186

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON TERAHERTZ SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 2, NO. 2, MARCH 2012

On-Wafer S-Parameter Measurements in the

325508 GHz Band
Andy Fung, Member, IEEE, Lorene Samoska, Senior Member, IEEE, David Pukala,
Douglas Dawson, Member, IEEE, Pekka Kangaslahti, Mikko Varonen, Todd Gaier, Charles Lawrence,
Greg Boll, Richard Lai, Fellow, IEEE, and X. B. Mei

AbstractWe report on two-port on-wafer vector network

analyzer measurements in the 325508 GHz frequency band.
Measurements are made with prototype GGB Industries Inc.
WR2.2 (325500 GHz) coplanar waveguide probes and OML Inc.
WR2.2 frequency extenders. New probe performance data and
characteristics of probe tip calibration using a Thru-Reflect-Line
procedure are discussed. Probe S-parameter measurements indicate insertion loss per probe of 5.0 to 9.1 dB in the WR2.2 band.
Calibrated dynamic range of about 30 dB or better for insertion
and return loss measurement across the band is achieved. These
new results for the prototype WR2.2 probes, the calibration
procedure, observed errors, and results of on-wafer amplifier
measurements are presented.
Index TermsMillimeter wave, monolithic microwave
integrated
circuits
(MMIC),
on-wafer,
S-parameters,
submillimeter wave, terahertz (THz).

I. INTRODUCTION

ECENT advances in transistor technologies have led to

the development of semiconductor analog ICs operating
at near 1 THz frequency [1][6]. These new high speed transistors and terahertz monolithic integrated circuits (TMICs)
will enable higher frequency and improved next generation
radar, imaging, spectroscopic and communication systems
(see [7] for a review). To progress planar TMIC development,
high frequency on-wafer circuit measurements will reduce
characterization time and cost, as they will remove the need
for labor intensive dicing and packaging of chips as the only
other alternative method for circuit testing. On-wafer probing
of circuits provides quick performance evaluation to improve
designs for subsequent circuit fabrication iterations and for
screening of circuits in a mass production environment.
Manuscript received October 05, 2011; revised December 12, 2011; accepted
December 20, 2011. Date of publication February 20, 2012; date of current version March 02, 2012. This work was supported in part by the NASA ESTO
Advanced Component Technologies ACT-05 program and by the NASA Innovative Partners Program IPP-06. This work was carried out in part at the Jet
Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
A. Fung, L. Samoska, D. Pukala, D. Dawson, P. Kangaslahti, M. Varonen, T.
Gaier, and C. Lawrence are with the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91109 USA (e-mail: andy.fung@jpl.nasa.
gov).
G. Boll is with the GGB Industries Inc, Naples, FL 34101 USA.
R. Lai and X. B. Mei are with the Northrop Grumman Corporation, Redondo
Beach, CA 90278 USA.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TTHZ.2011.2182369

Previous generations of on-wafer probes have been developed

for the WR3 (220325 GHz) and lower frequency bands [8], [9].
Very recent efforts have reported on the usage and/or development of probes for on-wafer measurements at the higher frequency WR2.2 (325500 GHz) [3], [4] and WR1.5 (500750
GHz) bands [10][12]. In the WR2.2 band, on-wafer probing
has been used to characterize HEMT amplifiers with 9 dB of
gain at 490 GHz [3] and 16 dB of gain at 460 GHz [4]. In the
WR1.5 band, on-wafer S-parameter measurements have been
used to demonstrate a 10-stage InP HEMT amplifier with 30
dB gain at 660 GHz [1]. In addition, for power measurements,
WR1.5 on-wafer probing has been used to measure InP HBT oscillators with output powers of 8.9 and 19.2 dBm, at 488 and
573 GHz, respectively [2]. With the recent growth in development of TMICs, higher frequency on-wafer probing techniques
have been rapidly advancing to allow for characterization of the
circuits.
In the WR2.2 (325500 GHz) frequency band, S-parameter
measurements have only been reported with measured data
and with limited discussions of probe performance, calibration
method and measurement errors [3], [4]. In this paper, we
present our recent developments for two-port on-wafer testing
and calibration in the WR2.2 frequency band, and provide
detailed measurements of the probes.

