
					

				

			

			

			

				
Thanks for the reply Popig, this gives me a good reference.

				
				
				
			

			
			

	

	
			

			

				
					

				
				
			

			

				

					

				

			

			
			
			

			


				
	



		
			
		
			
				
	
		
	

		
			

			
			

			
			
				
				

					

						
							
							

							Re: Copying firmware in Intel P80C51 CPU with Mask Program ROM
							
						
					

				

				

			
			

				

					


						
							

								
								
							

						
					

					

						
							


						
						 
						
							
							
						
						
					

				

			

			

			

				
I have also used a method on other types of devices with mask ROMs where I simply built a breadboarded circuit to make the device appear just like a regular ROM which my burner could work with electrically.? This was done years ago to read the mask ROMs on two I/O chips from a GM engine control module which nobody had hacked yet.? Oh, the joys of 68xx assembly language disassembly and then trying to wrap your head around what the machine/assembly language writer was intending with each subroutine.? I sure am glad that there is now a glut of inexpensive EFI engine controllers on the market, especially since automotive ECMs have become so complex relative to those early days.? I'm even more glad that I've shifted focus; hot rods get quite expensive, even as compared to diddling with older test equipment.


Glad you figured out how to get "there" from "here"!

				
				
				
			

			
			

	

	
			

			

				
					

				
				
			

			

				

					

				

			

			
			
			

			


				
	



		
			
		
			
				
	
		
	

		
			

			
			

			
			
				
				

					

						
							
							

							Re: Add option 002 to 3245A?...
							
						
					

				

				

			
			

				

					


						
							

								
								
							

						
					

					

						
							


						
						 
						
							
							
						
						
					

				

			

			

			

				








开云体育



The options on the 3245A are plug-n-play.? Just plug them in and they work.? I've had dozens and have added opt 002 to plain units.? You can't have option 001 & 002 together, its either one or the other.? Unfortunately, finding either an opt 002 board or a
 3245A with opt 002 is next to impossible.? If you happen to find one, buy it quick, it won't be there long.



Richard





				
					
					

					




From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Radu Bogdan Dicher via groups.io <vondicher@...>

Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 3:40 AM

To: [email protected] <[email protected]>

Subject: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Add option 002 to 3245A?...

?




Hi all,

As I've been looking for some reference/calibration level equipment for my bench, the 3245A has kind of come into focus for me. One of the main reasons is the shared hardware with the 3458A, which kid of points out its superior precision
 (DC accuracy:?±0.00071% + 85?V) - see?.



As units with option 002 (HV - 10x - output) seem to be very hard to come by, assuming I'd be able to grab an A3 board, I'm wondering how
 hard it'd be to add this option to an existing unit. Many come with option 001 (which adds a second output channel) which also means the second row, top/right BNC out connector (used by option 002) would be there.?



I'm just exploring this option as more of a thought experiment, but given there seems to be just one adjustment on the actual A3 board
 - zero offset, which doesn't seem impossible to adjust with less than stellar equipment (by which I mean something like a "laboratory standard" grade 3458A) - getting one such board added to an existing unit doesn't seem completely out of reach.?



Anyone willing to think on this with me?...



Thank you,

Radu.?







					


				
				
				
			

			
			

	

	
			

			

				
					

				
				
			

			

				

					

				

			

			
			
			

			


				
	



		
			
		
			
				
	
		
	

		
			

			
			

			
			
				
				

					

						
							
							

							Re: Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.
							
						
					

				

				

			
			

				

					


						
							

								
								
							

						
					

					

						
							


						
						 
						
							
							
						
						
					

				

			

			

			

				

  
  




开云体育

    Hi Charles,

    

    Can you point us to where you saw this claim? Like David Kirby, I'm
    skeptical, but I'd like to see the details of the argument. It is
    true that, since noise factor is dimensionless, a purely ratiometric
    measurement process is in principle possible. But details matter.

    

    -- Cheers,

    Tom

    
-- 
Prof. Thomas H. Lee
Allen Ctr., Rm. 205
350 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-4070


    
On 8/19/2022 01:33,
      charles.edmonds@... wrote:

    

    

				
					
					

					



      
      Hi, about 18 months ago I put the below on a Keysight forum
      expecting some helpful replies. Sadly I have not had a single
      reply as yet. (The concept of doing the measurement without the
      ENR being known is to compare derivatives of things not absolute
      values. This is the point where my mathematical cabilities
      implode).

