¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 Groups.io

Re: Stimulus Span change a bit the Smith measurement


 

I recommend to you to use the resonance method, it¡¯s more accurate. You are using a very simple VNA and there are errors of measurement bigger than the magnitude or real part of Z. I posted a method based on VNA that would be more accurate and repeatable. If you would like to measure the Q on several frequencies you can use a variable capacitor..
Figure that NanoVNA can measure resistor in a range of 50¦¸ there are no specifications for this instrument but for example for a R&S VNA model ZND ( I attached the accuracy plot) the S11 magnitude uncertainty is for Abs(S11) close to 1 is 0.02. Propagating errors it results for your specific case where the imaginary part of Z is 26,88 ¦¸ in a real part error of 0,64 ¦¸ * , and this is a mid range VNA!!
There are also a parasite capacitance on inductor that can affect the measurements.

You can find my post on : Step by step on measuring inductor and self resonance


* I used the appropriate formula :

?


Where X is the measured reactance , data gamma is the measurement uncertainty Zo=50¦¸

Regards, Patricio.
?

On 31 Jan 2025, at 4:23?PM, Team-SIM SIM-Mode via groups.io <sim31_team@...> wrote:

Hi All

SEESII H4 + 1.2.40 measuring a Ferrit inductance gives a little different values depend on stimulus span selected :

50Khz..30Mhz (calibrated with same load 401 point) ---> 0.100 Ohm + j 26.88 Ohm ==> Q = 268
13.5Mhz .. 14.5Mhz (calibrated with same load 401 point) ---> 0.200 Ohm + j 26.88 Ohm ==> Q= 134

NanoVNA-F gives same for both stimulus spans but ---> 0.400 Ohm + j 26.88 Ohm ==> Q= 67

can you explaine that , and which is the more accurate measurement ??

it's important to decide which inductance have the better Q coeff

Thanks
73's Nizar






<narrow band measure.jpg><wide band measure.jpg>

Join [email protected] to automatically receive all group messages.