Re: Which Firmware Version?
Really?
Read the latest Oct 2nd version of the User Guide in the files section on how to convert HEX or BIN files to DFU so you can update the flash on your Nano.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thursday, October 3, 2019, 2:25:13 p.m. GMT-4, Bob Albert via Groups.Io <bob91343@...> wrote:
What is the update procedure?
Bob
? ? On Thursday, October 3, 2019, 11:22:19 AM PDT, Larry Rothman <nlroth@...> wrote:
[Edited Message Follows]
Look for?? edy555_nanovna_v2.2-sept-30-19.dfu? or similar.
That's the bugfix version.
You can always go to the TTRFTECH github releases page:
Read the latest Oct 2nd version of the User Guide in the files section on how to convert HEX or BIN files to DFU so you can update the flash on your Nano.
? ? On Thursday, October 3, 2019, 2:16:11 p.m. GMT-4, Steve London <n2ic@...> wrote:
Okay - snooped around the wiki, yet I still couldn't find edy55_bugfix (10-1-19), for example.
|
Re: Which Firmware Version?
What is the update procedure?
Bob
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thursday, October 3, 2019, 11:22:19 AM PDT, Larry Rothman <nlroth@...> wrote:
[Edited Message Follows]
Look for?? edy555_nanovna_v2.2-sept-30-19.dfu? or similar.
That's the bugfix version.
You can always go to the TTRFTECH github releases page:
Read the latest Oct 2nd version of the User Guide in the files section on how to convert HEX or BIN files to DFU so you can update the flash on your Nano.
? ? On Thursday, October 3, 2019, 2:16:11 p.m. GMT-4, Steve London <n2ic@...> wrote:
Okay - snooped around the wiki, yet I still couldn't find edy55_bugfix (10-1-19), for example.
|
Re: Which Firmware Version?
Look for?? edy555_nanovna_v2.2-sept-30-19.dfu? or similar.
That's the bugfix version.
You can always go to the TTRFTECH github releases page:
Read the latest Oct 2nd version of the User Guide in the files section on how to convert HEX or BIN files to DFU so you can update the flash on your Nano.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thursday, October 3, 2019, 2:16:11 p.m. GMT-4, Steve London <n2ic@...> wrote:
Okay - snooped around the wiki, yet I still couldn't find edy55_bugfix (10-1-19), for example.
|
Re: Which Firmware Version?
Okay - snooped around the wiki, yet I still couldn't find edy55_bugfix (10-1-19), for example.
|
Re: Another push button mod
I got the switches off a scrap set top box PCB, but you can buy them almost anywhere. They are 6mm x 6mm and come in a variety of button heights.
4.3mm is flush with the PCB, 7mm sticks out slightly, take your pick.
--
Regards,
Martin - G8JNJ
|
Wow Bryan! Thanks for that in-depth piece of work! I use a Blackman window, which is created by putting in "np.blackman()" ;-) So I can use whatever window function is the most relevant. These ones are available: I've had suggested that I should pad the input data with as many zeroes as I have data values, I think in order to increase either resolution or range? I haven't done it yet, but I was thinking about having some experiments. If the second half the values shown are useless, I might as well just discard them! :-) You're right that the graph can currently only exist in one place. It's not particularly difficult to fix, but it involves re-doing a tiny bit of the application architecture; which I really should do at some point anyway. I don't promise when I will get it done, though. ;-) Thank you very much for your feedback, and I hope you can help me select things such as: 1) The window function to use, 2) Whether to pad the input, 3) How many points to use for the FFT, 4) What part of the output should be displayed (half, like you suggested?) -- Rune / 5Q5R On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 17:16, bryburns via Groups.Io <bryburns= [email protected]> wrote: Rune,
I am taking a deeper look at your TDR plot. Thanks for implementing this.
I think you are plotting all of the samples of the IFFT of the S11 data.
If so, I would recommend that you chop off the last half of the plot. With
5 segments (505 total samples) from 50kHz to 900 MHz I am seeing the right
side of the plot indicating 55.4 m as the longest distance one could
measure. I set the the cable type to RG58/U with a velocity factor of
0.66. I think 55.4 m is too large by a factor of 2. The last half of the
bins in the IFFT are time delays that we won't measure in this way with
real cables. As it is, you give the impression to someone that they could
measure a 55.4 m cable for the settings indicated above which is not
correct.
Are you applying a frequency domain window function to the data prior to
doing the IFFT? If so, it would be useful to let folks know what window
you are applying when it comes time for documentation. If not, there are
an infinite number of possible windows. I would suggest something fairly
easy to implement such as a Hanning window or a Hamming window. For cable
length measurement, what you have is great.
