Re: LogMag and SWR
Yes side-by-side as you put it.. The NanoVNA is calculating all the parameters (SWR, Return Loss (logmag format) and impedance (R, X) from the same scanned measurements. If your return loss is 14 dB
By
Roger Need
·
#28852
·
|
LogMag and SWR
Good day. I'm fairly new to both amateur radio and this marvelous device, the NanoVNA H4 v4.3 sold by Seesii on Amazon.ca I find tuning my many inverted V antennas using a manual tuner extremely
By
cariboome@...
·
#28851
·
|
Re: Using VNA to test NFC tags
On 7/17/22 6:17 AM, Larry Martin wrote: > I work with RFID/NFC at 13.56 MHz, and have been using my NanoVNA with a nonresonant loop to check the resonant frequency of HF tags. I'm wondering if the
By
Jim Lux
·
#28850
·
|
Re: Antenna VNA comparison with manufacturer
Try placing the antenna in a different location.... far away from anything metal/magnetic... - such items could be detuning the antenna... also, try using a longer test cable, so as to keep the VNA
By
Brian
·
#28849
·
|
Re: missing sma
#adapters
By
Richard Spohn
·
#28848
·
|
Re: missing sma
#adapters
another silly mistake ! I didnt realise that the short circuit cap is actually screwed in on the Ch0 and CH1 !!!
By
Observer
·
#28847
·
|
Using VNA to test NFC tags
I work with RFID/NFC at 13.56 MHz, and have been using my NanoVNA with a nonresonant loop to check the resonant frequency of HF tags. I'm wondering if the radio experts here can tell me if other
By
Larry Martin <larry@...>
·
#28846
·
|
Re: missing sma
#adapters
Hi, Check what you ordered, what should have been included, parts might be missing. Typically, 4 calibration components supplied with the nanoVNA. If this is not a supply problem, calibration kits are
By
Ed G8FAX
·
#28845
·
|
Re: missing sma
#adapters
You may decide that for yourself. Anything goes. :-) Op 17-7-2022 om 09:38 schreef Observer:
By
Arie Kleingeld PA3A
·
#28844
·
|
missing sma
#adapters
My newly received nanovna, has only two test connectors, plus two leads and the pen. Do they expect me to make the missing short circuit connector, myself ? It may seem a silly question, but, I am a
By
Observer
·
#28843
·
|
Re: Antenna VNA comparison with manufacturer
Think "terminal velocity" . . .
By
Tim Dawson
·
#28842
·
|
Re: Antenna VNA comparison with manufacturer
The worst were car stereo amplifier output Watts. Still trying to figure out how they got 300W out of a 12W chip.... 73 -Jim NU0C "Doug" <jdkearney@...> wrote:
By
Jim Shorney
·
#28841
·
|
Re: Antenna VNA comparison with manufacturer
Yes, the VNA is calibrated with short, open, and a 50 Ohm load through the cable. Though at 125kHz a 6" cable should not make much difference.
By
Douglas Butler
·
#28840
·
|
Re: Antenna VNA comparison with manufacturer
Is the NanoVNA calibrated to the end of the coax at the antenna with an open, short, and load?
By
Russ
·
#28839
·
|
Re: Antenna VNA comparison with manufacturer
Or GMRS radio range! Doug? -? VA3DKA
By
Doug <jdkearney@...>
·
#28838
·
|
Re: Antenna VNA comparison with manufacturer
Remember, marketing has the last word when a product is finally released for sale. Also, manufacturing variations also play into the whole picture. I wouldn't be too concerned with anything less than
By
W0LEV
·
#28837
·
|
Re: Antenna VNA comparison with manufacturer
if in manufacturers smith is shifted in the inductive area ... how can he claim an swr 1:1 and 50 ohms?? just thinking? (i have not seen the plots) dg9bfc sigi Am 16.07.2022 um 18:20 schrieb KENT
By
Siegfried Jackstien
·
#28836
·
|
Re: nanoVNA for Nerds
There aren't many ships (real ships that don't run on underwater wings like the new Independence) that can outrun a torpedo. Even an aircraft-carrier running at 46 knots is NO match for our modern
By
Mike C.
·
#28835
·
|
Re: nanoVNA for Nerds
12 pound per square foot plate is thicker than 10 pound per square foot. They always go thicker, but the point is they often go different than the designer's plan. If you design a ship to go 24 knots
By
Douglas Butler
·
#28834
·
|
Re: nanoVNA for Nerds
Oh, never compromise when safety is an issue or anything else for that matter. I'm assuming #12 plate was thinner, not a good choice. My 2 cents worth. Mike C.
By
Mike C.
·
#28833
·
|