AnsweredAssumed Answered

E8364B PNA

Question asked by Sterling019 on Jan 31, 2007
Latest reply on Jan 31, 2007 by Dr_joel
Hello,

I have been given the task of researching a PNA that is capable of measuring the devices that are contained in Agilent’s Verification kits (< 50GHz) such as 85055A, 85051B, 85053B and 85057B with the lowest possible uncertainties.  As I was searching around on Agilent’s main site, I happen to stumble onto this site, so I figured that I would just ask someone here.
We presently own a variety of VNA’s, mainly 8510C’s and 8753D’s. With the 8510’s being obsolete, the 8753’s being obsolete and some of our cal kits being obsolete, we figure that it is just a matter of time before the rest become obsolete.  So we are trying to purchase the equipment now to be able to measure the devices in the verification kits.
We have a budget of 200 to 250k to purchase the needed PNA and accessories.  I figured that the E8364B would be our best bet, so here are my questions:

We presently own a handful of precision kits such as the 85052C.  Would the TRL calibration give us a much lower uncertainty then our normal SL cal with the 85052B kit?

Will the E8364B lower our uncertainty of measurements “much” more than just measuring with the 8510C??

(The big question)…Would we be able to measure the devices with the E8364B and convert the data format so that the Verification Kit can be used on other VNA’s such as the 8510C, 8722 and possibility the older 8510’s with tape drives.???

We have also noticed that Agilent uses the 8510 system and “ET” standards for measuring all of our Verification kits….Why the 8510??? And what are the “ET” standards??

Bottom line is…that if we invest the 250k in standards then we have to be able to produce data for our Verification kits that has a low enough measurement uncertainty so that our user’s can perform the Verifications of their VNA’s  without giving them a false failure or false pass.  Will the E8364B with proper cal kits, test port cables and accessories be able to do this for us???

Thanks,  

Outcomes