I certainly don't need another one, but I couldn't resist!? Wonder if it's a scam or a mistake?? Maybe he meant to make it an auction?
Mike WY6K
"... somewhere in the distance, there's a tower and a light, broadcastin' the resistance, through the rain and through the night..."
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sunday, September 29, 2019, 4:54:06 PM CDT, James R. Chastain via Groups.Io <suenrod@...> wrote:
I just found this and ordered. Thought others might be interested....
NanoVNA Vector Network Analyzer HF VHF UHF Antenna 2.8" TFT Screen 50KHz-900MHz | eBay
|
|
|
| $20.99 |? |
|
|
|
|? |
NanoVNA Vector Network Analyzer HF VHF UHF Antenna 2.8" TFT Screen 50KHz...
50KHz-300MHz NanoVNA Vector Network Analyzer HF VHF UHF Antenna Analyzer 2.8" TFT Screen. NanoVNA is a compact h...
|
|
|
|
Good luck with that! This may be a case of you get what you pay for! Plus the guy has low numbers! Roy WA0YMH On Sun, Sep 29, 2019, 4:54 PM James R. Chastain via Groups.Io <suenrod= [email protected]> wrote: I just found this and ordered. Thought others might be interested....
NanoVNA Vector Network Analyzer HF VHF UHF Antenna 2.8" TFT Screen
50KHz-900MHz | eBay
|
|
|
| $20.99 | |
|
|
|
| |
NanoVNA Vector Network Analyzer HF VHF UHF Antenna 2.8" TFT Screen 50KHz...
50KHz-300MHz NanoVNA Vector Network Analyzer HF VHF UHF Antenna Analyzer
2.8" TFT Screen. NanoVNA is a compact h...
|
|
|
|
Re: NanoVNA V2 - I vote for a larger instrument...
By the way, for my needs, I would like an instrument that goes from 100 kHz to at lease 1 GHz. Burt, K6OQK At 02:20 PM 9/29/2019, you wrote: Once again, I vote for a larger version. As I said earlier, I would like one to be tablet size and with Type-N connectors. I suspect that I'd probably be willing to pay a fair price for a larger, more robust instrument. I typically use my RF test equipment of this type in the field, rarely if ever up a tower, often at the tower base, not so much on the bench. I want something I can easily see and use a touch screen that works with real fingers, not fingers I have to first stick in a pencil sharpener.
The idea of using the nanoVNA in conjunction with a phone for a larger screen or a tablet for a tablet size screen does not appeal to me. For me, a VNA is a tool, not a project - making an antenna work properly is the project.
Burt, K6OQK
At 01:37 PM 9/29/2019, you wrote:
In my opinion, it could be a bit larger with a larger screen and still be fine for portable or field use.? Just look at the Keysight Field Fox...
Mike WY6K
"... somewhere in the distance, there's a tower and a light, broadcastin' the resistance, through the rain and through the night..."
On Sunday, September 29, 2019, 3:22:33 PM CDT, Bo, OZ2M <groups.io@...> wrote:
Hi
Personally I am not at all sensitive to the form factor. My use is 99% lab use and 1% antenna/portable use.
I wonder how many actually wants a small form factor.
Bo
Burt I. Weiner Associates
Broadcast Technical Services
Glendale, California U.S.A.
biwa@...
K6OQK
--
Burt I. Weiner Associates
Broadcast Technical Services
Glendale, CA U.S.A.
K6OQK
Burt I. Weiner Associates Broadcast Technical Services Glendale, California U.S.A. biwa@... K6OQK -- Burt I. Weiner Associates Broadcast Technical Services Glendale, CA? U.S.A. K6OQK
|
Re: NanoVNA usable as spectrum analyzer?. Yes, if you know what you are doing
This is an interesting topic.? How would I hook it up to use it as a spectrum analyzer?? Run the signal into the CH0 and kook at logmag?
Mike WY6K
"... somewhere in the distance, there's a tower and a light, broadcastin' the resistance, through the rain and through the night..."
