嗨 - 安捷伦和R＆amp; S称其探测器之间存在差异，可能还有自动耦合的方式。
安捷伦有一个平均值检测器，您可以选择平均记录功率类型（视频），平均功率平均值（RMS）或电压平均值。
R＆amp; S有一个RMS检测器，你提到它们有跟踪平均选择，如Log等。在PXA上，如果选择平均检测器，我们会自动耦合到RMS检测器类型。
这样做是因为这种组合提供了准确的信号幅度*和*噪声测量。
我们正在采用“平均值的对数”如果您遇到CW信号非常接近本底噪声的情况，并且您想要将信号“拉”出噪声，那么您可以很好地测量
信号，您可以选择平均值检测器和平均类型日志“日志的平均值”，这种组合会导致噪声报告不足（本底噪声会降低）。
您可以进行准确的CW信号测量，但不能进行准确的噪声测量。
有些人可能想要这样做，但他们需要了解风险是什么，并且“平均值的对数”不等于“日志的平均值”。
显然，如果您感兴趣的信号是类似噪声的通信信号，则您不希望选择平均值检测器和平均类型日志。
问候 -
以上来自于谷歌翻译
以下为原文
Hi -
There are differences between what Agilent and R&S call their detectors, and probably how the automatic coupling is done.
Agilent has an Average detector, and you can chose the Average Types of Log power (video), Pwr Average (RMS) or Voltage avg.
R&S has an RMS detector, and you mentioned they have trace averaging selections such as Log, etc.
On the PXA, if you chose the Average Detector, we automatically couple to the RMS detector type. This is done because this combination provides accurate signal amplitude *and* noise measurements. We are taking the “log of the averages”
If you had a situation where the a CW signal was very close to the noise floor, and you wanted to “pull” the signal out of the noise so you could make a good measurement of the signal, you could chose Average detector and Average Type Log “the average of the Log”, and this combination would cause the noise to be under reported (the noise floor would decrease). You could make an accurate CW signal measurement but not an accurate noise measurement. Some people may want to do this, but they need to understand what the risk is and that the “log of the averages” is not equal to the “average of the Log”. Obviously if your signal of interest is a noise-like comms signal, you would not want to select Average detector and Average Type Log.
Regards -
嗨 - 安捷伦和R＆amp; S称其探测器之间存在差异，可能还有自动耦合的方式。
安捷伦有一个平均值检测器，您可以选择平均记录功率类型（视频），平均功率平均值（RMS）或电压平均值。
R＆amp; S有一个RMS检测器，你提到它们有跟踪平均选择，如Log等。在PXA上，如果选择平均检测器，我们会自动耦合到RMS检测器类型。
这样做是因为这种组合提供了准确的信号幅度*和*噪声测量。
我们正在采用“平均值的对数”如果您遇到CW信号非常接近本底噪声的情况，并且您想要将信号“拉”出噪声，那么您可以很好地测量
信号，您可以选择平均值检测器和平均类型日志“日志的平均值”，这种组合会导致噪声报告不足（本底噪声会降低）。
您可以进行准确的CW信号测量，但不能进行准确的噪声测量。
有些人可能想要这样做，但他们需要了解风险是什么，并且“平均值的对数”不等于“日志的平均值”。
显然，如果您感兴趣的信号是类似噪声的通信信号，则您不希望选择平均值检测器和平均类型日志。
问候 -
以上来自于谷歌翻译
以下为原文
Hi -
There are differences between what Agilent and R&S call their detectors, and probably how the automatic coupling is done.
Agilent has an Average detector, and you can chose the Average Types of Log power (video), Pwr Average (RMS) or Voltage avg.
R&S has an RMS detector, and you mentioned they have trace averaging selections such as Log, etc.
On the PXA, if you chose the Average Detector, we automatically couple to the RMS detector type. This is done because this combination provides accurate signal amplitude *and* noise measurements. We are taking the “log of the averages”
If you had a situation where the a CW signal was very close to the noise floor, and you wanted to “pull” the signal out of the noise so you could make a good measurement of the signal, you could chose Average detector and Average Type Log “the average of the Log”, and this combination would cause the noise to be under reported (the noise floor would decrease). You could make an accurate CW signal measurement but not an accurate noise measurement. Some people may want to do this, but they need to understand what the risk is and that the “log of the averages” is not equal to the “average of the Log”. Obviously if your signal of interest is a noise-like comms signal, you would not want to select Average detector and Average Type Log.
Regards -
举报
举报
