Uncertainty Budget Calibration Factor: Table 10: Example uncertainty budget for frequency dependent calibration factor (4 GHz / 1 mW) Table 11: Example uncertainty budget for frequency dependent calibration factor (50 GHz / 1 mW) Control and Cross Check Measurements of the Travelling Standard Control and cross check measurements to investigate drift and stability of the travelling standard during the whole measurement period were performed by Metas two times (03.09.2009, Day 1, MET1 and 23.05.2011, Day 627, MET3), according to . The results showed no significant drift of the device under test (DUT) and therefore no corrections were necessary. The results for the calibration factor are shown for the nominal power level (PCal = 1 mW) nom in three graphs as well as in Table 3. The following quantities are plotted: Calibration Factor measured at METAS 03.09.2009, Day 1 CFMET1: Calibration Factor measured at METAS 23.05.2011, Day 627 CFMET3: Standard uncertainty in u(CFMET1): CFMET1 Standard uncertainty in u(CFMET3): CFMET2 Error = CFMET1 – CFMET3 = Error / En U(Error) If < 0.1 the measured drift is regarded as insignificant, i.e. no corrections are made. En Crosscheck of Normalized Frequency Response, Metas 9/2009 5/2011 – Figure 18: Calibration factor ± U(Error), linear frequency range. CF(f)100kHz Figure 19: Calibration factor ± U(Error), logarithmic frequency range. CF(f)100kHz Figure 20: Error ± U(Error).
Uncertainty Budget Calibration Factor: Table 10: Example uncertainty budget for frequency dependent calibration factor (4 GHz / 1 mW) Table 11: Example uncertainty budget for frequency dependent calibration factor (50 GHz / 1 mW) Control and Cross Check Measurements of the Travelling Standard Control and cross check measurements to investigate drift and stability of the travelling standard during the whole measurement period were performed by Metas two times (03.09.2009, Day 1, MET1 and 23.05.2011, Day 627, MET3), according to . The results showed no significant drift of the device under test (DUT) and therefore no corrections were necessary. The results for the calibration factor are shown for the nominal power level (PCal nom = 1 mW) in three graphs as well as in Table 3. The following quantities are plotted: CFMET1: Calibration Factor measured at METAS 03.09.2009, Day 1 CFMET3: Calibration Factor measured at METAS 23.05.2011, Day 627 u(CFMET1): Standard uncertainty in CFMET1 u(CFMET3): Standard uncertainty in CFMET2 Error = CFMET1 – CFMET3 En = Error / U(Error) If En < 0.1 the measured drift is regarded as insignificant, i.e. no corrections are made. Crosscheck of Normalized Frequency Response, Metas 9/2009 – 5/2011 Figure 18: Calibration factor CF(f)100kHz ± U(Error), linear frequency range. Figure 19: Calibration factor CF(f)100kHz ± U(Error), logarithmic frequency range. Figure 20: Error ± U(Error).