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sunday, September 29, 2019, 4:32:47 PM CDT, franciscm@... <franciscm@...> wrote:
Hello again Eric and other possible readers. I received my nanoVNA a couple of weeks ago and I have been doing many tests with it.
First I must say my unit came without shields and I added them, but there was no considerable improvement in the base noise level.
The second thing I am going to say is that I have been trying to check the operation of the CH1 input as a spectrum analyzer and I have been able see under what circumstances it is more or less usable.
First, the level measurements appear to be around 15 dB higher than the signal applied below 300 MHz and around 20 dB higher? about this frequency. I assume that it is because the nanoVNA accepts as 0dB the value applied in its CH1 in the calibration, which is that provided by CH0 and has those values ??(in the measurement frequency). Known that offset, is not a major problem.
Secondly, below 1MHz of span two peaks appear instead of one, as the image frequency also appears separated twice the value of the IF (i.e. 10KHz). In a "real" spectrum analyzer this image frequency is separated at several GHz and is rejected by the input LPF. Of the two peaks, the "real" is the higher frequency (the one on the right).
The third problem I have appreciated is that to be
recognized, the signal must fall exactly on any of the sampled frequencies because otherwise it is strongly or completely attenuated. Properly choosing the span this inconvenience is soslayable. This makes signals with a significant frequency modulation look very bad on the screen. This contributes to the low refresh rate, which also prevents an AM signal from being displayed correctly and as an extreme case a telegraphic signal.
As a summary of the above, to say that the signal of an RF generator without modulation is looked and measured "good" but "practical" signals (the carriers alone do not serve much in real life) look bad.
Greetings and forgiveness for the extension and possible-probable inaccuracies and bad english.
Javier Muriedas EA1AWY
|
I just found this and ordered. Thought others might be interested....
NanoVNA Vector Network Analyzer HF VHF UHF Antenna 2.8" TFT Screen 50KHz-900MHz | eBay
|
|
|
| $20.99 | |
|
|
|
| |
NanoVNA Vector Network Analyzer HF VHF UHF Antenna 2.8" TFT Screen 50KHz...
50KHz-300MHz NanoVNA Vector Network Analyzer HF VHF UHF Antenna Analyzer 2.8" TFT Screen. NanoVNA is a compact h...
|
|
|
|
Here is an overview of the xaVNA:
|
Re: Cal-Kit Standards' Definitions
Dr. David Kirkby from Kirkby Microwave Ltd
On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 at 22:00, Kurt Poulsen <kurt@...> wrote: Hi David
One detail if I may. It is not possible to use the R&S T-Check software it
requires the NanoVNA are able to do a full 10/12term error correction..
Sorry
Kind regards
Kurt I was unaware that it could not do that, but it doesn¡¯t change the fact you can use T-checker or airlines on another VNA, or perhaps the external software for the NanoVNA. I am sure I will learn more about this little device when I finally get it boxed up with decent switches, USB connector and RF connectors. Otherwise I know that I will damage it. ???? Dave. -- Dr. David Kirkby, Kirkby Microwave Ltd, drkirkby@... Telephone 01621-680100./ +44 1621 680100 Registered in England & Wales, company number 08914892. Registered office: Stokes Hall Lodge, Burnham Rd, Althorne, Chelmsford, Essex, CM3 6DT, United Kingdom
|
ST-Link V2 (Re: [nanovna-users] NanoVNA bricked)
un-necessarily ordered the ST Programmer.
In case you are now weighing the momentous decision whether you invest in one or not, I recommend to get a couple of these: At $1.92 per piece shipped, they won¡¯t break the bank, and it is good to have a couple lying around as insurance. Buy them now before you find out you need them :-) (Yes, these things work. The only trap for newcomers is that they incredibly come in two different pinouts, so if you make your own cable, make sure you read the description on the unit.) Gr¨¹?e, Carsten
|
Re: Another modified nanoVNA software
Hi neb,
I tried to use the program and the .s2p made by others cannot display (works with nanovna saver) and using the TDR function I don't know how it works. I don't know what to load after typing%.
Gyula
|
Re: NanoVNA usable as spectrum analyzer?. Yes, if you know what you are doing
Hello again Eric and other possible readers. I received my nanoVNA a couple of weeks ago and I have been doing many tests with it.
