Re: NanoVNA vs. MFJ-259B Antenna Analyzer
I have two 259 variants and will probably keep both of them. They are a good tool for the primary job intended, and are arguably a better solution for non-technical hams who don't want to be bothered with the learning curve. Each device has it's place. 73 -Jim NU0C On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 21:13:03 -0400 "Pierre Martel" <petem001@...> wrote: The NanoVNA and the MFJ AA are directed to 2 different groups of people.
The MFJ is more of an entry level testing device that take care of checking
an antenna in a fast and simple way, like using a SWR meter but more
conveniently, no big radio to drag with you and less power used so you can
tune all over the rf spectrum without causing interference to other
services.
The NanoVNA is more of an advanced device that is also convenient in many
ways, but has a sharper learning curve and has more advanced features that
an average ham will ever need.
Of course the price of the device will put a pressure on MFJ to design a
lower price AA. But also not everyone will accept to buy a device that does
not have a over the counter support and can be abandoned by the designer.
That needs to be taken in consideration also. And the guys at MFJ do know
the market to whom they sell to. They are losing a very small part of the
market to the NanoVNA cause many hams did want a small device to test
antenna, filters and such and do not have the money to buy more
advanced devices.
Pierre
VE2PF
Le mer. 9 sept. 2020 ¨¤ 20:53, Jim Lux <jimlux@...> a ¨¦crit :
On 9/9/20 5:13 PM, David Eckhardt wrote:
Well, Jim, I'm a total nerd when it comes to RF and the HP 8753C. And,
yes, I've tuned / adjusted antennas using only the Smith Chart. Those were
antennas aimed at UHF and the Hi line at 1420 MHz for radio astronomy.
Seeing whether and how much L or C needs to be added or subtracted is
invaluable. Bringing the intended frequency into the center is quite
useful! Once that is done, then, yes, I look at bandwidth using SWR (in a
50-ohm system). I use the Smith Chart quite a bit in 'tuning' various
antennas. Yes, tuning in the "design a matching network" sense - which is why I
think it's more a design tool - you look at the smith chart, figure out
what components/networks will make it work.
That's different from a interactive "field instrument" where you're
turning a knob (or adjusting element lengths, or cutting wire off a
dipole).
Dave - W?LEV
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 11:32 PM Jim Lux <jimlux@...> wrote:
On 9/9/20 2:52 PM, n9xcr@... wrote:
I would have to say the NanoVNA is probably putting a hurt on MFJ's sales of analyzers.
It really addresses a totally different need. The MFJ is a handy device
- Having a meter needle/LCD display to see the "dip" at resonance is a
pretty fast way to trim a dipole.
(with all it's idiosyncracies, but then, so does the NanoVNA have
idiosyncracies).
Nobody trims a dipole using a smith chart <grin>
Smith charts are really more of a design tool, especially if you're
designing/adjusting a matching network. You measure the device you want
to match (or you get supplied with the chart by the mfr) and then you
can piecemeal together a LC matching network by drawing lines on the
chart.
I'd hate to tune a multisection filter or a multistub tuner with a smith
chart - that mag S11, mag S21 vs frequency is what you want for that.
One of the more interesting applications I see for the NanoVNA going
forward is to support making a backyard/living room antenna range for
microwave antennas.
The other thing it would be great for is measuring the self and mutual Z
in an array antenna like a 4 square. Right now, everyone sort of runs a
model and assumes that it's like the model. Or you use the 1/4 wave
"current forcing" scheme, which has some limitations.
The NanoVNA would also be invaluable for doing something like a 3
element beam with identical length elements, bringing all 3 elements to
the ground with coax, and then putting Ls and Cs to "tune" the beam.
Just like a SteppIR, except without the moving parts in the air.
|
Re: NanoVNA vs. MFJ-259B Antenna Analyzer
While I appreciate and respect all the opinions here, I feel the need to reply.
I have owned MFJ-259 and nanoVNA and can say without question that the nano is far superior in every way that is important to me.? This may not be true for other users, but I cannot lavish enough praise on the nano.? It can be set up for the very casual ham and it's capable of sophisticated and accurate measurements for the advanced engineer.
I use my nano nearly every day.? I have had problems with one of my antennas and the nano nails it every time.? I can plot an SWR curve over almost any frequency range and see the best frequency.? As I adjust the antenna I can see the effects instantly over the entire band.? I can see where it has low SWR even far from design frequency.? I can see resonance, whether it be at SWR minimum or not.? And bandwidth is instantly presented to me.
The Smith chart lets me measure line length and characteristic impedance.? It can be a TDR as well.? As a bonus I can measure capacitors, resistors, and inductors for frequency sensitivity, ESR, self resonance, the whole schmear.
