Keyboard Shortcuts
ctrl + shift + ? :
Show all keyboard shortcuts
ctrl + g :
Navigate to a group
ctrl + shift + f :
Find
ctrl + / :
Quick actions
esc to dismiss
Likes
- Nanovna-Users
- Messages
Search
Re: 3D printed nanoVNA-H BNC holder and binding post DUT holder
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 05:45 AM, KD8CGH wrote:
I designed and printed a nanoVNA-H holder that securely mounts BNC adapters and a binding post DUT holder. ============================================ Bob, Thanks for showing the fixtures. The group should start a "Fixture" gallery in the "Photos" section. On an unrelated matter, I noticed that your NanoVNA is indicating that it is calibrated but the smith chart display is not what I would expect with CH0 open. Is this because of a test jig that you normally have attached to CH0? - Herb |
Re: NanoVNA-Saver v0.2.2
#nanovna-saver
Hi Rune,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
_About the markers:_?? Today I did exactly? the same as yesterday ,? but only could reproduce items 5 and 6 :? It remains inpossible to set the color of marker 4. What happened to the filling of the data fields is a mistery for me, I tried many things but can't reproduce, very sorry. Best regards Jos Op 15-1-2020 om 10:22 schreef Rune Broberg: Hi Jos, |
Re: NanoVNA-Saver 2.2 on fresh install of Mint 19.3 Cinnamon
Rune,
Thanks. This is the info I requested in another, previous, post. I will make sure these dependencies are met before I try to install .22 on Linux (Linuxmint Mate 19.3). If you can help with the Python issues, we can work out the Linux-Python issues. BruceN / K4TQL -- *"To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk"* -- Thomas Alva Edison (1847-1931) |
Re: How high will Hugen v3.4 HW go?
Erik,
Thanks for the information. I'm hoping my NanoVNA-H4 v3.4 will be delivered by February. Any chance you might be able to do a hands on review of the changes that have been implemented with the v3.4 HW? Are you planning on releasing a 2 GHZ firmware branch for the NanoVNA-H? - Herb |
Re: NanoVNA-Saver v0.2.2
#nanovna-saver
Hi Jos,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
this sounds decidedly odd. I'll have a look at it. :-) -- Rune / 5Q5R On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 18:48, Jos Stevens <jrs@...> wrote:
Hi Rune, |
Re: NanoVNA-Saver 2.2 on fresh install of Mint 19.3 Cinnamon
Hi Nels,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
It certainly is multi-platform. I don't know who writes on that wiki, but the fact that someone wrote an OpenSUSE guide does not mean it doesn't work anywhere else: It should work on any operating system /that can live up the requirements/: - Python 3.7 - PyQt5 in a relatively new version - numpy - scipy - pyserial Of these, the challenges are Python 3.7 - which isn't available on some distributions and operating systems - and PyQt5, which only has builds in "pip" for 64 bit Linux, for no obvious reason. Your error messages point to you being unable to install PyQt5 via pip. This is an OS issue, not an issue with NanoVNA-Saver. If you install PyQt5 from another source, such as from your OS's package handling system, NanoVNA-Saver should run just fine. -- Rune / 5Q5R On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 00:37, Nels Nelsen <nels.nelsen@...> wrote:
It does not work on a fresh install of Mint 19.3 Cinnamon |
How high will Hugen v3.4 HW go?
The new v3.4 nanoVNA from Hugen gives excellent results up to its official upper frequency limit of 1.5GHz. Hugen has done an excellent job with this HW update.
So I could not resist to remove the 1.5GHz upper frequency limit and test how far the v3.4 HW will go. With an upper limit of 2.1GHz enabled by using the 7/9 overtone mode, the noise in the calibration gradually starts to increase above 1.5GHz and at 2.1GHz a load is no longer a dot on the Smith chart but a blob due to the noise The dynamic range above 1.5GH does not deteriorate and stays better than 30dB Time to measure the S11 and S21 of a 2GHz cavity filter. To my pleasant surprise the measurement results, although with noise in the S11 and limited dynamic range in the S21, are identical to the measurement results with my 3GHz VNA. In order to see more of the the out of band rejection you can still use the amplifier/attenuator trick to get 20dB extra dynamic range but for a manual tuning of a 2GHz cavity filter the nanoVNA on its own is capable enough. Amazing!!!! -- NanoVNA Wiki: /g/nanovna-users/wiki/home NanoVNA Files: /g/nanovna-users/files Erik, PD0EK |
Re: NanoVNA-Saver Linux update procedure
#tutorials
In thinking about some of the responses here, perhaps a better approach would be to check your distro's package manager for PyQt5. It may be already on your system, or available for install. If so, install it from the package manager and just pull down the nanovna-saver repository and see if it will run.