II. PROBE CHARACTERISTICS

The technologies that enable the new test capabilities we report are the recently developed GGB Industries Inc. WR2.2
coplanar waveguide (CPW) probes and the WR2.2 OML Inc.
frequency extenders. In our test set, OML WR2.2 frequency extenders are interfaced with an Agilent 8510C 50 GHz vector
network analyzer to allow for 325508 GHz swept frequency
S-parameter measurements. More details of the frequency extenders can be found elsewhere [13].
The prototype GGB WR2.2 probes (500-GSG-40-BT) (see
Fig. 1) transition from the OML frequency extenders WR2.2
(0.559 mm 0.279 mm) rectangular waveguide ports into a
custom made miniature 50 coax having a 0.043 mm diameter center conductor. At the probe tip, the miniature coax
metallic outer ground shield is shaped by machining it into
two ground tips in a coplanar waveguide configuration. The
signal-to-ground contact pitch is 40 m and targets the best
transition match to 50 CPW terminations on a GGB CS-15
calibration substrate. The GGB probe has an integrated bias-tee

2156-342X/$31.00 2012 IEEE

FUNG et al.: ON-WAFER S-PARAMETER MEASUREMENTS IN THE 325508 GHZ BAND

187

Fig. 1. (a) Photo of GGB Industries Inc. WR2.2 probes connected to OML
Inc. WR2.2 frequency extenders. (b) Photograph of the Port 2 CPW probe tip
focused at the plane of contact with a TMIC.

capable of supplying up to 250 mA of bias current to the signal

contact tip.
To characterize the probes, S-parameters of the WR2.2 probes
are deduced through an one-port two-tier calibration process
[14], [15] with Cascade Microtechs WinCal software calibration tool. A calibration is first performed at the WR2.2 frequency extenders waveguide port flange with a Short-OffsetShort-Load procedure. Then a second calibration is done with
the probe mounted on the flange at the WR2.2 CPW probe tip.
For the probe tip calibration, GGB CS-15 Short, Open, and Load
alumina substrate standards are used. Once both calibrations are
performed at the reference planes on either side of the WR2.2
probe, the probes S-parameters are calculated (see Fig. 2). Insertion loss per probe is found to vary between 5.09.1 dB, and
return loss is typically more than 5 dB across the WR2.2 band.
Alternatively for comparison, insertion loss for the probes can
be approximated by examining the S-parameters of two probes
in series (see Fig. 3). After a two-port waveguide calibration is
performed [13], the two probes are placed on a Thru Line and the
S-parameter of the series combination is measured. Assuming
probe symmetry, the net series insertion loss can be divided in
half and attributed to each probe. From this, probe loss is estimated to vary between 4.9 to 8.5 dB across the WR2.2 band.
These estimated probe loss values are similar to those deduced
from the two-tier approach. This method of estimation has been
used in the past to deduce microstrip to waveguide probe transition loss [16]. However, it is understood that mismatches can
cause peaks and valleys in the net series S-parameter response,
which bounds the actual insertion loss of the probes. In addition
the loss of the Thru Line is assumed negligible which is another
limitation of this approach.

Fig. 2. Insertion and return loss data of two GGB WR2.2 probes deduced from
a two-tier calibration and measurement. Port 1 is the waveguide flange. Port 2
is the CPW probe tip. (a) Probe 1 data. (b) Probe 2 data.

Fig. 3. S-parameters of two GGB WR2.2 probes in series contact with a CS-15
175 m Thru Line. Probe loss can be estimated from half the measured insertion
loss.

