开云体育

Being mathematical identical the standards being NOT ideal have identical impact, even the uncertainty regions will be identical. The formula I provided for comparison and is proven to be identical is

GIN&PEZ; Am I correct in my interpretation of this that incorporating standards with correction has - in this particular case - moved the measured result closer to the higher of the uncertainty

Thanks Jeff; Too many new tools tied to learning about this. I don’t know which one to learn first. :-) I’m seeing universal agreement on the equivalence of the computations, so I’m comfortable

Erik; The most recent posts by GIN&PEZ is shedding some new light on this. I am seeing additional data that leads me to believe that my understanding still remains somewhat off track. I also see hints

The GIN&PEZ equation certainly seems to give the same result as the standard one-port 3-term correction equations. Here's a quick Matlab example I wrote, using the GIN&PEZ terminology and values

I believe it is soldered, haven't bothered to look. -- Terry VK5TM https://www.vk5tm.com

I found this 2.8 inch 240*320 color TFT LCD touch screen with ili9341 driver IC touch panel | eBay | | | | $18.00 | | | | | | | 2.8 inch 240*320 color TFT LCD touch screen with ili9341 driver IC

I looked at it and it's not clear just how it replaces the original screen.? Is there a connector you just swap, or what?? I would give it a shot to make for a bigger display. I have had some

Found it on the english Aliexpress site, but when I went to pay they started wanting jpeg scans of my credit card, drivers license and other stuff. They can stick that where the sun doesn't shine.

I was just going by the guy who said it was, specifically when he said it was a way to get QST issues. Dave?? AB7E

Did you actually look at TinyCat/LibraryThing that W0RW uses? It is not a download or copying service. https://www.librarything.com/ https://www.librarycat.org/ 73 -Jim NU0C "stone_ridge_road"

Not all.? I just think it's funny how easily people will rationalize their behavior, and I'm referring to the guy who started this thread as well as the guy who thinks W0RW isn't engaging in

Hello again Erik; It seems we are in complete agreement at my current level of understanding. This all being new to me, I've not yet attempted to dig into the details of how the calibration

@Bob Albert I understand that... It was more about accuracy over a smaller calibration range. Thanks...

@Larry Rothman I thought I had read about the "measurement points" That was what led me to asking the question.... Thanks :)

Still, the calibration is based on the value of the load used for calibrating.? If it's 51 Ohms you will have SWR of 1.02 with a 50 Ohm load. However, this is usually a trivial error. Bob

Wow, Dave! You got in the bus very late, didn’t you? NONE of us are interested in this new QEX article for VNA theory! It’s about the empirical comparison of the NanoVNA versus other higher grade

Yes, for that narrow range, you will have a set of cal values.The Nanovna natively scans 101 points and if you narrow the freq range, it will still scann 101 points in the narrow range so the

Yes, you need to place the choke in its position ON THE INTENDED AMPLIFIER chassis. In this manner the exact distributive affects of shunt C are properly noted. And with all do respects to the VNA, I

Hello, I'm new to VNA's and have just received my nanoVNA All the YouTubes show calibrating from 50Khz to 900MHz If you set the range to say 45MHz to 55Mhz, and then calibrate. will it provide more