First I must say my unit came without shields and I added them, but there was no considerable improvement in the base noise level.
The second thing I am going to say is that I have been trying to check the operation of the CH1 input as a spectrum analyzer and I have been able see under what circumstances it is more or less usable.
First, the level measurements appear to be around 15 dB higher than the signal applied below 300 MHz and around 20 dB higher to over this frequency. I assume that it is because the nanoVNA accepts as 0dB the value applied in its CH1 in the calibration, which is that provided by CH0 and has those values ??(in the measurement frequency). Known that offset, is not a major problem.
Secondly, below 1MHz of span two peaks appear instead of one, as the image frequency also appears separated twice the value of the IF (i.e. 10KHz). In a "real" spectrum analyzer this image frequency is separated at several GHz and is rejected by the input LPF. Of the two peaks, the "real" is the higher frequency (the one on the right).
The third problem I have appreciated is that to be
recognized, the signal must fall exactly on any of the sampled frequencies because otherwise it is strongly or completely attenuated. Properly choosing the span this inconvenience is soslayable. This makes signals with a significant frequency modulation look very bad on the screen. This contributes to the low refresh rate, which also prevents an AM signal from being displayed correctly and as an extreme case a telegraphic signal.
As a summary of the above, to say that the signal of an RF generator without modulation is looked and measured "good" but "practical" signals (the carriers alone do not serve much in real life) look bad.
Greetings and forgiveness for the extension and possible-probable inaccuracies and bad english.
Javier Muriedas EA1AWY
|
Re: Cal-Kit Standards' Definitions
Dr. David Kirkby from Kirkby Microwave Ltd
On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 at 21:40, Kurt Poulsen <kurt@...> wrote: Hi Jeff
I have given a report I made on the last day of 2017 a brush-up which you
can download from
to design a homemade male BNC calibration
kit.pdf I had a problem with the link - initially I thought there was no file present, but later I see my iPhone had only put the first part in a link. You don¡¯t surprise me with your comment about the Huber & Suhner load. I think their products are overrated. I recall testing a large number of female-female N connectors and found Huber and Suhner had just about the worst electrical performance of any. I was going to phone them to complain, but on checking the data sheet I could see it met the specifications. What I did find however is that the quality of their machining, which was done in China ???, was the best of any of the adapters. From an electrical perspective, a really cheap adapter someone sent me free was the best. However, the threads looked as though they had been cut with an axe, rather than rolled or cut with a die. ???? I suspect that there are tradeoffs between mechanical strength and electrical performance of adapters. If you grip the PTFE and inner conductor well, it makes it mechanically strong, but gives poor electrical performance. Dave.
|
Re: NanoVNA V2 - I vote for a larger instrument...
Hello
If the list owner could open a poll, already a tool in groups.io, I will be happy to vote for my v.2 preferences.
Bo
|
Robert,
The thanks actually go to the great user groups that have formed around the nanoVNA. I never understood why people are so enthusiastic about some open source projects until now. This group is at almost 3500 messages and its almost guaranteed that if you run into a problem some other user has too. Some of the replies need to go through your "common sense" filter, but its hard to fault anyone if they are trying to help.
Herb
|
Re: NanoVNA V2 - I vote for a larger instrument...
Once again, I vote for a larger version. As I said earlier, I would like one to be tablet size and with Type-N connectors. I suspect that I'd probably be willing to pay a fair price for a larger, more robust instrument. I typically use my RF test equipment of this type in the field, rarely if ever up a tower, often at the tower base, not so much on the bench. I want something I can easily see and use a touch screen that works with real fingers, not fingers I have to first stick in a pencil sharpener. The idea of using the nanoVNA in conjunction with a phone for a larger screen or a tablet for a tablet size screen does not appeal to me. For me, a VNA is a tool, not a project - making an antenna work properly is the project. Burt, K6OQK At 01:37 PM 9/29/2019, you wrote: In my opinion, it could be a bit larger with a larger screen and still be fine for portable or field use.? Just look at the Keysight Field Fox...
