开云体育

Hi Herb,
I provide the BPF center frequency as the geometric mean, as that's how I
was taught. ;-)

You're right that the analysis picks the nearest point that's *at least* -3
dB - generally, for this app, I don't want to interpolate: There are
provisions available to get as many points as required, so my design
philosophy has been that it's up to the user to set the required frequency
resolution. If the -3 dB point is found below -4 dB, a warning is displayed
to the user.

I will rename "span" in the next release, and probably include the -6 dB
bandwidth as well. :-)

The analysis framework is set up to be relatively self-contained, and
anyone who wants to contribute additional analysis types is very welcome!
:-)

--
Rune / 5Q5R

Folks,

For some measurements it is important to know how much power is coming out of CH0 on the nanoVNA. I have seen some data elsewhere in this forum and a few spectrum analyzer pictures with max hold enabled. However, I have seen nothing that showed the information I sought. So, I created a set of measured data over the full range of frequencies from 1 MHz to 900 MHz and plotted it as shown in the attached graph, "nanoVNAOutputPower.jpg."

I connected the nanoVNA to the power meter using a very wide-band 10-dB pad to ensure the load was consistent and removed the loss in the pad from the power measurements. The data was collected every 1 MHz from 1 MHz to 30 MHz, every 10 MHz from 30 MHz to 350 MHz, every 25 MHz from 350 MHz to 450 MHz, and every 50 MHz from 450 MHz to 900 MHz. All data was collected in CW mode.

For me, there were a few surprises in this data. I have read that the maximum power out of the device should be -9 dBm or less. This is true over the range of frequencies below 300 MHz. As you can see in the graph, I observed more power coming out of CH0 with CW frequencies above 300 MHz.

I was surprised to learn that for frequencies above 300 MHz, the 3rd harmonic is always assumed in CW mode. This is evident in the power levels shown in the attached graph. I confirmed with a fast oscilloscope that this is indeed the case. When 750 MHz is set, a 250 MHz waveform is coming out of CH0. Perhaps the reasons for this in the firmware is that it produces more power at 750 MHz than using the 5th harmonic and setting the fundamental to 150 MHz. In fact, the output amplitude at the fundamental frequency is increased above 300 MHz and never gets back down to the level I observed at 1-30 MHz. The maximum power I measured was a little less than -7 dBm decreasing to a little more than -10 dBm at 900 MHz as the set frequency. I have read that the 5th harmonic is used above 600 MHz for swept measurements; however, that is not what I saw in the CW data. I assume this is an artifact of the CW measurement.

Over the range from 1 to 300 MHz, I notice that the change in output power I saw (about 9 dB) is consistent with the change in the noise floor for S21 measurements when the ports of the VNA are terminated in loads. A copy of S21 with both ports terminated on my nanoVNA using nanoVNASaver 0.1.0 set for 5 sweeps from 50 kHz to 900 MHz and 20 averages is also attached, "S21 NoiseFloor.png." Clearly, we cannot be very precise with this type of noise floor data but I think it is consistent with the reduction in power out of CH0 I observed from 50 kHz to 300 MHz. So, I really do think there is about a 9-dB variation in the output power on CH0 from 1 to 300 MHz. At frequencies above 300 MHz the noise floor level continues to increase so the increase in power from CH0 must compensate for the use of the third harmonic pretty well in my VNA. I do see a substantial change in the noise floor below 600 MHz. I had thought this should happen at 600 MHz not below 600 MHz.

--
Bryan, WA5VAH

Perfectly normal to get that pop-up.

Rune,
Just tried the new version 0.1.1 analysis feature on a highpass and low pass filter that I had handy (see attachments). Looks like the search algorithm finds the nearest value in the data point array. If for instance two adjacent points are -2.7dB and -3.2dB it goes with the -3.2 value because it is closest to -3.0. I can live with that, but ideally the -3.0dB interpolated frequency between -2.7dB and -3.2dB would be preferred. As Norbert suggested, the better term for "span" would be -3dB bandwidth (BW) and -6dB BW. (high cutoff frequency - low cutoff frequency)/2 would give you the BPF center frequency if you wanted to provide that info.

Thanks again for you continued contribution to the community.

Herb

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 15:02, Pierre Martel <petem001@...> wrote:

If I can say a little something about this Idea.

A tracking generator would not cost a lot more in ressources and would
be a nice addon in a NanoSa.
And the possibility to add an amplifier to the TG to bring the level
to 30 DBm (1watt) would also be cool.

And lastly with the Generator in the TG, if you can modulate the
signal with a tone at a deviation level you can set, we could do some
really nice stuff.

With that said, I have a nice pelican box that could house all of
those nice device with a large rechargeable bank of Lithium/ion
battery lots of cable and adaptors. A Raspberry Pi4, 2 hdmi touche
screen And we have a portable RF labs..




