开云体育

This happens when you have common mode issues and the outer surface of the coax shield has become part of the antenna. For example - A dipole connect to coax with out a balun will have this issue.

I have a -F and I have never encountered this problem with either a 10 m coaxial or a 40 m coaxial (3-30 MHz). I make my measurements from the station, the NanoVNA being connected to my PC. The

Whenever I have made measurements to antennas I have had very different results -even calibrating the antenna feed coaxial cable- than placing my VNA-F with a 10 cm. patch cord directly to the antenna

RE: "digging in" Old proverb: "When you're up to your ass in alligators it's hard to remember that your job was to drain the swamp!" Bill K2TNO [email protected]> wrote:

The best way to conquer the "steep learning curve" is to just dig in..... Dave - W?LEV [email protected]> wrote: -- Dave - W?LEV

Yes it can do much more and it has a steep learning curve... Roger

SimSmith can do all this and far more..... And.....its freeware: https://www.ae6ty.com/smith_charts/ And an excellent tutorial: https://www.w0qe.com/SimSmith.html Dave - W?LEV [email protected]>

There is an excellent free program for Windows that really helps to understand how transmission lines work. It is called TLDetails >> https://www.ac6la.com/tldetails1.html Using this program you can

I use the nanoVNA to get my Hallicrafters S-40B receiver on frequency for a CW net when using it with my Elmac AF-67 transmitter on CW. I could easily set the nanoVNA slightly off the CW frequency I

Not as a BFO, that should work well. It does make for a good VFO going into a first mixer. getting the levels right can be challenging.

Appreciate all the quick replies here confirming the BFO is do-able in theory. Easiest thing for me to try first would be the Gander VOLMET station on 13270 kHz USB, during the daytime, believe they

There is an article in the August, 1963 issue of Popular Electronics describing an external BFO. It attached to the receiver antenna terminal so the idea has been around 60 years at least. I would

Probably best to do it at the IF frequency rather than at RF. 73 Jeff G8HUL ________________________________________ Sent: 16 January 2025 13:31 To: [email protected] Subject: [nanovna-users]

Hi Bruce, Yes, I have done something similar using my NanoVNA SAA-2N. I set the NanaVNA to a particular CW frequency, but have only used it to test effects of using a filter or amplifier at the input

Has anyone ever tried using the CW output feature to generate a carrier for reception of SSB (LSB/USB) on a cheap shortwave receiver that can only receive AM mode signals? It seems like this should be

Why not perform an swr sweep and see where the min swr falls? The impedance will change with exact length of feedline but thr swr min. should show you where your antenna is closest to resonance. 73,

Hey David, ? ? Good morning. Everything looks pretty good, and I'm sure you've noted the points about calibrating at the antenna feedpoint.? When transmitting at low power, does your radio / SWR

** The easiest to interpret: yes But it is not the most relevant. In SWR you display 2 variables; in Smith you display 3. The SWR does not allow to adjust an antenna because, on the Smith, the minimum

at best calibrate at the cable end .... then you see the impedance of the antenna alone ...? not with cable (that may rotate you results in Smith) dg9bfc Sigi Am 15.01.2025 07:23 schrieb "Fran?ois

** Yes, I understood what you did. It is not a mistake. You measure the impedance of your antenna, brought back by your cable. It is the impedance that your TX sees in transmission. Where it is a