Mike WY6K
"... somewhere in the distance, there's a tower and a light, broadcastin' the resistance, through the rain and through the night..."
On Sunday, September 29, 2019, 3:22:33 PM CDT, Bo, OZ2M <groups.io@...> wrote:
Hi
Personally I am not at all sensitive to the form factor. My use is 99% lab use and 1% antenna/portable use.
I wonder how many actually wants a small form factor.
Bo
Burt I. Weiner Associates Broadcast Technical Services Glendale, California U.S.A. biwa@... K6OQK -- Burt I. Weiner Associates Broadcast Technical Services Glendale, CA? U.S.A. K6OQK
|
Here is an S2P file from RFSim99. It doesn't load. Error: "2019-09-29 23:11:04,575 - NanoVNASaver.Touchstone - WARNING - Read line without having read header: 15.000000 1.000 -153.501 0.000 -63.501 0.000 -63.501 1.000 -153.501"
|
Hi Bo,
if the firmware starts supporting changing the fundamental/harmonic
changeover point, I'll definitely have that in the software as well :-)
The Elsie format doesn't look much like a file format, to be honest?
Particularly as you mention copy-paste. I notice that decimal separators
are commas, rather than periods, so that might depend on the language in
use? I think it would be much preferable if they could export S2P files ;-)
--
Rune / 5Q5R
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 at 23:06, Bo, OZ2M <groups.io@...> wrote: Hello Rune
Firmware info. OK. Then just an idea for future F/W.
Max freq. see here:
/g/nanovna-users/topic/si5351a_max_fundamental/34315096
This will require the firmware to have this as a variable instead of
hardcoded.
Attached is a picture showing the Elsie data format that has to be
selected, copied and pasted into a new file. The Elsie home page is here:
Bo
|
Hi Bo VNWA can do it, import anything ? Kind regards Kurt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: [email protected] < [email protected]> P? vegne af Bo, OZ2M Sendt: 29. september 2019 22:33 Til: [email protected]Emne: Re: [nanovna-users] NanoVNA-Saver 0.0.12 More ideas. If possible query the firmware name and version. When, if, possible set the max fundamental frequency. Possibility to load Elsie data. The problem right now is that Elsie doesn't export S-file data otherwise it would be possible. So should Elsie add S-data OR should NanoVAN-Saver be able to load Elsie data, i.e. who to ask for a change? (I have not tried with RFSim99 data). The overall idea is to be able to show simulation vs measured responses. Bo
|
Hello Rune Firmware info. OK. Then just an idea for future F/W. Max freq. see here: /g/nanovna-users/topic/si5351a_max_fundamental/34315096 This will require the firmware to have this as a variable instead of hardcoded. Attached is a picture showing the Elsie data format that has to be selected, copied and pasted into a new file. The Elsie home page is here: Bo
|
Dr. David Kirkby from Kirkby Microwave Ltd
On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 at 21:22, Bo, OZ2M <groups.io@...> wrote: Hi
Personally I am not at all sensitive to the form factor. My use is 99% lab
use and 1% antenna/portable use.
I wonder how many actually wants a small form factor.
Bo I think it depends what you define as ¡°small . To me at least, a Keysight FieldFox is just about acceptable for carrying and for use with antennas. That¡¯s approximately 292 x 187 x 71 mm and weighs 3.0 to 3.2 kg. I would prefer something a bit smaller and lighter, but I don¡¯t see any need to be able to fit a VNA in a shirt pocket. We have a RigExpert at our radio club, and I have seen an MFJ around too. The RigExpert and MFJ are much bigger than a NanoVNA, but in my opinion at least, they are perfectly acceptable for work on antennas. Everyone has different priorities. Some want more dynamic range, some want higher frequency, some want a bigger screen, some want to fit it a shirt pocket, others want TDR in the firmware .... Unless you build your own VNA, you will probably never get exactly what you want.
G8WRB.