Le mar. 8 oct. 2019 à 09:18, Larry Rothman <nlroth@...> a écrit :

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 08:51 AM, <erik@...> wrote:

Would it be wonderful if there would be, next to the nanoVNA, a nanoSA

or nano

Spectrum Analyzer?

Well I decided to test what the most simple SA could look like, just

good

enough to test the harmonics level of your signals till 400MHz and

some other,

not too complex, measurements.

Thanks for playing with this idea, Erik.
There was a comment from a Japanese NanoVNA user on Twitter comparing

the use of the Nano to an oscilloscope that is in the same price range but
has poor specs.

They gave an example of JYE Tech's 200KHz bandwidth scope kit for $30 vs

the Nano's capabilities - image attached.

At this time, there is not near enough memory to implement a scope

function - maybe in the version 2 device?

--
Dr David Kirkby Ph.D C.Eng MIET
Kirkby Microwave Ltd
Registered office: Stokes Hall Lodge, Burnham Rd, Althorne, CHELMSFORD,
Essex, CM3 6DT, United Kingdom.
Registered in England and Wales as company number 08914892

Tel 01621-680100 / +44 1621-680100

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 15:48, Jim AC0E <ham@...> wrote:

Dr. Kirkby,
Excellent suggestion. Especially, for myself, the beginners section.
Thank you.
Regards,
James Douglass
Garden City, Kansas
USA

Yes, I think beginners is quite an important one.



*Subgroups might be more of a PITA than I thought. I looked at one list I
own, and read this. *
Create A Subgroup

*Subgroups are a great way to segment your members. You can easily add
members from your parent group to each subgroup and you can see on one page
which subgroups each member is a part of. Subgroups have the full feature
set of parent groups; subgroup messages can be fully public, viewable by
members of the parent group, or private to members of the subgroup.*

*When you create your first subgroup, a subdomain will be created
automatically for you. Your parent group is called
[email protected]
<[email protected]>. Let's say you're
creating a subgroup called sg. After you create the subgroup, your parent
group will now be [email protected]
<[email protected]> and your
subgroup will be called
[email protected]
<[email protected]>. You can change
main to any other name you wish.*

I interpret that is meaning creating a subgroup "Beginners" of
[email protected], would destroy [email protected], and
instead create [email protected]
and [email protected]

I don't know what would happen if someone sent an email to
[email protected].

I was tempted to try this on a group I own, but I'm reluctant to mess up a
group that works well.

--
Dr David Kirkby Ph.D C.Eng MIET
Kirkby Microwave Ltd
Registered office: Stokes Hall Lodge, Burnham Rd, Althorne, CHELMSFORD,
Essex, CM3 6DT, United Kingdom.
Registered in England and Wales as company number 08914892

Tel 01621-680100 / +44 1621-680100

To the extent that this encourages present or future developers out there:

A spectrum analyzer, with a tracking generator, that covers "below HF"
through "above UHF", with user-selectable RBW and VBW, for around 50 USD
would be ... awesome!

[FWIW, I'm "blown away" by the nanoVNA ... so my thanks to those
developers.]

Paul
WB1EMK

I read all this for my entertainerment and advancement of knowledge (both
things correlated), so for me:
- the more the better
- having everything in one place is convenient

Most important is that the permanent knowledge that gets found or developed
in the discussions is recorded in the wiki or in structured lists (such as
the firmware versions).
This points seems to be taken care of by several individuals which I thank
for their great service to the community.

I get this, but it seems to work OK....

Like someone did said, Group.io can do sub-groups.

A nice layout of sub group would be something like:

firmware
hardware
software
where to buy
new user
advance discussion
calibration

the owner can even set pinned post on the main web site



Le mar. 8 oct. 2019 à 11:49, Dr. David Kirkby from Kirkby Microwave
Ltd <drkirkby@...> a écrit :

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 12:43, Mike_nano <biounit.mike@...> wrote:

I agree. This is a mess and hard to follow. It should have been a forum
from the beginning. Suggest that since this project and others like it will
continue into the future, that a forum should be started and all messages
(if possible) be moved there. Do this ASAP.

This is my opinion.

What’s the difference between a forum and a group? I assume that they are
basically different names for the same thing, but perhaps I am wrong.

--

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

I just released 0.1.1:


[]
This version should work with NanoVNA-F, though I have had no way to test
it - I look forward to hearing if it does.
[]
Enjoy,
Rune / 5Q5R
===================================

Rune,

A basic test with the NanoVNA-F works as expected - just testing a filter response (as on my earlier Tweet).

73,
David GM8ARV
--
SatSignal Software - Quality software for you
Web:
Email: david-taylor@...
Twitter: @gm8arv

Hi Rune,
if you would change the word "Span:" to "BW:" that's more comprehensive.
Please add a -6dB BW as well because SSB chrystal filters are usually characterized with their -6dB BW.
If you don't set a marker from where the search starts, and let the software find the -3dB points of the BP-filter instead, then the software can also calculate the correct center frequency of the BP-Filter. This is very helpfull while adjusting a homebrew filter, because you would get from sweep to sweep an update of the CF. If I understand the current method correctly, I will set the CF with the marker visually. Correct me if I am wrong.
For HP- and LP filters this method would work as well. If you search for lowest attenuation first and set this value as reference, next search for the -3dB point starting at reference.

