The present application claims priority to PCT Application No. PCT/EP2007/005354, filed on Jun. 18, 2007, which claims priority to DE102006061144.6 filed Dec. 22, 2006 and DE102006031045.4 filed Jul. 5, 2006, the entire contents of which are herein incorporated by reference.
1. Field of the Invention
The invention relates to a method for direct measurement of the mixed-mode scattering matrix with a vectorial network analyzer (also referred to below as VNA).
2. Discussion of the Background
Lines conventionally used for the transmission of electrical signals generally comprise two separate conductors. In the past, these lines were generally unbalanced, that is to say, one conductor is disposed at earth or ground potential. With an earthed, unbalanced line, only one wave mode is generally capable of propagation. More recently, however, signals have also increasingly been transmitted via balanced-to-earth lines. In a balanced-to-earth line, also referred to as a balanced line, both conductors are detached from the ground potential. Accordingly, two fundamental modes are capable of propagation, namely the differential mode and the common mode. In the differential mode, which is preferred for signal transmission, the earthed signal voltages of the two conductors have the same amplitude but opposing phases. By contrast, in the common mode, not only the amplitudes but also the phases of the earthed, single-conductor modes are the same. Each physically-possible wave mode can be described as a linear combination of differential mode and common mode.
By comparison with that of earthed signals, the transmission of differential-mode signals has the advantages that, on the one hand, any interference signals, which may be present in the earth, are not added to the useful signal, from which they can no longer be separated, and, on the other hand, because of its symmetry, the line radiates a small interference-signal field. In view of the increasing spread of differential-mode transmission, electrical components with balanced ports are increasingly manufactured.
It is conventional to use network-analyzers to measure the electrical properties of components at higher frequencies. The primary test parameters of network analyzers are scattering (S-) parameters, which describe the transmission and reflection behaviour of a component, which will be referred to below as the device under test (MO). A vectorial network analyzer (VNA) provides the S-parameters as complex values, that is to say, with modulus and phase information. The complex S-parameters can be converted into further descriptive parameters of the device under test (MO), for example, Z-parameters, Y-parameters or group delay time.
However, commercially-available vectorial network analyzers have at their disposal only unbalanced (also referred to as nodal) test ports, to which the balanced ports of a device under test (MO) cannot be connected directly. It is therefore conventional to connect each of the two poles of a balanced device port to the pole conducting the signal voltage, that is to say, generally, to the inner coaxial conductor of an unbalanced VNA test port. Provided the device under test (MO) behaves in a linear manner, it is possible to measure the unbalanced S-parameters of the device under test (MO) with the unbalanced VNA, and then to convert these into balanced S-parameters. A conversion process of this kind is described in the specialist article by D. E. Bockelman, W. R. Eisenstadt: “Combined Differential and Common-Mode Scattering Parameters: Theory and Simulation”, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, Volume 43, No. 7, July 1995, pp. 1530-1539. The S-parameters of a device under test (MO), which provides balanced ports, are also described as mixed-mode parameters. This description results from the fact that the scattering matrix of a device under test with balanced ports describes the transmission between incoming and outgoing differential-mode and common-mode waves. If unbalanced ports are added, the transmission functions between three different modes are contained in the mixed-mode S-matrix. For example, the mixed-mode S-matrix SM of a filter with unbalanced input at port 1 and balanced output at port 2 provides the 9 elements presented below:
The element index s (single ended) denotes the unbalanced mode of port 1; d (differential) denotes the differential-mode and c (common) denotes the common mode of port 2.
Active devices under test with balanced ports, such as differential-mode amplifiers, can provide nonlinear behaviour. In this case, the transmission functions for common-mode waves and differential-mode waves cannot be obtained by linear superposition of the transmission functions for unbalanced waves. On the contrary, for devices under test of this kind, appropriate VNAs must be capable of generating a genuine balanced excitation signal (stimulus signal).
A VNA for devices under test with two balanced ports is disclosed, for example, in the U.S. Pat. No. 5,495,173 B1. In this context, the device under test is supplied alternately in the transmission and reflection direction with a differential-mode and a common-mode generator signal. These signals are generated using hybrid circuits. The disadvantage in this context is that maintaining the amplitude and phase conditions for pure differential-mode and common-mode signals is dependent upon the ideality of the hybrid circuits. Sufficiently-good properties can be realized with circuits of this kind only over a relatively-limited frequency range, wherein a maximum ratio between the lower and upper frequency limit of approximately 1:8 can be achieved. Furthermore, all of the circuit components behind the hybrids must provide the most identical transmission behaviour possible, so that the adjusted amplitude and phase ratio is maintained through to the test ports. The specialist article by D. E. Bockelman, W. R. Eisenstadt: “Calibration and Verification of the Pure-Mode Vectorial Network Analyser”, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, Volume 46, No. 7, July 1998, pages 1009 to 1012 discloses a method, in which the balanced parameters are measured with a non-ideal measuring device according to U.S. Pat. No. 5,495,173 B1 and then corrected with the assumption of linear behaviour of the device under test. However, if the device under test behaves in a nonlinear manner, this method cannot be used.
