开云体育

Thanks for feedback

"There are 3 possible drivers that may appear in Device Manager:

Another possible driver "ChiBios/RT Virtual COM Port"

Why? Someone with this problem needs to test why and post repeatable results here.

Presumably because, sometime in the past, another device (e.g. ST-Link)
or application provoked installation of those drivers
along with a .inf file that associates nanoVNA USB device ID with those drivers.

"Connect your device in bootloader mode." I think you mean "... DFU mode."

Oops, my bad for copying from another suggestion without proofreading.

From STM's driver page:
"Starting from Windows? 10, the STSW-STM32102 driver is no more adequate
and the usage of the native inbox driver is recommended."


I have taken another whack:
/g/nanovna-users/wiki/drivers

On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 02:16 AM, Reinier Gerritsen wrote:

" BNC on 900 MHz is just so so, on a measurement device it is an absolute no no! ''
========================================================================

Not true. BNC connectors are rated up to 4 GHz, although most professional test equipment in my company's laboratory only use it to about 1.5 GHz. Agilent, Rhode-Schwartz, Fluke etc. all commonly use BNC connectors on their test instruments.

Quality measurement equipment use BNC connectors manufactured by companies such as Amphenol, Pasternak, etc. If you are talking about a bad experience with cheap Asian imports then you should say that and not disparage all BNC connectors.

- Herb

Hi Norbert
On the contrary I see better results. It is all about the calibration so show us a picture of calibration settings and give information about what you are using for calibration
Kind regards
Kurt

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: [email protected] <[email protected]> P? vegne af Norbert Kohns
Sendt: 24. januar 2020 09:27
Til: [email protected]
Emne: [nanovna-users] Full reflection runs over the perimeter of the smith chart

Hi Rune,

after calibration with the nanovna saver software, I connected a 35cm long semi rigid coax to CH0. I am wondering, that at full reflection the response moves over the perimeter of the smith chart.
On the NanoVNA display it doesn't go over the perimeter but with increasing frequency it should spiral more inwards.
The calibration procedure I repeated twice with the same result.

Maybe I am doing something wrong!?

Does anyone else see the same symptom?

Best regards
Norbert, DG1KPN

Hi Gabriel
Nice to hear you about experiments with the tuning of cal kit parameters which my great hobby. You may find interst in finding the fringe C for the open using the program FEMM which does that with great accuracy. When using a stub for sweep and adjust for (not minimum) then use a rigid cable e.g. UT141A and use SimSmith to figure out the k0, k1 and k2 and the also create a s1p file for the given length e.g. 25cm to have as a background trace and tune for same ripple. For the stub use both a shorted and an open one where the open has a fringe C of 146.4fF (offset 7.32ps) which I have calculated with FEMM. The UT141 has the following k values k0=1.85 k1=0.327 k2=0.00095 so SimSmith does the rest creating a s1p file by either a short as termination or 10Mohm as termination for open.
The only missing detail is the delay in the adaptor from rear to calibration reference plane which I do measure by a caliper and use VF 0.695 for Teflon. Then delay is distance multiplied by 0.3 and divided by VF
Kind regards
Kurt

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: [email protected] <[email protected]> P? vegne af Gabriel Tenma White
Sendt: 24. januar 2020 04:48
Til: [email protected]
Emne: Re: [nanovna-users] First PCB pictures of the V2

I heard from the customer that they've finished testing half of the first batch. I think it will become available right after the holidays, so in just over a week.

"On some of her other projects she had to find a client before the finished product could be manufactured. "
Actually it's the other way around :) the client comes to us for a R&D job, we do the design work and build prototypes. So my job is done :) However I'll continue work on the firmware and software on an independent basis, that way we aren't relying on a single manufacturer for software updates (you know how well that usually works out). When in between contracts we (OwOComm) also work on core projects like the software defined radio for OwONet and other fun projects. See

The passives parasitics on the board aren't usually a bottleneck and we've used techniques to tune out e.g. resistor inductance. On the cal kit though we found that soldering resistors upside down improved performance. For example this type of cal kit:
I've just implemented calibration kit parameter fine tuning in the PC software so you can adjust cal kit parasitics and see the results in realtime, so you can e.g. connect a coax stub and adjust cal kit parasitics until the S11 ripple is minimized for a "best guess" of the kit parameters.