What do you think about that?

Kind regards
Norbert, DG1KPN

groups.io groups are glorified mailing lists. They're very different from
"web forums", which is what I think people are requesting. Look at the
eevblog forums for a relevant example.

I don't have a problem keeping up with this list, but I do think the
discussions on the organisation of it, as well as complaints about the
amount of traffic, should be moved to a sub-group. ;-)

--
Rune / 5Q5R

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 17:49, Dr. David Kirkby from Kirkby Microwave Ltd <
drkirkby@...> wrote:

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 12:43, Mike_nano <biounit.mike@...> wrote:

I agree. This is a mess and hard to follow. It should have been a forum
from the beginning. Suggest that since this project and others like it

will

continue into the future, that a forum should be started and all messages
(if possible) be moved there. Do this ASAP.

This is my opinion.

What’s the difference between a forum and a group? I assume that they are
basically different names for the same thing, but perhaps I am wrong.

--

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

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 12:43, Mike_nano <biounit.mike@...> wrote:

I agree. This is a mess and hard to follow. It should have been a forum
from the beginning. Suggest that since this project and others like it will
continue into the future, that a forum should be started and all messages
(if possible) be moved there. Do this ASAP.

This is my opinion.

What’s the difference between a forum and a group? I assume that they are
basically different names for the same thing, but perhaps I am wrong.

--

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

What confused some people is the fact that Group.io is both a mailing
list and a forum as Yahoo group are.

You can use group.io as a mailing list and never go to the web site
but to set your first inscription to the group.

Or you can only use the web interface and never receive an email, or
set to receive announcement to post you replayed or follow.

People need to use the tools in place as they prefer and not try to
impose a type of communication to the other.

MOn Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 16:15, Richard G4TGJ <rpt@...> wrote:

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 12:43 PM, Mike_nano wrote:

a forum should be started

Who will host it?

--
73
Richard
G4TGJ

Whether one calls it a group or a forum, I currently see no reason to move
from groups.io. It supports subgroups. I don’t have any experience of
these, but since I own two groups on groups.io

/g/HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment
(4325 members)

and

/g/Test-Equipment-For-Sale-Wanted-or-Exchange
(895 members)

I could experiment, if the owners of this group wanted. But if they plan to
use hashtags, do nothing, create other groups etc, I will not waste my time.

It is interesting that the HP/Agilent/Keysight group has more than twice as
many members of this group, but only about 10% of the traffic!

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

I am confused by your suggestion.

The nanovna-users group IS a forum.

DaveD

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 11:55, <qrp.ddc@...> wrote:

Did you mean that user will be able to enter offset delay for open, short
and load and specify C0 for the open?

Yes.

I can try to add it at least for C0.


That would be a start. It would offer two improvements

1)*It would allow support of APC7 kits, which only need C0.* as the offset
delay is zero.

(For the 85031B= C0=92.85)



for the 85050B, C0=90.4799



2) Purposely putting in the wrong value of C0, it might be possible to get
any kit to work at least overy a limited frequency range. There’s some
information on pages 11 & 12 here




that might indicate that would work.

Regarding to the delay offset, I'm not sure on how to apply it to the

calibration terms.

Is it correct to apply electronic delay before error term calculations?

Yes, I believe so. As I understand it.

1) The VNA measures the calibration standards.

2) From the raw measurement data collected by the VNA of the standards,
*and* the mathematical model of the calibration standards (real and
imaginary part of the impedance), the error terms are calculated. The
error terms can not possibly be worked out without knowing everything
about those calibration standards, including the delay. Jeff, k6jca has
convinced me that C1, C2 and C3 can be ignored - at least for high end kits
over the frequency range of the NanoVNA.

3) The error terms are applied to all measurements.

I have no ifea

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

Ken,
There are 3 file types that can be generated when new firmware is created: bin, hex & S19
The 'Windows DFU File' manager is used to convert from one format to another and produce the dfu file from any one of the 3 types above.
The manager is installed when you install the DefuSe uility.
If the DefuSe utility is telling you that you've got the wrong file format, it's not dfu or it's a corrupted dfu file.
Grab the release zip from github and pull out and convert the bin to a dfu and you should be good to go.
...Larry

When I first started out looking at the NanoVNA, there wasn't any open
source software, thus my little attempt at a simple Python app.

Has this software been made open source? Or is it simply modded binaries?

When I looked at first, Hugen seemed very adamant that he wouldn't make his
software Open Source.

If it is open, I would look at it for inspiration :-)

--
Rune / 5Q5R