US patent specifications US 2004/0196083 A1 and US 2004/0196051 A1 or respectively the German published application DE 103 57 243 A1 corresponding to US 2004/0196083 A1 provide a solution to the problem of generating the most ideal differential-mode and common-mode signals possible over a broad frequency range.
The above disclosed method provides several weaknesses. On the one hand, a signal divider is required for the calibration of the VNA. The quality of this calibration therefore depends substantially upon the properties of the signal divider. Non-idealities of this component, such as imbalances, ultimately lead to amplitude and phase deviations of the DOHFSS signal. Furthermore, a signal divider is not a conventional accessory of a VNA and must therefore possibly be additionally purchased. On the other hand, the disclosed method does not take into consideration that a device under test connected to the DOHFSS can couple the two signal branches of the DOHFSS with one another and can therefore change the relationship set down in the correction table between the nominal and the actual phase difference. The two named problems are resolved by a method according to an embodiment of the present invention.
However, the object to be achieved, namely, a determination of elements of the mixed-mode matrix, is not achieved in full by generating a stimulus signal for a balanced device under test. The incident-wave and reflected-wave parameters must also be measured in differential mode and common mode. The measuring method according to an embodiment of the present invention can also achieve such an object.
It is known that VNAs for measuring the scattering parameters of unbalanced devices under test can be subjected to a system-error calibration (SFK), thereby considerably reducing the uncertainty of the test. An appropriate method in this context is disclosed, for example, in the German patent specification DE 35 12 795 C2. This method relates to a two-port VNA with two complex measuring points per port. As shown in DE 199 18 960 B4, the method can also be used in a similar manner for VNAs with more than two measuring points. However, for reasons of clarity, a two-port VNA will be assumed by way of example in paragraphs below.
Scaled versions of the matrices G and H are sufficient for the system-error correction of S-parameters, which are, of course, quotients of wave parameters. In order to reduce the number of unknown error terms, it is expedient to scale to one of the matrix elements, and, in fact, to one which does not become zero with an ideal VNA. The element H21, for example, is available for this purpose. Accordingly, the equations (2) and (3) are transformed as follows:
thereby leaving 7 error terms. The calibration methods, with which the error terms Gijn and Hijn can be determined by connecting partially-known or completely-known calibration standards, are therefore also referred to as 7-term calibration methods. These include, for example, the TRL, TRM, TOM and TNA methods.
However, the parameters Gijn and Hijn can also be determined using the known 10-term calibration method often referred to as the TOSM-method or SOLT-method. The system-error terms transmission synchronisation Tji from port i to j and reflection synchronisation RTi, directivity Di and source-port adaptation SMi at port i obtained in this context can be converted into scaled G-parameters and H-parameters via the following relationships:
With more than two test ports, the 10-term-parameters must be provided for this purpose in a uniformly-scaled form. This is achieved, for example, with a calibration method according to DE 199 18 697 A1.
The invention therefore advantageously provides a method for direct measurement of the mixed-mode scattering matrix with improved accuracy.
The invention is based on the idea that a system-error correction of the unbalanced incident and reflected waves must initially be implemented in order to obtain corrected waves, and, from these corrected waves, the amplitude and phase changes required in the signal generators to fulfill the desired amplitude and phase conditions must then be calculated and implemented. The method becomes substantially more efficient as a result of the preceding system-error correction before the calculation of the amplitude and phase changes.
If the two unbalanced ports of a DOHFSS in the network analyzer are not coupled to one another via the device under test, the necessary amplitude and phase changes of the signal generators can be calculated directly from the deviations of the amplitudes and phases. If the test ports are coupled, the procedure is more complicated. In this case, the complex component, of which the modulus and phase are dependent respectively only upon a signal generator associated with the port group, must first be determined for each incident, balanced wave associated with a coupled DOHFSS, before the overall vector of the amplitude and phase change necessary as a whole, which also contains the coupling, is calculated. In this context, a procedure, wherein the phase settings are rotated through 180°, and the moduli and phases of the partial vectors are determined from the resulting maxima and minima, is advantageous.