At first it seemed like a cheap toy but I quickly learned better.? If anyone has trouble figuring it out I stand ready to help.? Mostly it practically operates itself.? Sure it has limitations but a careful user can work around them easily.
73, Bob K6DDX
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Wednesday, September 9, 2020, 06:13:20 PM PDT, Pierre Martel <petem001@...> wrote: The NanoVNA and the MFJ AA are directed to 2 different groups of people. The MFJ is more of an entry level testing device that take care of checking an antenna in a fast and simple way, like using a SWR meter but more conveniently, no big radio to drag with you and less power used so you can tune all over the rf spectrum without causing interference to other services. The NanoVNA is more of an advanced device that is also convenient in many ways, but has a sharper learning curve and has more advanced features that an average ham will ever need. Of course the price of the device will put a pressure on MFJ to design a lower price AA. But also not everyone will accept to buy a device that does not have a over the counter support and can be abandoned by the designer. That needs to be taken in consideration also. And the guys at MFJ do know the market to whom they sell to. They are losing a very small part of the market to the NanoVNA cause many hams did want a small device to test antenna, filters and such and do not have the money to buy more advanced devices. Pierre VE2PF Le mer. 9 sept. 2020 ¨¤ 20:53, Jim Lux <jimlux@...> a ¨¦crit : On 9/9/20 5:13 PM, David Eckhardt wrote:
Well, Jim, I'm a total nerd when it comes to RF and the HP 8753C.? And,
yes, I've tuned / adjusted antennas using only the Smith Chart.? Those were
antennas aimed at UHF and the Hi line at 1420 MHz for radio astronomy.
Seeing whether and how much L or C needs to be added or subtracted is
invaluable.? Bringing the intended frequency into the center is quite
useful!? Once that is done, then, yes, I look at bandwidth using SWR (in a
50-ohm system).? I use the Smith Chart quite a bit in 'tuning' various
antennas. Yes, tuning in the "design a matching network" sense - which is why I
think it's more a design tool - you look at the smith chart, figure out
what components/networks will make it work.
That's different from a interactive "field instrument" where you're
turning a knob (or adjusting element lengths, or cutting wire off a
dipole).
Dave - W?LEV
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 11:32 PM Jim Lux <jimlux@...> wrote:
On 9/9/20 2:52 PM, n9xcr@... wrote:
I would have to say the NanoVNA is probably putting a hurt on MFJ's sales of analyzers.
It really addresses a totally different need. The MFJ is a handy device
- Having a meter needle/LCD display to see the "dip" at resonance is a
pretty fast way to trim a dipole.
(with all it's idiosyncracies, but then, so does the NanoVNA have
idiosyncracies).
Nobody trims a dipole using a smith chart <grin>
Smith charts are really more of a design tool, especially if you're
designing/adjusting a matching network.? You measure the device you want
to match (or you get supplied with the chart by the mfr) and then you
can piecemeal together a LC matching network by drawing lines on the
chart.
I'd hate to tune a multisection filter or a multistub tuner with a smith
chart - that mag S11, mag S21 vs frequency is what you want for that.
One of the more interesting applications I see for the NanoVNA going
forward is to support making a backyard/living room antenna range for
microwave antennas.
The other thing it would be great for is measuring the self and mutual Z
in an array antenna like a 4 square.? Right now, everyone sort of runs a
model and assumes that it's like the model.? Or you use the 1/4 wave
"current forcing" scheme, which has some limitations.
The NanoVNA would also be invaluable for doing something like a 3
element beam with identical length elements, bringing all 3 elements to
the ground with coax, and then putting Ls and Cs to "tune" the beam.
Just like a SteppIR, except without the moving parts in the air.
|
Re: NanoVNA vs. MFJ-259B Antenna Analyzer
The NanoVNA and the MFJ AA are directed to 2 different groups of people.
The MFJ is more of an entry level testing device that take care of checking
an antenna in a fast and simple way, like using a SWR meter but more
conveniently, no big radio to drag with you and less power used so you can
tune all over the rf spectrum without causing interference to other
services.
The NanoVNA is more of an advanced device that is also convenient in many
ways, but has a sharper learning curve and has more advanced features that
an average ham will ever need.
Of course the price of the device will put a pressure on MFJ to design a
lower price AA. But also not everyone will accept to buy a device that does
not have a over the counter support and can be abandoned by the designer.
That needs to be taken in consideration also. And the guys at MFJ do know
the market to whom they sell to. They are losing a very small part of the
market to the NanoVNA cause many hams did want a small device to test
antenna, filters and such and do not have the money to buy more
advanced devices.
Pierre
VE2PF
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Le mer. 9 sept. 2020 ¨¤ 20:53, Jim Lux <jimlux@...> a ¨¦crit : On 9/9/20 5:13 PM, David Eckhardt wrote:
Well, Jim, I'm a total nerd when it comes to RF and the HP 8753C. And,
yes, I've tuned / adjusted antennas using only the Smith Chart. Those were
antennas aimed at UHF and the Hi line at 1420 MHz for radio astronomy.
