开云体育

Question: If the NanoVNA is used only for HF, are the shields necessary?

You could do what I did when I got my Nano back in June - use a very thin cellphone battery.It's perfectly safe and there are a couple of photos in the photo section of the forum:
/g/nanovna-users/photo/0/40?p=Created,,,20,1,40,0

Excellent information. Thanks for taking the time to provide this information.

Tom Stiles

Hi Nan -

I found the menu structure for firmware 0.2.3 -

but could not find one for the NanoVNA-H which was slightly different.

Thanks for heads up; I was unaware of any differences,
other than between two ("AA") and four trace versions.

Unlike commercial software and firmware, open source developers typically
do not coordinate with (and may be unaware of) other user documentation writers.

Could anyone please guide me to find this please?

By "latest", do you mean:



... or

I do not attempt to keep up with latest GitHub releases,
only those Hugen considers worthwhile posting to Google Drive..

It takes some time to download, calibrate and capture menu structure,
then a few more hours to tweak menu map CSS and HTML.

FWIW, some nanoVNA controls remain to me somewhat mysterious..

I surely did..

BR-Nan-vk2krn

Thanks to all for your responses.
The "Reset" menu option got me very confused but its clearer now. For example, Recall 1 and Reset only clears Register 1 and not "ALL" Cal data as I originally thought!
I used the latest NanoVNA-H firmware and then moved over to edy555's firmware 0.2.3. I found the menu structure for firmware 0.2.3 - but could not find one for the NanoVNA-H which was slightly different. Could anyone please guide me to find this please? I presume both firmware's are fine to use with my hardware bought from eBay - black, shields, USB-C , power on splash screen showed gen111.taobao.com. (eBay seller in Sydney, Australia)

Regards, Nan

Me too.

--
Regards,

Martin - G8JNJ

#66: Public Invitation : #66

Hello,

Allow us, please, to generally express our clear point of view
on these extraordinary stupid demands expressed by impotent
members of this group, by addressing in particular our valuable
collaborator in this very topic, Gary O'Neil, as follows:

Dear Gary,

We gradually read your huge valuable work and we think
that it certainly will be an honer for us if you will accept
this public invitation to participate with us, as the first
co-author of course, in a Series of Papers to be published
in our small-but-honest research journal FTP#J, with subjects
beginning with those research results that you and we
produced here - after a so hard work as productive doers
of course [*].

Therefore, if you -as well as any other Fellow in Knowledge,
of course- are interested enough in the open and free publication
on these matters, then do not hesitate to contact us, please,
at this email address :

yzavna@...

anytime you will feel that you are ready for such an attempt.

Meanwhile, as we already predicted with our very early
messages:

#8 - 21 September 2019 :
/g/nanovna-users/message/3004

#9 - 25 September 2019 :
/g/nanovna-users/message/3040

we are going to save our contributions in this group,
without any of these interfering nuisances of course,
which obscure and defame our research work, at:



Farewell !

[*] and not just as impotent totalitarian lazy talkers, whose their
main job in this particular case is dual :

- on the one hand, to hide from the innocent Common User the
fact that the least operation of any VNA is just as simply as our
two step process based totally on its measurements and nothing
else, as well as

- on the other hand, to mute the fact that there are errors in any
VNA results, which under more than less circumstances may
become so extremely large that its computed measurements
become totally unreliable.

That's all.

Sincerely,

gin&pez@arg

66#

Hi Jim

There is no substitute to hard work. Besides I have a Magic Wand ?

Kind regards

Kurt



-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: [email protected] <[email protected]> P? vegne af Starsekr via Groups.Io
Sendt: 21. oktober 2019 10:28
Til: [email protected]
Emne: Re: [nanovna-users] Measuring ferrite beads #test-jig



Kurt, Just read your comment above. I think you said it works by Magic, Which I believe. I will have to get a bit of experimenting experience before I try ferrite beads I think.



Jim, KA6TPR

Also it seems that this PCB layout is not good. Because it don't allow to place shield edge on safe distance from c26, c27. Also it looks that there is impedance problem with wire to SMA connector. The wire thickness looks like too thin for two layers pcb.

But these things cannot be fixed. This is poor PCB design.

ideald shield should be soldered with no gap. Because any gap leads to ground loop. Longer gap leads to higher noise. Did you see these through holes on the pcb ground? These holes are named "vias", they plays the same role as shield soldering. As you can see, there are a lot of vias with a short distance. This is needed to avoid ground loops between front and back ground layers of pcb.

On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 01:04 AM, Mike_nano wrote:

What am I missing? Did I do something wrong?

yes, you did it wrong. There are two problems with your shields:
1) You're forgot to solder left top corner of shield. The distance to the ground is long, so the shield works as loop antenna and receiving noise.

2) the distance between shield and c26, c27 is too close. Short distance leads to capacitive coupling. You're needs to cut a small piece of left top corner of your shield in order to increase distance between shield and c26, c27.

Also, you didn't shown what is under the hood of the top shield. There is also may be problem with capacitive coupling due to short distance and missing soldering at some point. Also, there are needs two sections under shield for CH0. It's not clear from your photo if CH0 shield has two sections or one section.