The accuracy of the solution determined in this context can be improved by linearization and variation by means of linear interference terms in accordance with interference theory. An iterative procedure is also possible.
An exemplary embodiment of the invention is described in greater detail below with reference to the drawings. The drawings are as follows:
The relationships (4) and (5) and the 7-term calibration method were originally developed for correcting system errors in the context of scattering-parameter measurements with a VNA. However, as will be shown below, they can also be used for system-error calibration of mixed-mode measurements.
A two-port VNA with two coherent sources can be used according to US 2004/0196083 A1 as a DOHFSS for generating differential-mode or common-mode signals. In general, it is also possible to adjust any required amplitude ratio and any required phase difference for the two sources. The sources can be realized, as in the case of US 2004/0196083 A1, in such a manner that a common original signal is split into two paths, and the amplitude and phase can be changed in one or both paths using vector modulators. However, two independent sources, which are normally operated at the same frequency and of which the coherence is secured, for example, by a phase-locked loop, can also be used. If the frequency of at least one source can be displaced for a time Δt by an offset Δf, this allows a defined rotation of the phase of this source by Δf·Δt·360° relative to the other source.
System errors according to
a1n=G21n·m1+G22n·m2 (6)
b1n=G11n·m1+G12n·m2 (7)
a2n=H11n·m3+H12n·m4 (8)
b2n=H21n·m3+H22n·m4 (9)
The desired amplitude ratio and the desired phase difference can be specified for the waves travelling towards the device under test and also for the scaled port voltages U1n and U2n. The port voltages can be calculated via the relationship Uin=ain+bin from the incident and reflected waves of the port i. The following relationships apply:
U1n=(G11n+G21n)·m1+(G12n+G22n)·m2 (10)
U2n=(H11n+1)·m3+(H12n+H22n)·m4 (11)
Since scaled and un-scaled waves or respectively voltages differ from one another only with reference to one factor, the target values for amplitude ratio and phase difference also apply for the un-scaled parameters in the same manner as for scaled parameters. In order to simplify the formulation, the index n referring to the scaling is therefore omitted in the paragraphs below. Moreover, equations (6) to (11) show that the linear relationship between measured parameters on the one hand and incident waves or respectively voltages on the other hand is formally identical. Only the correction coefficients differ. Accordingly, a separate observation of incident waves and voltages is not required. These are summarised in the paragraphs below under the superordinate term object parameters, that is to say, parameters for which a given Aw and Δφw is to be set. The character used in the formulae for these parameters will be q. After switching on, the DOHFSS is disposed in condition I. In this condition, the amplitude ratio is:
and the phase difference
ΔφI=arg(q2I)−arg(q1I)=φ2I−φ1I
The desired amplitude ratio is
and the desired phase difference is
Δφw=arg(q2w)−arg(q1w)=φ2w−φ1w (13)
By way of simplification, it will initially be assumed that the two sources are not coupled to one another via the device under test. Accordingly, the object parameters q1, q2 at the two ports are directly proportional to the “original” values q01 and q02 generated by the respective generators. In order to move from condition I to the desired final condition, the amplitude of the signal from the source 401 must be multiplied by the factor
and the offset
Δφ01=Δφw−ΔφI
must be added to its phase.
In order to establish the amplitude ratio A and phase difference Δφ of the object parameters, the method according to the invention differs from the related art in that it does not require an auxiliary three-port device (for example, a signal divider). A conventional system-error calibration is sufficient. The uncertainty in the measurement of A and Δφ depends substantially upon the uncertainty of the system-error correction data. This is generally significantly lower than the uncertainty regarding the balancing of a signal divider, especially over a large frequency range. Signal dividers with a narrow tolerance with reference to balancing properties are expensive and, by contrast with calibration units, are not among the standard accessories of a vectorial network analyzer VNA. If a sweep is carried out over the frequency, and ΔφI provides an initially arbitrary value at every measuring point in repeated sweeps, correction according to the related art is completely impracticable, because the device under test MO would have to be removed, and the signal divider would have to be connected at every measuring point. In the case of the method according to the invention, since the correction values need only be recorded once, and the actual correction is based only on the measurement of the current incident waves and reflected waves of the device ports, it can be used even under these more difficult conditions.
The method described can, in principle, also be used with signal sources, which provide more than two unbalanced outputs. The object parameter of a port is given as a reference, to which the desired amplitude ratios and phase differences for the other ports relate. In this case, the correction of the waves is based on a previously-implemented, uniformly-scaled, multi-port system-error calibration.