Seeing whether and how much L or C needs to be added or subtracted is
invaluable. Bringing the intended frequency into the center is quite
useful! Once that is done, then, yes, I look at bandwidth using SWR (in a
50-ohm system). I use the Smith Chart quite a bit in 'tuning' various
antennas. Yes, tuning in the "design a matching network" sense - which is why I
think it's more a design tool - you look at the smith chart, figure out
what components/networks will make it work.
That's different from a interactive "field instrument" where you're
turning a knob (or adjusting element lengths, or cutting wire off a
dipole).
Dave - W?LEV
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 11:32 PM Jim Lux <jimlux@...> wrote:
On 9/9/20 2:52 PM, n9xcr@... wrote:
I would have to say the NanoVNA is probably putting a hurt on MFJ's sales of analyzers.
It really addresses a totally different need. The MFJ is a handy device
- Having a meter needle/LCD display to see the "dip" at resonance is a
pretty fast way to trim a dipole.
(with all it's idiosyncracies, but then, so does the NanoVNA have
idiosyncracies).
Nobody trims a dipole using a smith chart <grin>
Smith charts are really more of a design tool, especially if you're
designing/adjusting a matching network. You measure the device you want
to match (or you get supplied with the chart by the mfr) and then you
can piecemeal together a LC matching network by drawing lines on the
chart.
I'd hate to tune a multisection filter or a multistub tuner with a smith
chart - that mag S11, mag S21 vs frequency is what you want for that.
One of the more interesting applications I see for the NanoVNA going
forward is to support making a backyard/living room antenna range for
microwave antennas.
The other thing it would be great for is measuring the self and mutual Z
in an array antenna like a 4 square. Right now, everyone sort of runs a
model and assumes that it's like the model. Or you use the 1/4 wave
"current forcing" scheme, which has some limitations.
The NanoVNA would also be invaluable for doing something like a 3
element beam with identical length elements, bringing all 3 elements to
the ground with coax, and then putting Ls and Cs to "tune" the beam.
Just like a SteppIR, except without the moving parts in the air.
|
Re: Has OneOfEleven gone again?
You are being kind here Radu ;-)
As my name can hint a bit at my original language, you can figure that I
learned english later in my life.
I also found that english can be dry. But it is not the situation here..
It is only a matter of someone being more politically correct and
judgmental then the rest of the group.
Not saying that 1of11 does not deserve respect for it's great work. Just
saying that if 1of11 can take care of a "bad" situation.
In fact the finger pointing guy is not showing respect to 1of11 capacity to
deal with problematic situations and maybe caused more shame then helped.
If I would have been in that situation I would have reacted with something
like. I am a grown up, don't assume I could or could not be offended by a
question.
Pierre
VE2PF
Le mer. 9 sept. 2020 ¨¤ 20:11, Radu Bogdan Dicher <vondicher@...> a
¨¦crit :
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Likely a language barrier issue. English is a very dry, down to facts,
goal-oriented language; it can sound a bit abrasive to non-native speakers
(especially romance languages ones). I happen to know this very well.
I don't think anyone really meant anything, more of a miscommunication
issue.
Hope this helps.
Radu.
<
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 4:18 PM Dragan Milivojevic <d.milivojevic@...
wrote:
I believe that the subject of the post is
the issue although I don't see anything
wrong with it either.
On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 00:48, Dave VE3LHO <dave@...> wrote:
I wondered the same thing myself.
The 404 may have been glitch at github or maybe a mistyping of the url but
I didn't think it was terribly disrespectful to ask about it.
But maybe we are missing something.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 02:54 PM, <n9xcr@...> wrote:
Am I missing something here?
On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 12:36 PM, CT2FZI wrote:
This is a very lame post.
Your behaviour is the reason devs like 1of11 are not fully sharing
their
work.
I suggest you to have some respect.
|
Re: NanoVNA vs. MFJ-259B Antenna Analyzer
On 9/9/20 5:13 PM, David Eckhardt wrote: Well, Jim, I'm a total nerd when it comes to RF and the HP 8753C. And,
yes, I've tuned / adjusted antennas using only the Smith Chart. Those were
antennas aimed at UHF and the Hi line at 1420 MHz for radio astronomy.