There is already a switch on port 2 and in theory can be used to implement ecal. The issue is just that the ecal parameters have to be individually characterized for each board (because the SMA connector soldering introduces variations), which is too expensive to do at manufacturing so would have to be done by the user, which means you need a traditional cal kit anyway. I'll think about introducing this in a later revision.

Yes the output is a square wave under 2.2GHz. The harmonics of the LO and RF mix to produce 2*IF, 3*IF, etc which is how harmonics mode works in the original Nano. When not in harmonics mode these are filtered out digitally and has few impacts on performance (assuming good receiver linearity) unless they get aliased by the ADC, which is why there is also an analog LPF after the mixer.

BNC on 900 MHz is just so so, on a measurement device it is an absolute no no!
I will happily stay with SMA for most of my RF work, and u.fl if it needs to be small.

Op 24-1-2020 om 00:38 schreef Kleibe PP2KR:

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 11:22 AM, Bob Albert wrote:

I just don't have the visual acuity, steady hand, and tiny soldering tool needed.

Howdy Bob,
I don't know if it would be worth the cost, but cell-phone repair techs are always fixing those tiny connectors. There's some youtube videos.
Most don't use a tiny-point iron for fine-pitch devices; they clean the pads, smear solder paste (with flux) across them, set the device in place, then hit it with the hot-air gun. The solder paste melts and surface tension pulls it apart and under the pins, all at once. If done right, no bridges. They also have a microscope!
I have your same afflictions. Last year I got a cheap imported hot-air & soldering iron rework station ($50), a USB microscope on a stand ($45), and a practice board with some SMT chips. It works! The hot air gun takes practice; smallest nozzle, very low air flow, and right temp for the paste used. The hard part is not blowing away the part... :)
73, --KV5R

Hi Rune,

after calibration with the nanovna saver software, I connected a 35cm long semi rigid coax to CH0. I am wondering, that at full reflection the response moves over the perimeter of the smith chart.
On the NanoVNA display it doesn't go over the perimeter but with increasing frequency it should spiral more inwards.
The calibration procedure I repeated twice with the same result.

Maybe I am doing something wrong!?

Does anyone else see the same symptom?

Best regards
Norbert, DG1KPN

Thanks Bob,you are right it was bought with no battery. Not up to working with SMD size components and soldering so have bought a 5V power bank and will run it from that when in the field.
Regards & 73
Chris G0EYO

Hi Oristo,
Good work on the driver wiki page. For better new-user understanding, you might consider adding something like:

"There are 3 possible drivers that may appear in Device Manager:
1 - STMicroelectronics Virtual COM port (for normal communication, as with nanovna-saver, terminal, etc)
2 - STM Device in DFU Mode (for DfuSE Demo software)
3 - STM32 Bootloader (for the ST-Link dongle)
User needs #1 & #2, not #3 (unless they are using the ST-Link dongle).
Sometimes #2 gets replaced by #3."

Why? Someone with this problem needs to test why and post repeatable results here. I thought maybe Windows is grabbing the bootloader driver because of user doing some wrong sequence, so just spent an hour plugging, powering, switching to DFU, and starting software, in many sequences. It didn't matter. If nano is in normal mode, Windows always started the COM driver. If it's in DFU mode, windows always switches to the DFU Mode driver. So now I think some users are searching for a driver online and finding the ST-Link bootloader driver (or some package that installs it) because it's confusing. There are too many (old) instructions for drivers and ways to install them; all Windows' users need is DfuSE Demo, it will bring the right drivers.

"Next, disconnect the nano and place it into DFU mode and connect to the computer again." On mine, when I switch to DFU mode (by nano menu), Windows makes noises; Device Manager shows the COM port driver disappear, and the DFU mode driver appears, without disconnecting or powering off/on. Of course, power off/on is needed to exit DFU mode, but not to enter it (unless using boot jumper, or new press button & power-on method.)

"Connect your device in bootloader mode." I think you mean "... DFU mode." A new user will say "what's bootloader mode?" (The phrase from the site Brian found is not specific to the nanovna; to me, the "bootloader" phrase implies using the ST-link dongle, since DFU via DfuSE does not access the bootloader.)

