Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
All,
I am trying to measure antenna impedance. For this I intend to us a directional coupler to isolate reflected signal. After using the coupler for a while I believe that it introduces a phase shift, that shift seems to be related to frequency. This creates a bit of a catch 22. Antenna resonance is defined as the frequency where there is no reflected complex component. If the tool to measure this is also frequency dependent how can this be accomplished? Is this even the best method? Do bi-directional couplers automatically compensate for frequency shift? Thanks - Dan kb0qil |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi Dan
Normally you would calibrate your test gear against a known resistive load first. If you coupler creates a phase shift that can be compensated for either in the test equipment or by varying the feedline length. (ouch!) All the network analysers I have used allow you to calibrate 50r, open or short. You can further test you setup by measuring known lengths of coax "stubs" that would present a reactive load. I imagine a directional coupler would introduce a phase shift as it has an electrical length that must be allowed for. I saw a real impressive antenna impedence measuring device that used coaxial cable as the tuned reference elements. It was of course frequency dependent. It was made for 2M but I guess the design would be easy to replicate for other frequencies given. It has about 10% usable bandwidth. I was going to make one for HF with BNC terminated coax lengths for each band, but never did! Go to http://www.vhfdx.oz-hams.org/and Measurements or http://www.vhfdx.oz-hams.org/docs/ZMeterVK2ZAB.pdf Apologies for not answering your exact questions. Cheers Bob W5/VK2YQA dansawyeror wrote: All, I am trying to measure antenna impedance. For this I intend to us a directional coupler to isolate reflected signal. After using the coupler for a while I believe that it introduces a phase shift, that shift seems to be related to frequency. This creates a bit of a catch 22. Antenna resonance is defined as the frequency where there is no reflected complex component. If the tool to measure this is also frequency dependent how can this be accomplished? Is this even the best method? Do bi-directional couplers automatically compensate for frequency shift? Thanks - Dan kb0qil |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I am trying to measure antenna impedance. For this I intend to us a
directional coupler to isolate reflected signal. After using the coupler for a while I believe that it introduces a phase shift, that shift seems to be related to frequency. This creates a bit of a catch 22. Antenna resonance is defined as the frequency where there is no reflected complex component. If the tool to measure this is also frequency dependent how can this be accomplished? Is this even the best method? Do bi-directional couplers automatically compensate for frequency shift? Thanks - Dan kb0qil What you are measuring with a directional coupler is the complex reflection coeficiant. If the measurement is for low frequencies (i.e. 30 MHz), and the load is at the input of the directional coupler, then you will probably obtain a realistic figure for complex "Gamma". Ideally you need a short circuit, open circuit, and 50 ohm load to determine if the system is calibrated. Short circuit Gamma = 1 180 Open circuit Gamma = 1 0 50 Ohm Gamma = 0 If the load is at the end of a length of coaxial cable you have to comphensate for the phase shift error at every measurement frequency. Since you are dealing with complex numbers it is tedious to determine the actual load impedance. The following app. note should help: http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/appnote_number/742 HP's app. note at http://www.sss-mag.com/pdf/hpan95-1.pdf is also very helpful. Regards, Frank |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Network analyzers incorporate a concept called a "reference plane". This
is a theoretical point at which the measurement is actually made. It's desirable to have this point be at the DUT connector. (In precision and/or extremely high frequency measurements, the point within the connector becomes important, and even a sex-change adapter can't be tolerated between calibration and measurement.) Software in the network analyzer is told where the reference plane is to be by means of a rather involved calibration procedure, then the network's software corrects for the phase shift and impedance magnitude transformation of the cable between the reference plane and the analyzer itself. It effectively makes the reference plane the point being measured, rather than the analyzer input terminal. When you make manual measurements, you have to do the correction yourself. So what you need to know is the impedance and length of the line between your point of measurement and the DUT. This can be determined in the same way as it's done for some network analyzer calibrations -- by measuring the impedance with the DUT replaced with a short circuit, an open circuit, and a known load impedance, then solving the resulting set of simultaneous equations. Once you know the impedance and length of the cable between where your measurement is correct and the DUT, you can calculate the actual DUT impedance from your measured value. I do this routinely at HF, when I measure antenna impedance at the input end of a transmission line. Accuracy is best when the impedance being measured isn't far from the Z0 of the transmission line, and the transmission line is short. The longer the line and the greater the difference between line Z0 and DUT impedance, the greater the sensitivity to measurement error in both the measured DUT impedance and the line Z0 and length. A surprisingly small amount of line loss can also skew the measurements quite badly if Z0 and DUT impedance are quite different. If you need accurate results, you should do an error analysis to see how far off your calculated result can be, given the estimated accuracy of your measurement and calibration. As I mentioned in my earlier posting, most people overestimate their ability to make accurate RF measurements. It's not at all trivial. Be sure to check your results frequently by measuring known load impedances close to the values being measured. How do you find the values of those "known" load impedances? Well, welcome to the world of metrology! Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 21:13:36 -0800, Roy Lewallen
wrote: As I mentioned in my earlier posting, most people overestimate their ability to make accurate RF measurements. It's not at all trivial. Be sure to check your results frequently by measuring known load impedances close to the values being measured. How do you find the values of those "known" load impedances? Well, welcome to the world of metrology! Roy, I've seen your postings hereabouts over the years and you've always struck me as one of the most knowledgeable posters on this, *the* most technically-challenging of all hobbies. I've recently bought a VNA and am going about the laborious process of setting it up with precisely-cut interconnects to the T/R bridge. Next thing I need to know is... Say I have a mica capacitor (for example) that I want to check for its SRF. How should I mount this component so as to minimize stray L&C from anything other than the component itself? IOW, what 'platform' (for want of a better word) do I need to construct to permit accurate measurements of this cap's RF characteristics in isolation? Thanks, Paul -- "What is now proved was once only imagin'd" - William Blake |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 17:33:18 -0800, dansawyeror
wrote: All, I am trying to measure antenna impedance. For this I intend to us a directional coupler to isolate reflected signal. After using the coupler for a while I believe that it introduces a phase shift, that shift seems to be related to frequency. This creates a bit of a catch 22. Antenna resonance is defined as the frequency where there is no reflected complex component. If the tool to measure this is also frequency dependent how can this be accomplished? Is this even the best method? This depends a lot on what instrument you are connecting to this coupler. If it's nothing more than a power sensor, then you are making scalar measurements and phase is meaningless. You would calibrate by placing a short on the measurement (antenna) port and getting a 100% reflection reference (rho=1). You would determine the magnitude of the reflection coefficient by ratioing this to the measured value. If you have a magnitude and phase sensitive instrument (vector analyzer) then, as others have answered, you calibrate with additional reference standards. In any event, the phase shift through the coupler is compensated for by the calibration process. Do bi-directional couplers automatically compensate for frequency shift? No. The provide for a simultaneous sample of the forward and reflected signals. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Wes,
Your answer to the question about bidirectional couplers was they do not compensate for phase shift. Let me ask it again: Do the measuring ports of a bi-directional coupler accurately represent or preserve the relative phases of the signal? To put it another way is the phase shift of the driving and reflected signals changed by the same about? Thanks - Dan kb0qil Wes Stewart wrote: On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 17:33:18 -0800, dansawyeror wrote: All, I am trying to measure antenna impedance. For this I intend to us a directional coupler to isolate reflected signal. After using the coupler for a while I believe that it introduces a phase shift, that shift seems to be related to frequency. This creates a bit of a catch 22. Antenna resonance is defined as the frequency where there is no reflected complex component. If the tool to measure this is also frequency dependent how can this be accomplished? Is this even the best method? This depends a lot on what instrument you are connecting to this coupler. If it's nothing more than a power sensor, then you are making scalar measurements and phase is meaningless. You would calibrate by placing a short on the measurement (antenna) port and getting a 100% reflection reference (rho=1). You would determine the magnitude of the reflection coefficient by ratioing this to the measured value. If you have a magnitude and phase sensitive instrument (vector analyzer) then, as others have answered, you calibrate with additional reference standards. In any event, the phase shift through the coupler is compensated for by the calibration process. Do bi-directional couplers automatically compensate for frequency shift? No. The provide for a simultaneous sample of the forward and reflected signals. |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Wes,