Kurt, Just read your comment above. I think you said it works by Magic, Which I believe. I will have to get a bit of experimenting experience before I try ferrite beads I think.

Jim, KA6TPR

i did

if you search on the term battery size you will get a lot of information. But here is one post:


|kf7dur
|
|Sep 5 #1870 ?
|
|
|Karl,
|
|I used a 602040 450mAH (5x20x31.5mm) battery in my Banggood NanoVNA. I don't think anything bigger will fit.
|$8.99 from Amazon.
|
|Ken
|KF7DUR

I also added a nice board photo uploaded by Mike. Shows the battery very nicely.

Advice to newbies: Search .....Look at the Wiki..... Read the Tips and Users Guide. #RTFM Look at and use #Hashtags

The NanoVNA is not Plug and Play. Using a VNA is not Plug and Play if you want reliable results. It is not a grid dip meter (look that up) and it isn't an MFJ 259B. It is a work in progress, IT IS A KIT! Firmware is being revised every few weeks right now, and the NanoSaver software is maturing very nicely, but it is being worked on by people who are not getting paid. Don't worry about firmware upgrades until you have some time with the Nano.

Hi Bryan,
I haven't tried the 0.3.0 firmware yet. Looking at the (sparse) release
notes, it's not obvious that there would be anything there that changes how
NanoVNA-Saver interfaces with it. I'll see if I can't find the time to load
it onto my NanoVNA and test it out :-)

--
Rune / 5Q5R

On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 at 07:03, bryburns via Groups.Io <bryburns=
[email protected]> wrote:

Rune,

I have been using several new features in nanoVNA-Saver 0.1.3 and think
that they are great additions.

I am trying to use edy555 firmware version 0.3.0 with nanoVNA-Saver
version 0.1.3. There are several new features in this firmware that are
beneficial to me when I cannot use nanoVNA-Saver, so I would like to keep
this firmware loaded in my nanoVNA. However, I am seeing a lot more data
errors with this version of firmware than I saw with 0.2.3 from edy555. It
is so bad that I cannot get a reliable calibration in nanoVNA-Saver without
using 5 averages and dropping 2 values in nanoVNA-Saver that are the
worst. This was not the case with the 0.2.3 version of firmware. With the
new firmware and software I had to do repeated scans until there were no
obvious errors in the data for each termination/through condition in order
to get a calibration that was reasonable. I could not use the Calibration
assistant. The errors are often 0.25 to 0.5 dB in the S11 trace and quite
obvious. Even data in the isolation state for through calibration had
large errors in amplitude, as much as 20-30 dB. I never see these errors
when I operate the nanoVNA by itself and simply use the displayed result.
It appears to be either something in the transfer (timing?) or something
related to scanning. Generally, there are about 3 or 4 bad samples per
scan, often at exactly the same frequency. As I have observed with some
previous firmware, the bad data is never in the first scan you do from
nanoVNA-Saver.

I have to wondered if the by-passing on the 5V power supply may be related
to this issue. Without replacing the 5V supply or improving filtering I am
not sure how to isolate this potential issue. Up to this point, I have
been reluctant to start modifying the hardware.

Have you been working with the 0.3.0 firmware from edy555? Has anyone
else reported this issue?

--
Bryan, WA5VAH

Rune,

I have been using several new features in nanoVNA-Saver 0.1.3 and think that they are great additions.

I am trying to use edy555 firmware version 0.3.0 with nanoVNA-Saver version 0.1.3. There are several new features in this firmware that are beneficial to me when I cannot use nanoVNA-Saver, so I would like to keep this firmware loaded in my nanoVNA. However, I am seeing a lot more data errors with this version of firmware than I saw with 0.2.3 from edy555. It is so bad that I cannot get a reliable calibration in nanoVNA-Saver without using 5 averages and dropping 2 values in nanoVNA-Saver that are the worst. This was not the case with the 0.2.3 version of firmware. With the new firmware and software I had to do repeated scans until there were no obvious errors in the data for each termination/through condition in order to get a calibration that was reasonable. I could not use the Calibration assistant. The errors are often 0.25 to 0.5 dB in the S11 trace and quite obvious. Even data in the isolation state for through calibration had large errors in amplitude, as much as 20-30 dB. I never see these errors when I operate the nanoVNA by itself and simply use the displayed result. It appears to be either something in the transfer (timing?) or something related to scanning. Generally, there are about 3 or 4 bad samples per scan, often at exactly the same frequency. As I have observed with some previous firmware, the bad data is never in the first scan you do from nanoVNA-Saver.

I have to wondered if the by-passing on the 5V power supply may be related to this issue. Without replacing the 5V supply or improving filtering I am not sure how to isolate this potential issue. Up to this point, I have been reluctant to start modifying the hardware.

Have you been working with the 0.3.0 firmware from edy555? Has anyone else reported this issue?

--
Bryan, WA5VAH

I found it on Amazon. I don't know where else you might find it. 73 de K9GXC, Jim

Here is a link to the one I purchased:


Marco

Anyone have a recommendation for a good battery to add to a unit missing one?