Hope this is helpful, and not too noisy :)
--KV5R

I heard from the customer that they've finished testing half of the first batch. I think it will become available right after the holidays, so in just over a week.

"On some of her other projects she had to find a client before the finished product could be manufactured. "
Actually it's the other way around :) the client comes to us for a R&D job, we do the design work and build prototypes. So my job is done :) However I'll continue work on the firmware and software on an independent basis, that way we aren't relying on a single manufacturer for software updates (you know how well that usually works out). When in between contracts we (OwOComm) also work on core projects like the software defined radio for OwONet and other fun projects. See

The passives parasitics on the board aren't usually a bottleneck and we've used techniques to tune out e.g. resistor inductance. On the cal kit though we found that soldering resistors upside down improved performance. For example this type of cal kit:
I've just implemented calibration kit parameter fine tuning in the PC software so you can adjust cal kit parasitics and see the results in realtime, so you can e.g. connect a coax stub and adjust cal kit parasitics until the S11 ripple is minimized for a "best guess" of the kit parameters.

There is already a switch on port 2 and in theory can be used to implement ecal. The issue is just that the ecal parameters have to be individually characterized for each board (because the SMA connector soldering introduces variations), which is too expensive to do at manufacturing so would have to be done by the user, which means you need a traditional cal kit anyway. I'll think about introducing this in a later revision.

Yes the output is a square wave under 2.2GHz. The harmonics of the LO and RF mix to produce 2*IF, 3*IF, etc which is how harmonics mode works in the original Nano. When not in harmonics mode these are filtered out digitally and has few impacts on performance (assuming good receiver linearity) unless they get aliased by the ADC, which is why there is also an analog LPF after the mixer.

Just seen on Twitter a version with BNC connectors.



Kleibe
PP2KR

Greetings to everyone,

Good work on the new boards, I will surely get one when they reach market.
Have you checked if mounting passives upside down makes any difference in this design or does that only help at much higher frequencies, just curious. Check this short PDF for example:


I would like to suggest an ECAL expansion board (for SOLT calibration or some other calibration scheme) that could replace the display, that would be a neat accessory to these devices

From the PDF of the schematic I see that the ADF4350 is used. The fundamental VCO of those is 2.2 - 4.4 GHz if memory serves, which means the synthesizers will have higher harmonics from the digital dividers in the synthesizers at significant amplitudes which I assume means that signal will be downconverted at those frequencies also? Anybody RF wizard willing to chip in on this ?

Keep up the good work
Kalle

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 09:24 AM, dwabbit wrote:

" any update on a release yet. im holding off on a few 2.4ghz projects as I will be needing the use of a vna @2.4ghz to do some antenna testing "

dwabbit,
Gabriel hasn't announced an anticipated release date. On some of her other projects she had to find a client before the finished product could be manufactured. It would also be nice to know what the expected performance specifications are so you could determine if they will meet your project requirements.

I did notice the first public release of her V2 software application, VNA View, is available for down load at . It has a mock device selection if you want to kick the tires and take it for a spin.

- Herb

Larry,

Thanks for posting this. I bookmarked that "Engineer's Garage" site. Lots of interesting stuff to read...

Roger

That display looks like the one that hugen is using on his new H4 version of the nanovna.
Is the LCD and touch surface broken or just the touch surface? It looks like it's a 3.9inch diagonal.Remove the display assembly and check the part number on the backside of it.

any update on a release yet. im holding off on a few 2.4ghz projects as I will be needing the use of a vna @2.4ghz to do some antenna testing
cheers

Thanks Larry, looks like the links to the device and its photo did not made
it to the main post.

www.ebay.com/itm/RF-Sweep-Signal-Source-Generator-Board-35M-to-4-4G-STM32-TFT-Touch-LCD-ecl/382977928545

the screen that broke is the generator one.. If the links would have made
it it would have been more obvious.. sorry..

In case the link dont do it again.. the generator can be found on ebay
under this description:

RF Sweep Signal Source Generator Board 35M to 4.4G + STM32 TFT Touch LCD ecl

hope this help

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 08:22 AM, hwalker wrote:

Steve,
I believe no one has replied to the original post because it is hard to find members with both devices. NanoVNA-F owners are pretty satisfied with their devices and the same will go for NanoVNA-H4 owners.