I am interested in using the TDR to look for impedance deviations along
the transmission line which can get easily obscured by time-domain
sidelobes if no window is applied. I am using the TDR capability to look
for coax damage or breaks in the protective jacket caused by gardening. My
coax cables run through a garden area to my antennas which are above the
garden. Outright breaks in the coax are fairly easy to find; however, some
types of damage are a bit more difficult to observe. The TDR is especially
helpful for this application.
I do like the separate plotting capability you have implemented for the
TDR data which is in the same window as the coax definition. I have
noticed that once you put it into the main window as one of the graphs, you
cannot ever see the TDR data again as a separate plot unless you restart
the program. It seems like it would be a good idea to restore the plot to
the TDR window if it is removed from the plots in the main window or just
permanently leave it in the separate window that the user can bring up as
desired?
Another alternative is to only plot the TDR data in the main window. When
the TDR plot is a graph in the main window you should show at least the
velocity factor you have assumed on the TDR plot and perhaps the cable type
the user selected. This makes the plot self-contained when it is saved as
an image. I prefer a separate window where I can make the TDR plot as big
as my screen; however, that is not in any way essential and probably makes
more work for you.
Thanks, again, for your great work on this software. I greatly appreciate
it.
73,
Bryan, WA5VAH
|
Re: Another push button mod
where did you find the switches?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 10/3/2019 12:49 PM, Martin via Groups.Io wrote: Hi All,
I got fed up with the Jog wheel sticking, so today I took the plunge and fitted some PCB mount push buttons behind the front panel (see attached).
The wiring is the same as the push button mod in the files section. I simply drilled some small holes in the PCB front panel and attached the buttons to the rear.
There is just enough space and depth between the panels for the miniature switches to fit nicely in place. The top of the buttons are flush with the surface of the PCB, but it's easy to operate them with the edge of your thumb nail.
I insulated the back of the switches so that they can't short against the other PCB, and ran the thin connecting wires between the PCB panels through the newly vacated Jog wheel mounting holes.
I also cut down the slider of the rather delicate miniature on/off switch, so that it doesn't accidentally get caught on other objects or become switched on in transit.
Regards,
Martin
--
Dave, WB5NHL
5BDXCC, 311 countries confirmed
@dkjellqu
|
Always takes at least a day before it appears in the stracking
|
Actually, if you check, you will see that ONLY the shipping INFO was received by China Post - not the actual item.
This is what my eBay info says: ?? Shipping status Shipping info received
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thursday, October 3, 2019, 1:03:30 p.m. GMT-4, Henning Weddig via Groups.Io <hweddig@...> wrote: according to ebay my order is just shipped. It was marked shipped with a a tracking number, so I can track the status of the shipment. Henning Weddig Am 03.10.2019 um 18:56 schrieb Larry Rothman: ? I just tried looking at the seller's eBay page and they no longer have ANYTHING listed for sale.
So - let's see how this all plays out at the end of the month so yes, the wait begins......
? ? ? On Thursday, October 3, 2019, 10:40:59 a.m. GMT-4, James R. Chastain via Groups.Io <suenrod@...> wrote:
?
? My order show shipped today. Now the waiting begins.
? ?
|
Re: errors of "error" models
29 : ann : our nanovna will be evaluated tonight
|
according to ebay my order is just shipped. It was marked shipped with a a tracking number, so I can track the status of the shipment.
Henning Weddig
Am 03.10.2019 um 18:56 schrieb Larry Rothman:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I just tried looking at the seller's eBay page and they no longer have ANYTHING listed for sale.
So - let's see how this all plays out at the end of the month so yes, the wait begins......
On Thursday, October 3, 2019, 10:40:59 a.m. GMT-4, James R. Chastain via Groups.Io <suenrod@...> wrote:
My order show shipped today. Now the waiting begins.
|
Re: Using the VNWA Testboard Kit
Paul,
I can't tell from the Smith chart plots you have included what might be wrong What does the 68 pf capacitor show at around 1-10 MHz? At low frequencies, like 50 kHz, the Smith chart should show an open - a dot on the right side of the Smith chart. The nanoVNA is measuring the reflected signal and phase or complex values of those quantities. At very low frequencies, like 50 kHz, the capacitor is so much like an open circuit, it is very difficult to measure with a VNA. The reactance of 68 pf is around 47 k-ohms at 50 kHz and therefore hard to measure in a system calibrated for 50 ohms. However, at 1 MHz, the 68 pf capacitor has a reactance of ~2.34 k ohms and at 10 MHz it is ~234 ohms. So, measurements at 10 MHz with the nanoVNA are very possible.