73 -Jim NU0C On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 22:14:26 -0600 "N9KDY" <n9kdy@...> wrote: Nick wrote:Using Linux Mint 19.3 amd64 here..... |
Re: NanoVNA-Saver Linux update procedure
#tutorials
Nick wrote:
Using Linux Mint 19.3 amd64 here..... ----------------------------------------Has anyone just done a web search for this error? And from that search, has anyone tried pip install --upgrade setuptools ?? Several results for this error have pointed to this being the solution. I cannot seem to find (lack of time to spend diving into the archives, so my fault if this has been brought up already) any reference to this solution being offered. Maybe give it a try and see? -- wes will n9kdy |
Re: First PCB pictures of the V2
| Have you noticed any detuning effects from hand capacitance by having the buttons in such close proximity to the connectors?
No, the connectors are fully shielded (because of the way it's soldered) and there are no effects from nearby objects. If there were, you would have bigger problems to worry about ;) |
Re: First PCB pictures of the V2
The ecal switch does not replace user calibration and is only there to eliminate temperature drift. You still do the Short, Open, Load calibration externally as usual.
LT5560 currently costs just under twice the AD8342, but I'll add it to the list of mixers to keep a watch on. The 3 stages of switches between the coupler port and the mixer are a must in order to have good isolation when measuring S21. Using a second receive mixer will not fit in the BOM budget. The RF switches cost pennies and are a big part of what allowed this design to be possible within the budget. I'm already experimenting with using higher IF frequencies, you may see it implemented in a later firmware update. The V2 RF performance already exceeds the N1201SA, but I'll see if trace noise can be improved with higher IF. |
Re: 1/2 of TDR
#tdr
I haven't abandoned it and still have plans to look into it.
-- Salil Tembe (Nuclearrambo.com) |
Re: Replacing the jog switch
The switches are polled by the software, not interrupt driven so whatever the software sees pressed first as the switches are scanned, gets serviced.?
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 9:19 PM, Dana Whitlow<k8yumdoober@...> wrote: I'm curious about one aspect of the pushbutton switch solution: What happens if one pushes more than one button at a time? Thanks, Dana |
Re: First PCB pictures of the V2
A few comments after reviewing the attached schematics.
You might take a look at the LT5560 for mixer. It has lower input Z over a broader freq range, lower current drain, allows higher value I.F. load resistors yielding higher gain, and should cost less then half of the AD8342. Four SP4T RF switches from S11 input to mixer, really !!. Each switch has some parasitics due to switch and PCB layout. As I previously mentioned, you should not calibrate Open, Short, Load internally. The calibration needs to be closest to the measurement point to include the path delay to measurement point accurately. User would have to make a guess at their delay to measurement point and manually enter it with the internal calibration system.. This is not practical for good accuracy. I don't understand the purpose of the two switches after the S11 bridge balun. I guess it is to help isolate S11 port when switching single RF mixer over to S21 port. It would be much better to dump the RF switches and put in the second mixer / I.F. op amp for S21 port. How much do all these RF switches cost? Only legit place for RF switches would be to switch between low freq and high freq synthesizers. Fyi, The N1201SA is much cleaner then nano's with much better dynamic range. Most of the improvement is use of the ADF4351 synthesizer but there are a few other items I have noticed. The N1201SA makes use of the ADC's in the STM32F103 uC as you mentioned you are planning to do. I was surprised to find that the I.F. frequency is changing for higher freq band groups. 