III. PROBE TIP CALIBRATION

There is a rich history of probe tip calibration efforts extending to prior decades [17][20]. For calibration we chose
to implement the Thru-Reflect-Line (TRL) method because of
its simplicity [21], [22]. TRL requires the minimum number of
standards: three. Two of these are transmission Lines, which are
simple to fabricate. Many other methods require a more difficult

188

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON TERAHERTZ SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 2, NO. 2, MARCH 2012

to manufacture high frequency precision Load for calibration,

such as for the Short-Open-Load-Thru (SOLT) and Line-Reflect-Match (LRM) methods. In addition, for TRL the required
definitions of standards are reduced. The magnitude of the Reflect standard is not require to be defined, although its phase is
defined to 90 deg, and the loss of the Line does not need to
be specified. To calibrate we utilize the TRL algorithm and the
12-term error model internal to the Agilent 8510C [23]. For the
Thru and Line standards, we use a nonzero length Thru Line
of 175 m and a 280 m length Line from a modified GGB
CS-15 substrate. These coplanar waveguide Lines have nominal center conductor width of 25 m, gap spacing to ground
conductors of 14 m, gold metal thickness of 3 m, and are
constructed on an alumina substrate that is 625 m thick; more
details can be found elsewhere [24]. For the Reflect standard
we suspended the probes in Air [15], [25], [26] separated by
approximately 150 m. Probe-to-probe isolation (insertion loss)
at this distance in Air is measured to be more than 25 dB with
respect to the probes on the Thru Line. We calibrated with an
Air-Open as it provided the greatest raw return loss signal from
all the Reflect standards available including those on the CS-15
substrate. This, along with the CS-15 Line match standards, provided the greatest raw return loss dynamic range at the probe tips
to calibrate.
During calibration, the Agilent TRL algorithm sets the reference impedance to the average impedance of the nonzero length
Thru and Line. These Lines also provide the necessary phase information for calibration from their signal delay (Offset Delay)
definitions and measured characteristics. In our definition of the
nonzero length Thru Line we specified its loss (Offset Loss) to
be zero [23] because its value is not known exactly. Later we estimate the error due to this assumption. In the Agilent TRL algorithm the reflection coefficient of the Reflect standard is required
to be identical for both ports 1 and 2, and its phase characteristic
needs to be specified to be either a Short or an Open. For the calibration we further simplify the process and Agilent error model
by omitting its two Isolation error terms for any leakage signal
between Ports 1 and 2. The result of this is that for insertion
loss measurements the lowest signal level that can be measured
will be limited by the leakage signal. For measurement where
device signals are sufficiently above this systematic cross talk,
Isolation can be neglected [23]. For the amplifiers we measure
this is generally the case as can be seen by the lower signal limit
of the dynamic range of the test set [Fig. 4(a)] and the lowest
signal level of the insertion loss of the amplifiers tested, which
will be described in Section IV. It may be possible to further increase the calibrated dynamic range of the test set by applying
a more involved 16-term error model calibration taking into account all systematic cross coupling errors [27].
Through the TRL calibration method we implement, the calibrated passive dynamic range at the probe tips is found to be
greater than about 30 dB for both insertion and return loss (see
Fig. 4). To examine error in our calibration we compare measurements of different structures on the CS-15 substrate and
discuss their deviations from expected responses. It should be
noted for our study that probe placement error can be about

Fig. 4. Calibrated on-wafer S-parameter dynamic range for (a) insertion loss
and (b) return loss. Calibrations are performed with the substrate on Eccosorb
MF117.

