On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 03:33 PM, Roger Need wrote:
The Q calculation is wrong.
OK, glad that's cleared up. I thought I must have done something really wrong to get 4 times the value you reported.
I hope Nizar got his answer. I think the best one was provided by Jim Lux. It didn't make it into this thread, but Nizar can find it. If I had only a NanoVNA to measure Q, I'd calibrate it over as narrow a frequency range as possible to minimize interpolation error. Then I'd take extra care to make low-resistance connections, which can really matter when Q is high.
Back into the woodwork...
Brian