Attached is a Smith Chart plot of my measurement of a capacitor marked as 68 pf. I did not do a careful calibration for the test fixture I am using; however, this shows what I think is a correct trend for a 68 pf capacitor from 50 kHz to 30 MHz. As you go higher in frequency than 30 MHz a good capacitor should plot a curve which goes further around the Smith chart than shown in the attached image in a counter-clockwise direction. When nanoVNA-Saver estimates the capacitance at 10 MHz, it is saying it is ~74 pf. Some of this error is likely due to my test fixture; however, I don't have a well calibrated measurement of this unused capacitor.
I hope this helps. Good luck with your measurements.
--
Bryan, WA5VAH
|
I just tried looking at the seller's eBay page and they no longer have ANYTHING listed for sale.
So - let's see how this all plays out at the end of the month so yes, the wait begins......
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thursday, October 3, 2019, 10:40:59 a.m. GMT-4, James R. Chastain via Groups.Io <suenrod@...> wrote:
My order show shipped today. Now the waiting begins.
|
Hi All,
I got fed up with the Jog wheel sticking, so today I took the plunge and fitted some PCB mount push buttons behind the front panel (see attached).
The wiring is the same as the push button mod in the files section. I simply drilled some small holes in the PCB front panel and attached the buttons to the rear.
There is just enough space and depth between the panels for the miniature switches to fit nicely in place. The top of the buttons are flush with the surface of the PCB, but it's easy to operate them with the edge of your thumb nail.
I insulated the back of the switches so that they can't short against the other PCB, and ran the thin connecting wires between the PCB panels through the newly vacated Jog wheel mounting holes.
I also cut down the slider of the rather delicate miniature on/off switch, so that it doesn't accidentally get caught on other objects or become switched on in transit.
Regards,
Martin - G8JNJ
|
Re: Using the VNWA Testboard Kit
Paul,
Make sure you calibrate the Nano properly, which begins with using the RESET button on the calibration menu.
At the same time, ensure you're calibrating out the cables you're using - that means perform the calibration with the test cables attached.
That will allow you to see the actual items under test more clearly.
73,?
Larry
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thursday, October 3, 2019, 12:10:10 p.m. GMT-4, Paul <pw.versteeg@...> wrote:
[Edited Message Follows]
I just got my NanoVNA, and I've never used one before. I spent about two weeks reading whatever I can find to learn more.
To get myself familiar, I purchased the VNWA Testboard kit from SDR-Kits. (www.sdr-kits.net)
This is a smal pcb with sockets and parts that allow you to create little circuits a VNA can test. The kit was designed for the VNWA, a instrument in principle not much different from the NanoVNA. ()
I was hoping to use the same kit with the NanoVNA, unfortunately, I ran into a few issues I can't explain and would like to bring to your attention to see if this can hopefully be resolved, or as a minimum, explained.
The kit was connected to the NanaVNA using the supplied cables and calibrated before making any measurements, of course.
Measuring resistors works fine with the kit, the values do not have a great accuracy, but are close enough if you stay below 1 KOhms, and even show plausible inductance's of a few nH due to the lead length. Just what I was looking for. Unfortunately, capacitors and inductors do not give plausible (to me) results at all.
A 47.28 Ohm resistor is reported to be 46.6 with 7.53uH. (see chart)
A 98.85 Ohm resistor is reported as 98.3 with 8.58uH.
That's all very good!
However, a 68 pF capacitor (with short leads) shows far too much of an inductance on the chart, and is reported to have a resistance of 37 mOhm and 1.59nF. (see chart)
A 180 pF capacitor is shown as -89.5u (no unit given) and 840 pH, no capacitance offered.
An inductor of 1uH is reported to have 3.8 KOhm and 370 fF, no inductance offered. (see chart)
I've included the screenshots of the PC program, unfortunately, they do not show the reported values. (room for improvement?)
Can anybody offer an explanation or better yet, a fix?
Thanks,
Paul
After sending my post off, I noticed that the file names didn't make it.
The first file shows the 1uH inductor, the second the 47R resistor and the third file the 68pF capacitor.
|
Re: Using the VNWA Testboard Kit
After thinking about this some more, I realized that the stop frequency I used was 300MHz.
This is obviously way too high.
When I used a stop frequency of 1MHz, the values started to make sense. ( I did not re-calibrate - yet)
The 1uH inductor is now reported as 1.03 uH with 130mOhm. Which is very accurate.