5 m, and subsequent probe skating about 7 m for effective

electrical contact. Insertion loss errors in Line measurements
due to probe repositioning can result in up to 0.3 dB in magnitude and 10 deg in phase change. For insertion loss measurements, because we defined the Thru Line (175 m) to be lossless, its response is centered about 0 dB. However it is apparent
that due to the Thru Lines finite loss a shorter Line (25 m)
can show positive S21,12 response [see Fig. 5(a)]. We define
an insertion loss error as the difference between the measured
insertion loss of the 175 m Line and its expected value. Its expected value is deduced from the loss per unit length of Line determined from the difference in insertion loss between the 175
and 280 m Lines (see Fig. 6). This insertion loss error estimate
when considered for the 25 m Line brings its S21,12 nearer
to 0 dB. Near zero insertion loss is expected as probe placement
and skating on the 25 m Line leaves the probe tips separated by
a distance of 3 to 5 m, approaching that of a zero length Line.
Estimated insertion loss error in the calibration approaches up
to about 1.5 dB at the higher frequency region of the test band.
We define insertion loss phase error as the absolute difference
between measured phases of the calibration substrate Lines (25,
175, and 280 m) and expected values calculated with Agilent
ADS [see Fig. 5(b)]. The average phase error for S21,12 is 5.4
deg. In Fig. 7, we plot the return loss measurements of Reflect
structures from the CS-15 calibration substrate. Measurements

FUNG et al.: ON-WAFER S-PARAMETER MEASUREMENTS IN THE 325508 GHZ BAND

189

Fig. 6. Estimate of insertion loss error versus frequency, based on the difference
between measured and extrapolated loss for the 175 m Thru-Line.

Fig. 5. Insertion loss measurements of various CS-15 alumina substrate 50

Lines. (a) magnitude and (b) phase. Nominal Line lengths are labeled in the
plots. For simulations it is assumed Lines are 24 m shorter to compensate for
probe placement from the edge of the standards due to probe skating for both
probes.

show the Open and Short structures (not used in the calibration)
on the CS-15 calibration substrate deviate from the ideal fully
reflecting 0 dB value. The Open-Air Reflect varies up to as much
as 2 dB and 50 deg from the ideal Open set by the calibration.
For comparison, in a 1-port WR1.5 test set, a maximum variation between measurements and calculations of return loss error
of 3.3 dB and phase of 30 deg was observed [11]. The CS-15
Short structure is closer to the established calibrated ideal characteristics, with an average absolute magnitude and phase of 0.6
dB and 174 degrees for S11, S22 over the frequency band. Deviations in the return loss measurements from ideal are attributed
to the mixed Air and alumina standards used, probe placement
errors, limited accuracy in the definition of standards in the TRL
algorithm used, and differences in the probes. Reference [28]
demonstrated that in a Line-Reflect-Reflect-Match (LRRM) calibration, the insertion loss error can be reduced using an Open
standard built on the same substrate as all the other standards
as opposed to an Air-Open. Calibration to the probe tips of the
prototype WR2.2 probes is limited by the quality of calibration
standards available for this frequency band and the accuracy of
their definitions in the calibration algorithm. To reduce errors in
the future, on-wafer standards that are on the same substrate as
the device-under-test (DUT) can be fabricated. This will allow
for the measurement reference plane to be set past the probe tips

Fig. 7. Return loss measurements of (a) magnitude and (b) phase for various
CS-15 alumina substrate standards and the Open-Air Reflect used for calibration. The phase of the Short is approximately 180 and 180 deg, which are
equivalent.

within the sample where the DUT is actually located to reduce

non-idealities in calibration.
IV. ON-WAFER MEASUREMENT OF AMPLIFIERS
Amplifiers have been fabricated in Northrop Grumman Corporations (NGCs) sub-50 nm InP HEMT process [5]. This
process provides two thin film resistor layers, metal-insulatormetal capacitors, two metal layers, substrate thinning to 50 m,
through wafer vias, and backside metallization. To test circuits,
the bias-tees of the GGB probes are used to supply voltages to
the drain and gate of the amplifiers through the center signal

190

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON TERAHERTZ SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 2, NO. 2, MARCH 2012

Fig. 8. WR2.2 and WR3 single-stage amplifier. (a) Chip photo of the singlestage prematched amplifier. (b) Measured and simulated S-parameter characteristics. The single-stage amplifier has a 50 m substrate and is biased through
probe bias-tees at a drain voltage of 1.1 V, drain current of 15 mA, and gate
voltage of 0.3 V. Ripples in measurements are attributed to unintentional propagating modes. Ripples have appeared more pronounced in amplifier S-parameters from changes in position of vias in a circuit. Via placement in the CPW
circuits are not modeled in the simulations. Presented measurements are taken
post probe tip calibration without further error correction.

