OK, no problem then.
However, please remember - considering the cost of the NanoVNA - it puts more capability in your shirt pocket than most of its predecessors used by Amateurs.
As I mentioned, it takes no effort to flash different versions of firmware onto the device. We aren't doing microwave design were pico-seconds matter.
And you can take it up an antenna tower - without a PC.
If I need to check out a length of cable from my Tx to the antenna, it is more than adequate to show the approximate location of any issues - and that includes connectors.
If the Nano TDR shows shows me a reflection a foot or two away from a connector, don't you think I will look at the connector before anything else?
It is good enough to play with and get a feel for how it works and that in my opinion is not a waste of time.
Others are using the Nano to learn from - from both a programming and an RF point of view.
There has been some great dialogue in the forum regarding TDR and RF theory in general.
You are sharing your TDR knowledge as well - that's great!
I've worked in the RF field (no pun intended) for 40 years and I'm still learning.
All I am saying here is that the various diagnostic functions that are being graciously developed for the Nano by very talented individuals, may not be for everyone but, they are NOT a waste of time for everyone.
Cheers,
Larry
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 02:21 PM, <qrp.ddc@...> wrote:
There is no question if TDR needed or not. It is definitely must have. The
question if it worth to make measurement more worse, cut-off useful
measurements just to add low-res TDR on firmware side? Or if it's better to
make NanoVNA more precise, more stable and more useful with more measurements,
but with TDR implementation on PC software side (with much better resolution
and more usable)?