In general, the object parameters are not independent of one another, but coupled via the device under test MO. The case of two coupled ports will be considered by way of example. As shown in
q1=q01+qk2 (14)
and
q2=q02+qk1 (15)
The parameter q1 provides a component q01, generated by the source 401, of which the amplitude and phase are proportional to the amplitude and phase of the original wave a01 of this source. However, it can also over-couple the signal generated by the source 402 via the device under test 411 to the port 405, where it is reflected at the four-port device 403. The reflection takes place only at the four-port device 403, because—as already mentioned—an ideal matching of the source 401 is assumed. The component qk2 over-coupled from port 2 is dependent only upon the amplitude and phase of the source 402.
Unsatisfactory results are generally obtained, if the method described in the introduction for un-coupled DOHFSSs is used for a coupled DOHFSS.
For coupled parameters, the relationship between the desired values Δw, Δφw and the amplitude and phase change of the original parameter q01 required for these is not so directly evident as for uncoupled parameters. In order to calculate the required change of q01, the moduli and relative phases of the partial vectors q01 and qki must be known. However, only the sum vectors q1 and q2 can be measured directly. One possible method for determining the vectors q01 and q02 can be broken down into the following stages:
1. Starting from an initial condition I with arbitrary and unknown relative-phase position of the vectors q02 and qk1, the phase φ01 of the original parameter q01 is adjusted in such a manner that the modulus of the sum vector q2 adopts the maximum value |q2|max in the intermediate condition II. One possible procedure can be explained with reference to
Following this, condition II is restored by a further rotation through 180°.
2. The search for condition III, in which |q1| is maximal, is implemented according to the same method. In this context, the changes of φ01 are summated, thereby leading to the phase difference Δφ01m relative to the condition II. In condition III, the moduli of the partial vectors of q1 can be determined—once again using a 180° phase offset:
3. The still-required relative phases of the partial vectors relative to one another need to be determined only for an arbitrary superposition condition. Since q01 and qk1 are phase-coupled, all other possible conditions can also be calculated. Condition II is appropriate for the determination of the phase, because the phase difference between q02 and qk1 is 0° at the maximum of |q2| and is therefore already known. The partial vectors are illustrated in
If the angle α is considered as the signed phase difference α=φ1−φ01, its value in case b) is negative. If no case-distinction is to be introduced, (18) will require a similarly-negative β. This can be achieved with the generally-valid statement
β=180°−Δφ01m (19)
For the phases of the partial vectors q01 and qk2 still required, the following relationships apply:
φ01=φ1−α
φk2=φ01×φ01m
Accordingly, all of the partial vectors q0i and qki have been determined with reference to modulus and phase.
The remaining task is now to determine for the vector q01 the amplitude factor c01 and the phase change Δφ01, according to which the condition:
q2w=Aw·ej·Δφ
obtained by combining (12) and (13) is fulfilled. c01 and Δφ01 act on the over-coupling value qk1 in the same manner as on q01, so that—starting from the starting condition I—the following can be stated with regard to q1w and q2w:
q1w=c01·ej·Δφ
q2w=q02I+c01·ej·Δφ
The index I is omitted in the paragraphs below for reasons of simplicity. By substituting (21) and (22) in (20), the following is obtained:
q02+c01·ej·Δφ
A scalar equation can be formulated in each case for the real and imaginary part of the complex equation (23). With the following substitutions:
A=Aw·(sin(Δφw)·Im(q01)−cos(Δφw)·Re(q01))+Re(qk1)
B=Aw·(cos(Δφw)·Im(q01)+sin(Δφw)·Re(q01))−Im(qk1)
C=Aw·(cos(Δφw)·Re(qk2)−sin(Δφw)·Im(qk2))−Re(q02)
D=Aw·(cos(Δφw)·Im(qk2)+sin(Δφw)·Re(qk2))−Im(q02)
these two scalar equations can be resolved to give the required c01:
c01 is eliminated by equating (24) and (25), and a relationship is obtained for the similarly required Δφ01:
c01 can also be determined with (24) or (25). Reference must be made to the fact that (26) provides two solutions for Δφ01, which differ from one another by 180°. However, consideration of (24) and (25) shows that Δφ01 and −Δφ01 lead to solutions for c01, which also differ only in their sign, that is to say, both solutions are equivalent. The adjustment of c01 and Δφ01 at the source 401 is referred to below as the main correction.
With a real VNA, nonlinearities can occur in the adjustment of generator level and generator phase. Moreover, the change in the attenuation of the level-adjustment element often also brings about a phase change in the generator signal. It must therefore be taken into consideration that, after the main correction, the generator signal still does not yet completely fulfill the requirements. However, if the deviations are slight, a further improvement can be achieved by means of a linearised follow-on correction. The cost in measurement and therefore also the cost in time for this follow-on correction is considerably less than if a further, iterative main-correction stage were to be carried out.