Fig. 9. WR2.2 single-stage amplifier. (a) Chip photo of the single-stage

prematched amplifier. (b) Measured and simulated S-parameter characteristics.
Displayed measured data are taken after probe tip calibration without additional
error correction.

new WR2.2 probes for diagnosing chip performance and model

confirmation.
V. CONCLUSION

CPW lines of the circuits. For probe tip calibration, we utilize

the procedure described in Section III above. All displayed data
are for amplifiers biased for maximum gain. Design simulations
are done using Agilent ADS with NGC device models.
Fig. 8 shows on-wafer measurements and simulated S-parameters of a single-stage amplifier up to 508 GHz. The amplifier uses quarter wavelength transmission lines for input/output
matching and tee junctions with capacitors and resistors for low
pass filtering. The amplifier includes all circuit elements for
verifying simulation models. S-parameters are measured in two
frequency bands, WR3 and WR2.2. For characterization in the
WR3 frequency band on-wafer measurements are obtained with
a different test set and calibration [8] than the WR2.2 measurements. The WR2.2 on-wafer measurements follow the trend of
the WR3 measurements at the common band edge frequency
of 325 GHz, and measurements are consistent with the WR2.2
S-parameter simulations.
Another amplifier circuit is shown in Fig. 9. This prematched
amplifier uses symmetric transmission line open stubs to proinput and output impedance match for the cirvide a 50
cuit. The measured peak gain is 6.2 dB at 401 GHz. This amplifier is biased at a drain voltage of 1 V and gate voltage of
0.3 V. The drain current is 14 mA. Measurements and simulations are similar; the gain peaks at the same frequency and
S-parameters follow similar trends. The consistency between
measurements and simulations demonstrate the utility of the

We present an investigation into calibration of on-wafer

probes for the WR2.2 waveguide band. A description of the
probes with integrated bias-tees is discussed and their S-parameters are measured. We have performed probe tip calibrations
for -parameter measurements between 325508 GHz using
the TRL method. We demonstrate the dynamic range of the
probe-tip test set and discuss calibration errors associated with
the calibration standards and calibration method used. Future
reduction of calibration error is expected with the application of
standards fabricated on the same substrate as the device under
test. On-wafer S-parameters are measured on single-stage amplifiers up to 508 GHz, and the results are found to be consistent
with simulations and to WR3 band edge measurements taken
with another test set. These results are some of the earliest
on-wafer S-parameter measurements in the WR2.2 frequency
band.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors thank L. Ferreira of NGC for layout assistance
and Dr. M. Rosker of DARPA and OML Inc. for support.
REFERENCES
[1] W. R. Deal, K. Leong, V. Radisic, S. Sarkozy, B. Gorospe, J. Lee, P. H.
Liu, W. Yoshida, J. Zhou, M. Lange, R. Lai, and X. B. Mei, Low noise
amplification at 0.67 THz using 30 nm InP HEMTs, IEEE Microw.
Wireless Compon. Lett., vol. 21, no. 7, pp. 368370, Jul. 2011.

FUNG et al.: ON-WAFER S-PARAMETER MEASUREMENTS IN THE 325508 GHZ BAND

[2] M. Seo, M. Urteaga, J. Hacker, A. Young, Z. Griffith, V. Jain, R.

