2.4 mm 50 GHz Thermocouple Power Sensor
The first 2.4 mm 50 GHz RF power comparison (CCEM.RF-S1.CL / GTRF/02-03) took place between 2002 to 2004. At this time, the used travelling standards were AC coupled thermocouple power sensors (hp8487A). Today, a new generation of thermocouple power sensors are available on the market which are DC coupled, offer lower input reflection coefficient and include internal metering as well as an USB interface. Therefore, the calibration factor can be defined in a different way compared to AC coupled sensors, and lower uncertainties can be obtained.
Two NMIs participate in this comparison. The measurands of interest are the calibration factor at a nominal power level o 1 mW in the frequency range of DC to 50 GHz as well as the complex input reflection coefficient. This comparison offers the participants the possibility to verify their measurement procedures including the evaluation of the measurement uncertainty.
The measurement standard is a 2.4 mm 50 GHz thermocouple power sensor type NRP-Z56 (R&S). METAS acts as the pilot lab and provides the travelling standard. For details see the Technical Protocol.
The technical protocol can be downloaded here>>
Final Report 2012-05-02
The project has been completed and the report can be downloaded here>>
The first international comparison on RF power in the 2.4mm coaxial line system (CCEM.RF-S1.CL / GTRF/02-03) was organized in 2002 and conducted between 2002 to 2004. At that time the travelling standards were AC coupled thermocouple power sensors (HP8487A). Today, a new generation of thermocouple power sensors is available on the market which are DC coupled, offer lower input reflection coefficient, and include internal metering as well as an USB interface. Therefore, the calibration factor can be defined in a different way compared to AC coupled sensors resulting in lower uncertainties. For the two participants, this bilateral comparison offers the possibility to verify their measurement procedures, and it provides the possibility to identify and eliminate errors.
The analysis of all measured quantities at each individual test frequency and each test level resulted in |En| < 1, which indicates an overall agreement between the participants at the 95 % level.
Both participants used a direct comparison setup with different types of power standards which were traced to different NMIs. While PTB used a set of thermistor power sensors as standards, Metas employed a thermocouple reference standard.