Hi Martin,
thank you very much for your appreciation! :-)
I don't know Owen, so I couldn't possibly comment on his experiences; nor
will I speculate on where his heart is. I only know what impact comments
like his can have on the motivation of a developer.
David suggested a number of different readings in a separate post that I
think one of his pieces of hardware shows. All those could be interesting
to add, perhaps to a pop-out display in order to fit them all ;-)
The user definable SWR markers have been a request, and I think I'll put
them in for both Smith, SWR - and of course, "return loss" ;-)
--
Rune / 5Q5R
On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 15:11, Martin via Groups.Io <martin_ehrenfried=
[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Rune,
Understood. I really like Saver and very much appreciate what you have
achieved so far, especially in such a short space of time, and I'm very
grateful for your effort and dedication.
A lot of Owen's frustration is due to problems with other VNA's and
antenna analysers that have some serious issues with calculated values that
never seem to get fixed, and the negative response he has had from the
manufacturers when these have been flagged up, hence his reluctance to
engage directly.
I agree that amateur conventions often differ from those used in the
professional world, and that perhaps some of Owen's comments are merely a
reflection (no pun intended) of that conflict. However is heart is in the
right place when trying to point out these issues, even if perhaps his
methodology is not to your liking.
The AIM VNA shows both parallel and series values, so maybe it would be
useful to include those in addition to conductance & admittance and then
it's not necessary to resort to external calculators and spreadsheets ?
Finally - would it be possible to add some user definable SWR marker lines
to the Smith and SWR plots ?
Regards,
Martin - G8JNJ