137.5 to 275 MHz is using 10 KHz I.F. 275 to 550 MHz is using 20 KHz I.F. 550 to 1100 MHz is using 40 KHz I.F. 1100 to 2200 MHz is using 60 KHz I.F. 2200 to 2700 MHz is using 80 KHz I.F. This may be done to move the I.F. higher because the sideband noise level on the synth's gets worse farther out from source freq as synth output frequency increases, By rights, the frequencies below the I.F. output freq should be attenuated to take full advantage of SNR improvement with this scheme. I don't see any low freq I.F. filtering. The STM32 ADC should not have any issue with 80 KHz I.F. with its near 1 Msps capability. The second very large surprise I found was the L.O. source for the SA612 mixers is fed fundamental freq. It is dumping 2.7 GHz L.O. source into the SA612 LO port! Talk about running outside of part spec! It is probably starving the Gilbert cell mixer of LO drive but I guess they found the performance was better then injecting sub-harmonics and running as harmonic mixer. Looking at the I.F. signal output on a scope, the nano is no comparison to the N1201SA. Nano I.F. jitter is bad due to Si5351 synth. I also see glitches which I believe is due to the codex ADC DCOC zeroing calibration switching. The codex needs a lower driving source Z. I noticed the nano-F has decreased the LPF resistors from 15K on original nano schematic to 4.7K for nano-F. This is probably still not low enough. It is probably better to replace the LPF series resistors with ferrite chokes and adjust LPF caps values to work with SA612 internal 1.5K pull up resistors for LPF. Most SAR ADC have this cap switching to null out DC offset and start from zero volts This can create glitches when there are series coupling caps to ADC inputs. I found putting 100 pF to 1000 pF caps across ADC input fixes this but you have to be careful not to impact input signal bandwidth with the shunt caps. They have to be directly on ADC input pins. I have not researched possible candidates to replace the Si5351 to accomplish the low frequencies below 35 MHz which is limit of AD4351. It is going to be tough to get the balun performance below 5 MHz and keep the GHz range. Personally I would be happy with 5 MHz low end but some folks may not be happy with that. If you don't have a N1201SA you should get one. It is your benchmark. V2 should be equal or better. With better mixers (and synthesizer) there is no reason not to be better. |
Re: 1/2 of TDR
#tdr
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 02:28 PM, Leif M wrote:
" .. so this is all new to me. I have been wondering how a signal generator inside Nano generates short pulses for TDR, but it looks now it does not have to." ====================================================== Leif, Those of us, Larry being one, that have been around since this group's beginnings have a historical prospective on the NanoVNA's evolution. TDR measurement was not initially available on either the NanoVNA or in NanoVNA-saver. Nuclearrambo contributed a must read article at . Shortly thereafter, user ch045, a prolific NanoVNA software developer, squeezed the fft software transformations into code small enough to fit into the NanoVNA and submitted the code for inclusion in the NanoVNA's firmware. Rune incorporated a python TDR module into NanovVNA-saver that shares code with Nuclearrambo's original code. Rune acknowledges this on his GitHub page. Nuclearrambo also wrote a similar impedance measuring article, , but the code has flaws. Rune includes the code as a part of his NanovVNA-saver TDR module but it only approximates actual impedance steps. I was hoping Nuclearrambo would re-visit the code at some point but he seems to have a variety of interests and has moved on to other "bright and shiny objects". - Herb |
Re: NanoVNA-saver 0.2.2. crash
@ Peter I0YLI
hello peter, the merit is all who wrote the program, who designed the nanoVNA, the developers .. We, as users, try to give the most correct feedback possible. @All I confirm that the program has no problems for me. There is probably some incompatibility with previous versions but this is resolved by deleting folder "NanoVNASaver" in:"users/AppData/Roaming/ In this way you have the "clean" program as if it were the first installation. At this point do the calibration, apply your preferences and you shouldn't have any more problems. -- *73, Lucio I0LYL Rome, Italy* |
Re: NanoVNA-Saver Linux update procedure
#tutorials
OH I did not see you asked me a question,
Sorry, no it did no work for me, I tried that and it did not start, ha, you woke me up. Thanks Nels On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 10:35 PM Jim Allyn - N7JA <jim@...> wrote: On 1/12/20 5:05 PM, Nels Nelsen wrote:--Hi Jim I don't see where my program starts. n_n |
to navigate to use esc to dismiss