-- Dr. David Kirkby, Kirkby Microwave Ltd, drkirkby@... Telephone 01621-680100./ +44 1621 680100 Registered in England & Wales, company number 08914892. Registered office: Stokes Hall Lodge, Burnham Rd, Althorne, Chelmsford, Essex, CM3 6DT, United Kingdom
|
Re: Cal-Kit Standards' Definitions
Hi David One detail if I may. It is not possible to use the R&S T-Check software it requires the NanoVNA are able to do a full 10/12term error correction.. Sorry Kind regards Kurt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: [email protected] < [email protected]> P? vegne af Dr. David Kirkby from Kirkby Microwave Ltd Sendt: 29. september 2019 20:00 Til: [email protected]Emne: Re: [nanovna-users] Cal-Kit Standards' Definitions On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 at 07:28, Starsekr via Groups.Io <Starsekr= [email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 03:49 PM, Dr. David Kirkby from Kirkby
Microwave Ltd wrote:
I don¡¯t think your simple model is really suitable for the following
reasons
1) The variation of C with homemade standards is likely to exceed
that of commercial standards - this is from experience measuring them.
2) The inductance of shorts is likely to be more with homemade
standards than commercial ones - again this is based on experience measuring them.
3) People may well want to make measurements in a 75 ohm system.
4) it is possible to improve upon the accuracy of loads at low
frequencies
by using a DC resistance measurement.
5) In the case of a female N, a simple standard can be made by just leaving
the connector open. This will create a higher impedance transmission
line than 50 ohms as the centre conductor sits in a cylindrical
section with a greater diameter than when its mated.
6) The loss of homemade standards is likely to be greater than
commercial ones from Keysight - again this is based on actual
measurements I have performed.
Dr. Kirkby, if I understand your post, and objections to Dave
Anderson's "Very Simple Characterization Model", You are against Mr.
Anderson's idea because it doesn't account for the possibility that
inductance, capacitance and loss terms are likely to be significant in
home-made standards and a desire to have an option to change the
reference resistance to account for actual load resistance, or to use
the VNA at something other than 50 ohms, but you agree with the idea that Offset Delay should be an input option.
Yes, essentially Dr. Kirkby, I too like the idea of being able to reference the NanoVNA with 75 ohms or measureing a home-made load with a 4 terminal system and
getting a more accurate result. But I'm not sure if your other
objections are valid (1) (2) (6), because most home-made loads won't
be characterized anyway. The operator will take the answer he gets,
publish it in QST or RadCom, and move on. I believe implementing the full model could be beneficial for homemade kits in *some* circumstances, such as * Have the ability to measure homemade standards at work. I would suspect that a fair few NanoVNA users work in the RF field. * Know someone with a VNA able to measure them * *Possibly* compute the properties using a software package like openEMS * *Possibly* compute the approximately properties, then tweak them to produce the best calibration possible by using the T-checker. Jeff has convinced me that for the HP kits, C0 is sufficient. I think we can all accept the possibility of making slight tweaks of the load based on 4-wire resistance measurements, are the possibility of working in 75 ohms. *ONE OTHER THING I HAD FORGOTTEN ABOUT IS THE NEED TO BE ABLE TO ENTER THE DELAY OF A THRU FOR A 2-PORT CALIBRATION * Of course this brings up the operations of data entry and storage;
which starts taking away from the original concept of turn it on, do a
simple
1-2-3 cal, and use it, so I think that option should be 1st choice in
the software. If the firmware could a) Define a number of calibration kits b) Default to the most used one then once the VNA is configured once, the rest would be a simple 1-2-3. There seems a good argument for the VNA defaulting to the parameters of the supplied kit (50 fF on the open, some small negative delay on the short). But I would like to override that, as I will never use the supplied kit, as it¡¯s impossible to avoid rotating the male pin in the female. Jim McEwen, KA6TPR Dave -- Dr. David Kirkby, Kirkby Microwave Ltd, drkirkby@... Telephone 01621-680100./ +44 1621 680100 Registered in England & Wales, company number 08914892. Registered office: Stokes Hall Lodge, Burnham Rd, Althorne, Chelmsford, Essex, CM3 6DT, United Kingdom
|
WY6K Mike Watts
Burt K6OQK
Gyula Molnar
Bo, OZ2M
Kurt Poulsen