      

      
Measuring the ENR of a Noise
          Source

      

        

          

            
Hi, I have read that it
                  is possible to accurately measure the noise figure of
                  a device without having a calibrated noise source.
                  This is done by including an extra amplifier and an
                  attenuator in the process. If the amplifier gain and
                  the attenuator loss are very accurately known then
                  knowing the exact ENR of the noise source is not
                  necessary. The?device noise figure can?be?then
                  determined as accurately as doing the normal Y-factor
                  method with a calibrated noise source.

            
?

            
If this is correct then
                  surely the next step would be to do the normal
                  Y-factor process and change the ENR of the
                  un-calibrated noise source in the calculation until
                  the result given is the same as in the above
                  procedure. So now the ENR of the un-calibrated noise
                  source is known.

            
?

            
So how accurate could
                  this result be? Could it be claimed that the
                  un-calibrated noise source is now calibrated or only
                  measured?

            
?

            
Would it be possible to
                  create a spreadsheet to calculate all this using only
                  the noise marker readings from something like an old
                  859xE or 856xE spectrum analyzer? (As an aside I don't
                  think this would work using an E440xB spectrum
                  analyzer would it?)?

            
?

            
My thought is that a
                  hobbyist could buy 3 of the small amplifier modules
                  seen on auction sites, the best being the ones that
                  use the SBB5089 MMIC, as it have the right gain and a
                  fairly flat frequency response. Also needed would be a
                  termination and 2 attenuators. On one of the
                  amplifiers the termination would be placed on the
                  input and one of the attenuators placed on the output.
                  This would be the un-calibrated noise source. The
                  other preamplifiers would be the one normally used on
                  the front end of the spectrum analyzer for a Y-factor
                  method? measurement and the last is the DUT to be
                  measured.

          

        

      

      
    

    

  


					


				
				
				
			

			
			

	

	
			

			

				
					

				
				
			

			

				

					

				

			

			
			
			

			


				
	



		
			
		
			
				
	
		
	

		
			

			
			

			
			
				
				

					

						
							
							

							Re: Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.
							
						
					

				

				

			
			

				

					


						
							

								
								
							

						
					

					

						
							


						
						 
						
							
							
						
						
					

				

			

			

			

				





开云体育
Ha Ha, 
‘A meteorologist would say you’ 
I assume you meant to say Metrologist, otherwise you are probably predicting the weather. ?
<grins>
Nigel
?

				
					
					

					


From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dr. David Kirkby, Kirkby Microwave Ltd
Sent: 19 August 2022 11:53
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Noise head ENR calibration - how do keysight do it? A question that was put to Keysight.
?
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 03:03 AM, <charles.edmonds@...> wrote:
Hi, about 18 months ago I put the below on a Keysight forum expecting some helpful replies. Sadly I have not had a single reply as yet. (The concept of doing the measurement without the ENR being known is to compare derivatives of things not absolute values. This is the point where my mathematical cabilities implode).
Measuring the ENR of a Noise Source
Hi, I have read that it is possible to accurately measure the noise figure of a device without having a calibrated noise source. 
?
?
I don't see how. 

If you add an amplifier, that amplifier will contribute its own noise, which you probably don't know, as you will not know its noise figure. If you do know the noise figure and gain of that amplifier, you might as well terminate the input in 50 ohm and then you have a calibrated noise source. 

There are ways to calibrate noise sources yourself. SM5BSZ has done a lot of work on this - look over his website, which is unfortunately not that well organised. I don't know if he claims to get uncertainties as low as Agilent, but I know on one of his pages he states that the ENR uncertainty quoted by Agilent were conservative. That rather suggests to me he is working with uncertainties lower than Agilent claim. His methods are slow, and not suited to a production environment like a Keysight noise figure meter will be, but I believe he gets quite low uncertainties. 
Could it be claimed that the un-calibrated noise source is now calibrated or only measured?
A meteorologist would say you can't make a measurement unless you know your uncertainty. A measurement must have 

1) A statement of the value
2) An uncertainty
3) The coverage factor expressed in standard deviations or percent. For example, if you say your uncertainty is 10 mV, how sure are you of that? 95% sure? 99% sure? 

So a measurement would be 

"The noise figure is 1.4 dB +/- 0.2 dB with a confidence of 95%."

Dave

					


				
				
				
			

			
			

	

	
			

			

				
					

				
				
			

			

				

					

				

			

			
			
			

			


				
	



		
			
		
	

	
	
	
	


	

		
		
		
		
		
	

	

		
		
		
		
		
	

	
	

		
		
		
		
	



	

		

			
	
		

			
				22941 - 22960 of 151545