Your answer to the question about bidirectional couplers was they do not compensate for phase shift. Let me ask it again: Do the measuring ports of a bi-directional coupler accurately represent or preserve the relative phases of the signal? To put it another way is the phase shift of the driving and reflected signals changed by the same about? Thanks - Dan kb0qil Wes Stewart wrote: On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 17:33:18 -0800, dansawyeror wrote: All, I am trying to measure antenna impedance. For this I intend to us a directional coupler to isolate reflected signal. After using the coupler for a while I believe that it introduces a phase shift, that shift seems to be related to frequency. This creates a bit of a catch 22. Antenna resonance is defined as the frequency where there is no reflected complex component. If the tool to measure this is also frequency dependent how can this be accomplished? Is this even the best method? This depends a lot on what instrument you are connecting to this coupler. If it's nothing more than a power sensor, then you are making scalar measurements and phase is meaningless. You would calibrate by placing a short on the measurement (antenna) port and getting a 100% reflection reference (rho=1). You would determine the magnitude of the reflection coefficient by ratioing this to the measured value. If you have a magnitude and phase sensitive instrument (vector analyzer) then, as others have answered, you calibrate with additional reference standards. In any event, the phase shift through the coupler is compensated for by the calibration process. Do bi-directional couplers automatically compensate for frequency shift? No. The provide for a simultaneous sample of the forward and reflected signals. |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Your answer to the question about bidirectional couplers was they do not compensate for phase shift. Let me ask it again: Do the measuring ports of a bi-directional coupler accurately represent or preserve the relative phases of the signal? To put it another way is the phase shift of the driving and reflected signals changed by the same about? Thanks - Dan kb0qil The phases seen at each coupled port should be identical to the phase of the forward and reflected signals. This is easily verifiable, and frequency independant, as follows: No load -- forward and reverse amplitudes equal, and in phase; Short circuit at output -- forward and reverse amplitudes equal, and 180 degrees phase difference; 50 ohm load -- reverse than forward by = specified coupler directivity, and phase difference can 0 theta +/ 180. This is only true if the frequencies are low enough such that the standards do not require quantification by the use of "Standard definitions" -- see www.vnahelp.com. Regards, Frank |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 15:25:51 +0100, Paul Burridge
k wrote: Say I have a mica capacitor (for example) that I want to check for its SRF. How should I mount this component so as to minimize stray L&C from anything other than the component itself? IOW, what 'platform' (for want of a better word) do I need to construct to permit accurate measurements of this cap's RF characteristics in isolation? Hi Paul, Accuracy and precision is no good unless you can duplicate the test rig to the eventual environment of use. That said, precision capacitors and inductors are three leaded devices. The third lead goes to the shield around them. Obviously for either, a shield changes what would have been the nominal value for the component. However, that change also swamps all the variables that could disturb the accuracy. In other words, the shield enforces a fixed environment that reduces all other stray influences to a minimum. In so doing, I've been able to measure standard capacitors and inductors out to 9 places. Without those third lead configurations, the same components would easily lose 3, 4, or 5 of those digits. So one way to mount a mica cap would be over and close to a ground plane that extends beyond its foot print by a significant distance. This proximity would swamp the effects of other components nearby causing a shift in the resonance (if and when they were added, or removed). Building a cage around the capacitor would reduce these effects even further. Of course, all such measures would shift the native resonance, but you are never going to achieve that frequency anyway. You can, of course, elect to go the other way with a minimal ground proximity. In that case you would use microstrip techniques to build the test rig, making the strip with equal to the width of the component (presumably being surface mount). However, SRF becomes rather meaningless except as a general indicator. This is because changing the board material from alumina to epoxy; or changing from a series to shunt application can shift this frequency by 20% to 40%. Another issue is with the leads themselves. ESR for caps can easily tally up to a tenth of an Ohm and you have to select your caps on this basis as much as for their inductance. In this regard, you measure the D of the cap (dissipation factor) not Q (although each is the inverse of the other, there are D instruments specifically for this). This tenth Ohm is NOT necessarily in the wire lead (a common misconception) but rather in all the parallel (or worse, series of the wrapped cap) plate connections. For surface mount caps, you may want to mount them 90° (up on edge rather than flat on face) to the board to double the first PRF resonance and reduce the insertion losses there and above. The short answer to your question is how stable, and how accurate do you want to reproduce the measurement to your application? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Workman BS-1 Dipole Antenna = Easy Mod to make it a Mini-Windom Antenna ! | Shortwave | |||
On Topic | Shortwave | |||
The "Almost" Delta Loop Antenna for Limited Space Shortwave Listening (SWL) made from TV 'type' Parts | Shortwave | |||
Imax ground plane question | CB | |||
Outdoor Antenna and lack of intermod | Scanner |