Pierson, P. Rowell, A. Skalare, A. Peralta, R. Lin, D. Pukala, and
M. Rodwell, InP HBT IC technology for Terahertz frequencies:
Fundamental oscillators up to 0.57 THz, IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits,
vol. 46, no. 10, pp. 22032214, Oct. 2011.
[3] L. Samoska, A. Fung, D. Pukala, P. Kangaslahti, R. Lai, S. Sarkozy, X.
B. Mei, and G. Boll, On-wafer measurements of S-MMIC amplifiers
from 400500 GHz, in IEEE MTT-S Int. Dig., Baltimore, MD, Jun.
2011, pp. 14.
[4] A. Tessmann, A. Leuther, R. Loesch, M. Seelmann-Eggebert, and H.
Massler, A metamorphic HEMT S-MMIC amplifier with 16.1 dB gain
at 460 GHz, in IEEE Compound Semicond. IC Symp., Monterey, CA,
Oct. 2010.
[5] D. Pukala, L. Samoska, T. Gaier, A. Fung, X. B. Mei, W. Yoshida, J.
Lee, J. Uyeda, P. Liu, W. R. Deal, V. Radisic, and R. Lai, Submillimeter-Wave InP MMIC amplifiers from 300345 GHz, IEEE Microw. Wireless Compon. Lett., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 6163, Jan. 2008.
[6] W. R. Deal, X. B. Mei, V. Radisic, B. Bayuk, A. Fung, W. Yoshida, P.
H. Liu, J. Uyeda, L. Samoska, T. Gaier, and R. Lai, A balanced submillimeter wave power amplifier, in IEEE MTT-S Int. Dig., Atlanta,
GA, Jun. 2008, pp. 399402.
[7] P. Siegel, Terahertz technology, IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Tech.,
vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 910928, Mar. 2002.
[8] A. Fung, D. Dawson, L. Samoska, K. Lee, T. Gaier, P. Kangaslahti, C.
Oleson, A. Denning, Y. Lau, and G. Boll, Two port vector network
analyzer measurements in the 218344 and 356500 GHz frequency
bands, IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Tech., vol. 54, no. 12, pt. Part 2,
pp. 45074512, Dec. 2006.
[9] R. Campbell, M. Andrews, L. Samoska, and A. Fung, Membrane tip
probes for on-wafer measurements in the 220325 GHz band, in Proc.
18th Int. Symp. on Space Terahertz Technol., Mar. 2007, pp. 141149.
[10] T. J. Reck, L. Chen, C. Zhang, A. Arsenovic, C. Groppi, A. W. Lichtenberger, R. M. Weikle, and N. S. Barker, Micromachined probes for
submillimeter-wave on-wafer measurementsPart I: Mechanical design and characterization, IEEE Trans. Terahertz Sci. Technol., vol. 1,
no. 2, pp. 349356, Nov. 2011.
[11] T. J. Reck, L. Chen, C. Zhang, A. Arsenovic, C. Groppi, A. W. Lichtenberger, R. M. Weikle, and N. S. Barker, Micromachined probes for
submillimeter-wave on-wafer measurementsPart II: RF design and
characterization, IEEE Trans. Terahertz Sci. Technol., vol. 1, no. 2,
pp. 357363, Nov. 2011.
[12] L. Chen, C. Zhang, T. J. Reck, C. Groppi, A. Arsenovic, A. Lichtenberger, R. M. Weikle, and N. S. Barker, Terahertz micromachined
on-wafer probes: Repeatability and robustness, in IEEE MTT-S Int.
Dig., Baltimore, MD, Jun. 2011, pp. 14.
[13] A. Fung, L. Samoska, G. Chattopadhyay, T. Gaier, P. Kangaslahti, D.
Pukala, C. Oleson, A. Denning, and Y. Lau, Two-port vector network
analyzer measurements up to 508 GHz, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas.,
vol. 57, no. 6, pp. 11661169, Jun. 2008.
[14] R. Vaitkus and D. Scheitlin, A two-tier deembedding technique for
packaged transistors, in IEEE MTT-S Int. Dig., Dallas, TX, Jun. 1982,
pp. 1517.
[15] On-Wafer Vector Network Analyzer Calibration and Measurements. :
Cascade Microtech Application Note.
[16] Y.-C. Leong and S. Weinreb, Full band waveguide-to-microstrip
probe transitions, IEEE MTT-S Int. Dig., pp. 14351438, Jun. 1999.
[17] E. W. Strid and K. R. Gleason, Calibration methods for microwave
wafer probing, IEEE MTT-S Int. Dig., pp. 9397, 1984.
[18] D. F. Williams and R. B. Marks, Calibrating on-wafer probes to the
probe tips, in 40th ARFTG Conf. Dig., 1992, pp. 136143.
[19] J. Pla, M. Struble, and F. Colomb, On-Wafer calibration techniques
for measurement of microwave circuits and devices on thin substrates,
IEEE MTT-S Int. Dig., pp. 10451048, May 1995.
[20] Q. Li and K. L. Melde, The impact of on-wafer calibration method
on the measured results of coplanar waveguide circuits, IEEE Trans.
Adv. Pkg., vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 285292, 2010.
[21] G. Engen and C. Hoer, Thru-Reflect-Line: An improved technique for
calibrating the dual six-port automatic network analyzer, IEEE Trans.
Microw. Theory Technol., vol. 27, no. 12, pp. 987993, Dec. 1979.
[22] D. M. Pozar, Microwave Engineering, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley,
1998.
[23] Agilent, Network analysis applying the 8510 TRL calibration for noncoaxial measurements, Agilent Product Note 8510-8 [Online]. Available: http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5091-3645E.pdf

