开云体育

UOn Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 15:12, yza <yzaVNA@...> wrote:

18 : @Dr. David Kirkby from Kirkby Microwave Ltd :

/g/nanovna-users/message/3181

Hello,

Thank you very much for your interest in our work !

No problem at all. This looks interesting.

We much appreciate that; indeed. Therefore, allow

us, please, to inform you that, on the one hand
English is -obviously- not our native language,

I realise that. I believe if the information was written in English, to
that the best of your English permits, that would be adequate.

and,

on the other hand, we are deeply regret since our
limited presentation abilities still create so much
confusion to you, even after you already read all
of our references on this subject, of course,
because these are : "the document" "including
adequate references, much like a scientific paper"
you ask for.

People are not going to read all the references in an attempt to follow
you, unless they have some idea what you are trying to achieve. Your very
first post in this thread is

*We just uploaded the current version:*

we don’t know what what this is about. There are other threads from you
started on a similar topic.


However, and in addition to these,

we already wrote, but obviously you didn't notice
it too, at:

14 : /g/nanovna-users/message/3111

This is part of the problem. Your work is spread across multiple threads.
It is very difficult to follow.

Please ask people how many people are following this. I expect it is very
few.

Nevertheless, it is needless to say that we don't
agree at all with your, obviously subjective, comment
that "The whole issue is far from simple"
-
which, by the way, it appears as it is orchestrally
emanated from some honorable specialists of
this forum

I believe that I am correct to say that the problem is not simple. If you
look at the VNWA, there are no proper uncertainty specifications. The
designer of that product is a university professor, but in my opinion at
least, there are no adequate specifications of uncertainty. The subject is
not easy.

Uncertainty of VNA measurements is still an active area of research. There
are many IEEE papers on the topic.

-
as it unreasonably discourages any Radio Amateur,
who is absolute beginner or newcomer to the subject
to even give it a chance to attempt to follow it !

I do not believe absolute beginners will be worry about uncertainty of
S-parameter measurements, as they will not even know what S-parameters
are! Absolute beginners will not know why a short, open and load are used
for calibration.

I personally believe that only once has a certain level of experience will
people start to question the uncertainty of their measurements.

Many amateur radio enthusiasts have very good knowledge of the use of VNAs.


And, as your scientific titles imply, it is certain that

you know very well that this is the worst anti-scientific
attempt to patronize the unsuspecting innocent
victim who comes here wanting to learn.

That is an unfair comment. I am just trying make you aware that few people
are following your posts. That is why this thread contains more posts from
yourself than everyone else added together.

Anyway, since we always try to be good

listeners, we shall also attempt to follow your
valuable subjective suggestions on this very subject
and to learn our lessons : Thank you once more !

I am trying to be constructive. I am trying to bring to your attention that
few, if any people are following your posts, which is why very few are
replying.

Now, regarding the objective points you had the

kindness to also set, which, we assume, you are
definitely referenced to:

[17] : From A Common User's Point Of View
/g/nanovna-users/message/2521

allow us, please, to also gladly answer them, as follows:

No I have not looked, as I do not have a good understanding of what you are
writing about.

(1) You are absolutely right about the "incomplete

definitions of the equations".

This was a deliberate omission, in order to check how
many of the honorable members of this forum
-
who desperately declare their thirsty for the Knowledge,
that is they also passionately seek it in way which
exactly coincides with that permanent of ours
-
are indeed interested for it. Therefore, we also thank
you very much, since you are giving us the happiness
to notice that:

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that you are *deliberately
not defining the terms in your equations to see who is following you. *That
sort of practice *maybe* acceptable if you are trying to teach school
children, but it certainly *not* appropriate practice in this forum. I
believe that the subject is sufficiently complicated for people to
understand, without your deliberate attempts to obscure the subject, just
to see who is following you.

I believe that you need to attempt to make your work understandable by as
many uses of this group as possible, rather than purposely obscure the
subject.

the capital letters are representatives of the "true value"

-
[ well, if you don't have a feeling of what this exactly
[ means, then allow us, please, to inform you that
[ you are not alone, but just one of us, and that all
[ together we are, with many others who have the
[ scientific honesty to admit that they also don't know
[ what that really means, because, in our humble
[ opinion, this is a notion lying on the boundaries
[ between the philosophy and the science, that is it
[ is a primitive notion, an undefined term, and all that
[ in addition to the fact that there are many others,
[ who do not accept that exists such a "true value"
-
A, B. C of three "known" loads, and Gama is of the

If A, B & C are the calibration standards, I would suggest that you use the
term “calibration standards”, rather than “loads”. I appreciate that
English is not your first language, but the term “loads” in the English
technical of VNAs will be considered by most as resistive devices.

*Normally*, the calibration standards for a one port calibration would be
termed the short, open and load in the English speaking world. In waveguide
and high microwave frequencies other standards are necessary.


"unknown" one, while the small letters are the

representatives of the corresponding (VNA or
nanoVNA) "raw" measurements, with the rest
of the multi-letters to stand for either the well-known
indexed S-parameters or for intermediate variables
-
just for the corresponding indexed Numerators to
be used in the calculations and|or the computations
-
which facilitate, as we hope, not only the
comprehension but also the programming, in the
way we are mentioning in [17], that is of complex
variables as they are all the aforementioned ones.

(2) Regarding your interesting contributing notes
about the phase matter, allow us, please to reserve
ourselves from commenting it right now.

Sincerely,

yin&pez@arg

Please understand that I am trying to help you and others by bringing to
your attention the fact that few, if anyone on this group is following you.


Dave.
--
Dr. David Kirkby,
Kirkby Microwave Ltd,
drkirkby@...

Telephone 01621-680100./ +44 1621 680100

Registered in England & Wales, company number 08914892.
Registered office:
Stokes Hall Lodge, Burnham Rd, Althorne, Chelmsford, Essex, CM3 6DT, United
Kingdom