Both devices are based on edy555's original design but are implemented differently:

The NanoVNA-F has a 4.3" Display with better resolution than the NanoVNA-H4. It is packaged in a metal case and has a massive 5000 maH battery. Updates to the firmware are via a built-in virtual disk that shows up as a drive when connected to a pc. The frequency range is 50 kHz - 1 GHz.

The NanoVNA-H4 has a 4" Display. It is packaged in an ABS case and has a 1950mAh battery. Updates to the firmware are made using a software program via a USB connected pc. The frequency range is 10 kHz to 1.5 GHz.

The NanoVNA-F is about twice the cost of the NanoVNA-H4. My ham club has both devices and either is a great choice. I own a 2.8" NanoVNA-H and wanted a unit with a larger display. My personal decision was to purchase the NanoVNA-H4.

When hardware specifications are fairly close, support becomes the deciding factor for me. This support group and other forums around the internet are hands down better than any you will find for the NanoVNA-F. hugen has available numerous other developers (i.e. edy555, QRP, etc.) that contribute outstanding firmware functionality at a rapid clip. Firmware releases for the NanoVNA-F are historically slow and sometimes are rather mundane, such as allow you to add your call sign to the boot-up screen instead of something more substantial like the TDR functionality of the NanoVNA-H4.

Again, both units are based on the same design so there is a lot of overlap in their performance specifications. This user support group, the independent firmware developers, and the increased frequency range specifications were my reasons for deciding on the NanoVNA-H4.

===================================================================================

One thing I forgot to mention is that if you decide to purchase the NanoVNA-F be aware that there are currently a lot of clones out there. These clones are in an open case design without the large battery and are inferior to both the original NanoVNA-F and the NanoVNA-H4. If you purchase one of these clones You will like neither receive, nor should expect, any support from the NanoVNA-F user group. The group's owner is the developer of the NanoVNA-F and does not take kindly to the cloned devices.

If price is your limiting factor, you are best served purchasing the NanoVNA-H4 instead of the NanoVNA-F knock-offs.

- Herb

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 07:21 AM, Steven Greenfield AE7HD wrote:

" ... difference between nanoVNA-F and nanoVNA-H4..."

I am also interested in the difference.
===================================================================

Steve,
I believe no one has replied to the original post because it is hard to find members with both devices. NanoVNA-F owners are pretty satisfied with their devices and the same will go for NanoVNA-H4 owners.

Both devices are based on edy555's original design but are implemented differently:

The NanoVNA-F has a 4.3" Display with better resolution than the NanoVNA-H4. It is packaged in a metal case and has a massive 5000 maH battery. Updates to the firmware are via a built-in virtual disk that shows up as a drive when connected to a pc. The frequency range is 50 kHz - 1 GHz.

The NanoVNA-H4 has a 4" Display. It is packaged in an ABS case and has a 1950mAh battery. Updates to the firmware are made using a software program via a USB connected pc. The frequency range is 10 kHz to 1.5 GHz.

The NanoVNA-F is about twice the cost of the NanoVNA-H4. My ham club has both devices and either is a great choice. I own a 2.8" NanoVNA-H and wanted a unit with a larger display. My personal decision was to purchase the NanoVNA-H4.

When hardware specifications are fairly close, support becomes the deciding factor for me. This support group and other forums around the internet are hands down better than any you will find for the NanoVNA-F. hugen has available numerous other developers (i.e. edy555, QRP, etc.) that contribute outstanding firmware functionality at a rapid clip. Firmware releases for the NanoVNA-F are historically slow and sometimes are rather mundane, such as allow you to add your call sign to the boot-up screen instead of something more substantial like the TDR functionality of the NanoVNA-H4.

Again, both units are based on the same design so there is a lot of overlap in their performance specifications. This user support group, the independent firmware developers, and the increased frequency range specifications were my reasons for deciding on the NanoVNA-H4.

Hope that helps.

- Herb

The bit of plastic is nothing more than a handle to remove the screen protector.
Battery charging is indicated by flashing blue LED.? If it flashes, battery is charging.? If steady on, fully charged.? But the LED doesn't respond immediately; it takes a minute or so.
You can check the battery connector; perhaps it worked loose.? Measure on the PCB to see if battery voltage reaches the rest of the circuit.
I have battery issues also.? Seems to be a common thing.
Bob