191

[24] GGB Industries, Calibration Substrate CS-15, GGB Industries

Manual, Mar. 2002.
[25] S. A. Wartenberg, RF Measurements of Die and Packages. Boston,
MA: Artech House, 2002.
[26] L. Hayden, A hybrid probe-Tip calibration for multiport vector network analyzers, IEEE 68th ARFTG, Dec. 2006.
[27] J. V. Butler, D. K. Rytting, M. F. Iskander, R. D. Pollard, and M. V.
Bossche, 16-Term error model and calibration procedure for on-wafer
network analysis measurements, IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Techn.,
vol. 39, no. 12, pp. 22112217, Dec. 1991.
[28] A. Lord, Advancements in MM-wave on-wafer S-parameter verification, IET Seminar on MM-Wave Products and Technol., pp. 8791,
Nov. 2006.

Andy Fung (S97M99) received the B.E.E.,

M.S.E.E., and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering
from the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, in
1993, 1995, and 1999, respectively.
Since 1999, he has been with the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena. His research interests have involved the
development of InP HBTs, GaAs Schottky diodes,
and GaN amplifiers for millimeter- and submillimeter-wave applications, and high frequency test
methods.

Lorene Samoska (M95SM04) received the B.S.

degree in engineering physics from the University of
Illinois in 1989, and the Ph.D. degree in materials
engineering from the University of California, Santa
Barbara, in 1995.
From 1995 until 1997, she was an associate
research engineer at the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department at University of California at
Santa Barbara, where she worked on the design and
fabrication of state-of-the-art InP HBT microwave
digital circuits. She joined the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in 1998, where she is currently a Principal Engineer. Her research interests
include the design and testing of .031 THz low noise radiometers and power
amplifiers for local oscillator sources and transmitters in future space missions.

David Pukala received the B.S. degree (with High

Honors) from the College of New Jersey, Trenton, in
1983, and the M.S. degree from the California State
University in 1988, all in electrical engineering.
In 1983, he joined Hughes Aircraft and designed
RF/Microwave missile hardware, test equipment and
attained the position of Group Supervisor. In 1991, he
joined JPL and designed RF/Microwave components,
submillimeter multipliers, LNAs and quasi-optical
components. Currently, he is a Senior Member of the
Technical Staff at JPL.
Mr. Pukala has received several NASA awards, and is an elected member of
the Phi Kappa Phi.

Douglas Dawson (S94M00) received the B.S. degree in physics and the M.S. degree in electrical engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, in 1994 and 1996, respectively.
From 1995 to 1999, he was with EMS Technologies. In May 1999 he joined the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena, where he has been involved with the
designing and building of microwave and millimeter-wave hardware. He is currently focused on
radiometric instruments for airplane earth science
and space planetary missions.