With the total differentials of |q1|, |q2|, φ1 and φ2 after the amplitude change Δq01 and the phase change Δφ01, linear interference terms for these parameters can be substituted into the equations (12) and (13). The following equation system is obtained:
In equation (27), |q1|, |q2|, φ1 and φ2 denote the values obtained after the main correction. In order to indicate the partial derivations Dij of these values according to |q01| and respectively φ01, the values |q1|, |q2|, φ1 and φ2 must first be presented as functions of |q01| and respectively φ01.
In view of the cosine rule, the following applies for |q1| (see
|q1|=√{square root over ((|q01|)2+(|qk2|)2−2·|q01|·|qk2|·cos(β))}{square root over ((|q01|)2+(|qk2|)2−2·|q01|·|qk2|·cos(β))}{square root over ((|q01|)2+(|qk2|)2−2·|q01|·|qk2|·cos(β))} (28)
If the angular relationship
Δφ01m=φk2−φ01
shown in equations (12a) and (12b) is substituted in (19), equation (28) is transformed to give
The following applies for the phase of q1:
Accordingly, the following equations are obtained for the modulus and phase of q2:
The partial derivations Dij can now be calculated from (29) . . . (32):
Equation (27) can be resolved, for example, using the matrix inversion for the required follow-on correction values Δq01 Δφ01. If the desired amplitude and phase condition for a follow-on correction stage has still not been fulfilled adequately, several follow-on correction stages can be implemented iteratively.
The first part of the measurement task consisting in the determination of the mixed-mode S-matrix SM is completed by generating a pure differential-mode and respectively common-mode stimulus signal. However, a calculation of SM from the measured values determined with these stimulus signals is still required. Let the m unbalanced ports of the device under test be assigned to n logical ports, wherein a logical port can be balanced or unbalanced. In every case, n≦m. The following applies for the matrix SM:
{right arrow over (bM)}=SM·{right arrow over (aM)} (33)
Wherein the vectors {right arrow over (b)}M of the waves reflected from the device under test and {right arrow over (a)}M of the waves travelling towards the device under test are mixed-mode waves, that is to say, they can contain unbalanced waves as well as differential-mode and common-mode waves. The unbalanced, system-error-corrected waves are given by equations (6) to (9). For the incident and reflected differential-mode waves of a balanced port consisting of the unbalanced ports j, k=1 . . . m with the index i=1 . . . n, the following apply:
and for the common-mode waves, the following apply:
System-error-corrected wave vectors {right arrow over (a)}Mp and {right arrow over (b)}Mp can be measured for a given stimulus condition p, in which generator signals (unbalanced, common-mode or differential-mode) are applied to one or more logical test ports corresponding to the port type. m corrected wave vectors are obtained from m different stimulus conditions, wherein each port must be stimulated at least once with each wave mode associated with this port. In the simplest case, precisely one wave mode is stimulated at one port in each stimulus condition. If the vectors {right arrow over (a)}Mp and {right arrow over (b)}Mp are arranged in matrices:
AM=({right arrow over (aM1)}{right arrow over (aM2)} . . . {right arrow over (aMm)}) BM=({right arrow over (bM1)} {right arrow over (bM2)} . . . {right arrow over (bMm)})
the following is obtained with equation (33):
BM=SM·AM
Finally, the required matrix SM can be calculated from this as follows:
SM=BM·AM−1
The invention is not restricted to the exemplary embodiment described. Apart from the voltage, other object parameters can be used. All of the features described can be combined with one another as required within the framework of the invention.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
10 2006 031 045 | Jul 2006 | DE | national |
10 2006 061 144 | Dec 2006 | DE | national |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/EP2007/005354 | 6/18/2007 | WO | 00 | 6/24/2008 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2008/003398 | 1/10/2008 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5495173 | Bockelman et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
20040196051 | Dunsmore et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040196083 | Dunsmore | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040201383 | Anderson | Oct 2004 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
35 12795 | Oct 1996 | DE |
197 57 675 | Jun 1999 | DE |
199 18 697 | Nov 1999 | DE |
199 18 960 | Nov 1999 | DE |
199 19 592 | Nov 2000 | DE |
103 57 243 | Nov 2004 | DE |
103 57 244 | Nov 2004 | DE |
1 455 197 | Sep 2004 | EP |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20080278177 A1 | Nov 2008 | US |