开云体育

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

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

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

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

Hi W5DXP,
I'm glad to hear you got it working. I don't know what I can do to make
Kaspersky like the software more. (Put in fewer viruses, I joked earlier?)

This particular piece of software doesn't really *do* anything that might
appear dodgy, so I'm unsure why it's even getting picked up. It might be
because the .exe packs all the requirements for running the software, and
unpacks to a temporary directory, as I understand it. Nothing really I can
do to change *that*. :-/

I hope you enjoy using the software!
--
Rune / 5Q5R

Hi Bo,
the software does query the firmware info, and outputs it to the console.
There isn't a sufficiently standardized reporting of capabilities that it's
really useful for the software, though.

I'm unsure what you mean about "max fundamental frequency"? Could you
describe it further?

I don't know Elsie, nor their data format. Supporting S1P/S2P files would
be an obvious choice, as it seems to be the standardized exchange format;
but if you can find a reference for the format, it might not be too
difficult to implement. :-)

Thanks for the suggestions!
--
Rune / 5Q5R

Congratulations, Eric

Hello

If I was to measure a 23 cm antenna, let alone one for 13 cm or 9 cm, I would NEVER EVER place an object the size of the NanoVAN at or close to the antenna. Thus size is not important.

In a modular solution the size of the display is not important either and may even be changed.

Bo

I had great difficulty flashing in DFU mode. At one point I thought the
VNA was bricked. For whatever reasons, I was unable get DFU running under
Linux. Under Windows, it finally worked but took almost 20 minutes to
flash.

Using, ST-LINK, under Windoze, 10 seconds to flash. Thanks Herb!!

Bob N6RFM

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
It is a full blown how to and if someone else seems it is overwhelming the trick is to calibrate to the rear of the adaptor and use 0ps for short, the fringe C for the open simulated in my report and the tuned shunt C for the load. That is a good starting point. Then check the calibration with a semirigid cable or a BNC test cable of length 0.5 meter until the S11 dB trace run without oscillation. Then you measure S11 in a super way an to "hell" with the measurement plane is not the defined calibration plane for the BNC adaptor :) If the NanoVNA could provide a negative Electrical delay it could be fixed.
To all !!! Please note and respect the reservations I have made at the end of the report
Kind regards
Kurt

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: [email protected] <[email protected]> P? vegne af Jeff Anderson
Sendt: 29. september 2019 19:04
Til: [email protected]
Emne: Re: [nanovna-users] Cal-Kit Standards' Definitions

Dr. Dave

I already noted that you cannot see the -60 dB point on a filter in through mode with a dynamic range of 40 dB. And I already noted that 99% of the time I personally do not need to see the 60 dB point and that for the 1% I can add an amp to the source.

You may well need to see that at Kirkby Microwave Ltd,/drkirkby@.../ 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. And that is likely why you have equipment available to do so. And I am glad you have such equipment because between talking about that and your self promotion there is very little meat left in your posts.

The vast, vast majority of the people on this board have no need for that level of detail.

Sheesh! Give it a rest will you?

WA8TOD

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..."

It's somewhat different, does not really matter
Till 300MHz both test signal and 5kHz offset LO are fundamentals.
From 300 to 900MHz test signal is 3rd harmonics so actually from 100 to 300MHz and the LO is using 5th harmonics so actually is from 60 to 180MHz.

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

..... and eliminate all of that self promotion? Highly unlikely I think.

WA8TOD

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

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 21:42, Warren Allgyer <allgyer@...> wrote:

Mike,

The do indeed increase the dynamic range somewhat. The dynamic range at
600 MHz and above is rated at 40 dB and all of the units I tested , even
the worst ones, met this spec. I have no uses for which I need dynamic
range greater than 30 dB. For example, a return loss of 30 dB equates to a
VSWR of 1.07 to 1. Trust me..... if I can achieve 1.07 to 1, even for my
broadcast clients, I have no need to go further.

Warren,

Dynamic range of a VNA is a parameter of importance in *transmission*
measurements, if for example you are looking at the attenuation of a
filter.

My HP 8720D has a measured dynamic range of about 108 dB (specification is
100 dB), but I found that insufficient for some measurements, making them
frustrating slow.

The Keysight N5242B



has a dynamic range of 127 dB, but it would not be able to measure a return
loss of even 60 dB, and even 50 dB would pose real challenges.

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