The 68 pF capacitor is now reported as 83.2 pF with -87 (no unit given - what is this?)
The 180 pF capacitor is now reported as 193 pF with -15.2 (no unit given - what is this?)
Pilot error!
I'll do some more testing...more relaxed now...
Paul
|
Re: Which Firmware Version?
There is - it's the NanoVNA's WIKI
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thursday, October 3, 2019, 11:59:10 a.m. GMT-4, Steve London <n2ic@...> wrote: On Tue, Oct? 1, 2019 at 08:17 AM, W5DXP wrote:
edy555_bugfix
Stupid question of the day : Where is this located ? Tried the Files folder. Tried Tried Maybe it would be good to have a sticky message that lists all the many places that firmware is available ? 73, Steve, N2IC
|
Dr. David Kirkby from Kirkby Microwave Ltd
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 16:13, Oristo <ormpoa@...> wrote: If you have alternative suggestions for ready made cheap test boards I am sure
many would love to hear about them? FWIW, I got this $6 SMA attenuation breadboard
Dremel open the 0dB line and attach UHF DUT of interest.
To now there are two options * $28 for a board that will wear out after about 20 connections. (Date from Hirose datasheet) * $6 for one which will last 500 matings (Generally accepted lifetime of SMAs) The other option you have with the $6 board is to remove the shunt resistors and put the DUT in series. Depending on the impedance of the device, different methods are more appropriate. To me, that $28 board seems overpriced for what it is. -- 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
|
Re: How does VNA get the phase angle of S11
All this technology for fifty bucks?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Wednesday, October 2, 2019, 11:36:26 PM PDT, <erik@...> wrote:
You have the test signal from the SI5351 send to the bridge but also to the "reference" mixer, in the reference mixer it is mixed with the output of the Local Oscillator (LO) which also comes from the SI5351.
The unbalance of the bridge goes to the "reflection" mixer where it is mixed with the same LO.
The LO is at 5kHz offset from the test signal so the output of both mixers is a IF signal at 5kHz.
Both IF's are then read into the controller using the ADC and in a DSP algorithm in the controller the IF's? are going to DSP mixers where they are mixed with two 5kHz signals 90 degrees apart (I/Q mixer) to create a DC signal.
The DC signals (I and Q) are the real and imaginary part of the complex downconverted reference and reflection input to the HW mixers. As you do not know the actual angle of amplitude of the test signal the complex test signal is divided by the complex reference signal to eliminate the phase and amplitude uncertainty.
The outcome of this division is the unbalance of the bridge scaled relative to the reference signal, both in magnitude and angle.
Attached a small pdf that contains the block diagram of a VNA using the same mechanism
|
Using the VNWA Testboard Kit
I just got my NanoVNA, and I've never used one before. I spent about two weeks reading whatever I can find to learn more.
To get myself familiar, I purchased the VNWA Testboard kit from SDR-Kits. (www.sdr-kits.net)
This is a smal pcb with sockets and parts that allow you to create little circuits a VNA can test. The kit was designed for the VNWA, a instrument in principle not much different from the NanoVNA. ()
I was hoping to use the same kit with the NanoVNA, unfortunately, I ran into a few issues I can't explain and would like to bring to your attention to see if this can hopefully be resolved, or as a minimum, explained.
The kit was connected to the NanaVNA using the supplied cables and calibrated before making any measurements, of course.
Measuring resistors works fine with the kit, the values do not have a great accuracy, but are close enough if you stay below 1 KOhms, and even show plausible inductance's of a few nH due to the lead length. Just what I was looking for. Unfortunately, capacitors and inductors do not give plausible (to me) results at all.
A 47.28 Ohm resistor is reported to be 46.6 with 7.53uH. (see chart)
A 98.85 Ohm resistor is reported as 98.3 with 8.58uH.
That's all very good!
However, a 68 pF capacitor (with short leads) shows far too much of an inductance on the chart, and is reported to have a resistance of 37 mOhm and 1.59nF. (see chart)
A 180 pF capacitor is shown as -89.5u (no unit given, Q?) and 840 pH, no capacitance offered.
An inductor of 1uH is reported to have 3.8 KOhm and 370 fF, no inductance offered. (see chart)
I've included the screenshots of the PC program, unfortunately, they do not show the reported values. (room for improvement?)
Can anybody offer an explanation or better yet, a fix?
Thanks,
Paul
After sending my post off, I noticed that the file names didn't make it.
The first file shows the 1uH inductor, the second the 47R resistor and the third file the 68pF capacitor.
|
Dave Kjellquist, WB5NHL
gin&pez@arg
Paul