192

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON TERAHERTZ SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 2, NO. 2, MARCH 2012

Pekka Kangaslahti received the M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees from the Aalto University (Formerly Helsinki
University of Technology), Espoo, Finland, in 1992
and 1999, respectively.
He is currently with Jet Propulsion Laboratory,
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, where
he designs low noise MMIC amplifiers and receivers
for astrophysics and remote sensing applications. Dr.
Kangaslahti developed microwave and millimeter
wave instruments for Cassini/Huygens, Planck, and
Juno missions and currently focuses on receiver
development for large arrays.

Charles Lawrence received the Ph.D. degree in

physics from MIT in 1983.
He is currently a Principal Scientist in Astrophysics at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California
Institute of Technology, Pasadena, where he is the
Project Scientist for the US Planck Project, Deputy
Project Scientist for the Spitzer Space Observatory,
and the Principal Investigator on several programs
to develop ultra-low-noise cryogenic amplifiers for
ground- and space-based applications.

Greg Boll, photograph and biography were not available at time of publication.
Mikko Varonen received the M.Sc. and Lic.Sc.
degrees in electrical engineering from the Helsinki
University of Technology (TKK), Espoo, Finland,
in 2002 and 2005, respectively, and the D.Sc. degree
(with distinction) in electrical engineering from the
Aalto University, Espoo, Finland, in 2010.
He is currently a NASA Postdoctoral Program
Fellow at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL),
Pasadena, California. His research interests involve
millimeter-wave integrated circuits. He was the
co-recipient of the APMC 2006 Prize for the outstanding contribution to the Asia-Pacific Microwave Conference.

Todd Gaier received the Ph.D. degree in physics

from the University of California, Santa Barbara in
1993.
He is the supervisor for JPLs Microwave Systems Technology Group. His research interests
include millimeter wave electronics for applications
in astrophysics and Earth remote sensing. His
group develops technologies and instruments using
monolithic microwave integrated circuit (MMIC)
components operating at frequencies 1250 GHz.
Active projects in the group include the Planck-LFI
mission to study the anisotropy and polarization of the cosmic microwave
background (CMB); the Q/U Imaging Experiment (QUIET) exploring the
polarization of the CMB; GeoSTAR an interferometric synthetic aperture
imager for Earth atmospheric sounding from geostationary orbit; the Advanced
Microwave Radiometers for the Jason-II Mission mapping small variations
in sea level across the globe monitoring conditions such as El-Nino and the
integrated receivers for the Juno Microwave Radiometers.

Richard Lai (M85M90SM01F10) received

the Ph.D. degree from The University of Michigan
at Ann Arbor, in 1991.
He possesses 20 years of experience in the research, development, and production of advanced
GaAs- and InP-based HEMT device and MMIC
RF technologies. Since 1994, he has been the
Principal Investigator for advanced HEMT research
and development with the Northrop Grumman
Corporation (formerly TRW), Redondo Beach, CA.
He has authored or coauthored over 150 papers and
conference presentations in the area of advanced GaAs- and InP-based device
and circuit technology, establishing world-record performance for the lowest
noise amplifiers, highest frequency amplifiers, and highest power amplifiers.
He holds numerous patents.

X. B. (Gerry) Mei received the B.S. degree in

physics from the University of Science and Technology of China, Beijing, China, in 1987, and the
Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the
University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, in
1997.
He is currently a Senior Staff Engineer with the
Micro Electronics Center, Northrop Grumman Corporation, Redondo Beach, CA, where he leads advanced InP HEMT technology development. He was
previously a Senior Molecular Beam Epitaxy (MBE)
Engineer and later an Integration Engineer with Hewlett Packard/Agilent Technologies. He was then a Senior Member of Technical Staff with Celeritek, where
he lead GaAs pseudomorphic HEMT (pHEMT) development.