Seeing whether and how much L or C needs to be added or subtracted is
invaluable. Bringing the intended frequency into the center is quite
useful! Once that is done, then, yes, I look at bandwidth using SWR (in a
50-ohm system). I use the Smith Chart quite a bit in 'tuning' various
antennas. Yes, tuning in the "design a matching network" sense - which is why I think it's more a design tool - you look at the smith chart, figure out what components/networks will make it work. That's different from a interactive "field instrument" where you're turning a knob (or adjusting element lengths, or cutting wire off a dipole). Dave - W?LEV
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 11:32 PM Jim Lux <jimlux@...> wrote:
On 9/9/20 2:52 PM, n9xcr@... wrote:
I would have to say the NanoVNA is probably putting a hurt on MFJ's sales of analyzers.
It really addresses a totally different need. The MFJ is a handy device
- Having a meter needle/LCD display to see the "dip" at resonance is a
pretty fast way to trim a dipole.
(with all it's idiosyncracies, but then, so does the NanoVNA have
idiosyncracies).
Nobody trims a dipole using a smith chart <grin>
Smith charts are really more of a design tool, especially if you're
designing/adjusting a matching network. You measure the device you want
to match (or you get supplied with the chart by the mfr) and then you
can piecemeal together a LC matching network by drawing lines on the chart.
I'd hate to tune a multisection filter or a multistub tuner with a smith
chart - that mag S11, mag S21 vs frequency is what you want for that.
One of the more interesting applications I see for the NanoVNA going
forward is to support making a backyard/living room antenna range for
microwave antennas.
The other thing it would be great for is measuring the self and mutual Z
in an array antenna like a 4 square. Right now, everyone sort of runs a
model and assumes that it's like the model. Or you use the 1/4 wave
"current forcing" scheme, which has some limitations.
The NanoVNA would also be invaluable for doing something like a 3
element beam with identical length elements, bringing all 3 elements to
the ground with coax, and then putting Ls and Cs to "tune" the beam.
Just like a SteppIR, except without the moving parts in the air.
|
Re: NanoVNA vs. MFJ-259B Antenna Analyzer
Well, Jim, I'm a total nerd when it comes to RF and the HP 8753C. And,
yes, I've tuned / adjusted antennas using only the Smith Chart. Those were
antennas aimed at UHF and the Hi line at 1420 MHz for radio astronomy.
Seeing whether and how much L or C needs to be added or subtracted is
invaluable. Bringing the intended frequency into the center is quite
useful! Once that is done, then, yes, I look at bandwidth using SWR (in a
50-ohm system). I use the Smith Chart quite a bit in 'tuning' various
antennas.
Dave - W?LEV
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 11:32 PM Jim Lux <jimlux@...> wrote: On 9/9/20 2:52 PM, n9xcr@... wrote:
I would have to say the NanoVNA is probably putting a hurt on MFJ's sales of analyzers.
It really addresses a totally different need. The MFJ is a handy device
- Having a meter needle/LCD display to see the "dip" at resonance is a
pretty fast way to trim a dipole.
(with all it's idiosyncracies, but then, so does the NanoVNA have
idiosyncracies).
Nobody trims a dipole using a smith chart <grin>
Smith charts are really more of a design tool, especially if you're
designing/adjusting a matching network. You measure the device you want
to match (or you get supplied with the chart by the mfr) and then you
can piecemeal together a LC matching network by drawing lines on the chart.
I'd hate to tune a multisection filter or a multistub tuner with a smith
chart - that mag S11, mag S21 vs frequency is what you want for that.
One of the more interesting applications I see for the NanoVNA going
forward is to support making a backyard/living room antenna range for
microwave antennas.
The other thing it would be great for is measuring the self and mutual Z
in an array antenna like a 4 square. Right now, everyone sort of runs a
model and assumes that it's like the model. Or you use the 1/4 wave
"current forcing" scheme, which has some limitations.
The NanoVNA would also be invaluable for doing something like a 3
element beam with identical length elements, bringing all 3 elements to
the ground with coax, and then putting Ls and Cs to "tune" the beam.
Just like a SteppIR, except without the moving parts in the air.
--
*Dave - W?LEV*
*Just Let Darwin Work*
|
Re: Has OneOfEleven gone again?
Likely a language barrier issue. English is a very dry, down to facts, goal-oriented language; it can sound a bit abrasive to non-native speakers (especially romance languages ones). I happen to know this very well. I don't think anyone really meant anything, more of a miscommunication issue. Hope this helps. Radu. <> Virus-free. www.avg.com <> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 4:18 PM Dragan Milivojevic <d.milivojevic@...> wrote: I believe that the subject of the post is
the issue although I don't see anything
wrong with it either.
On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 00:48, Dave VE3LHO <dave@...> wrote:
I wondered the same thing myself.
The 404 may have been glitch at github or maybe a mistyping of the url but
I didn't think it was terribly disrespectful to ask about it.
But maybe we are missing something.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 02:54 PM, <n9xcr@...> wrote:
Am I missing something here?
On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 12:36 PM, CT2FZI wrote:
This is a very lame post.
Your behaviour is the reason devs like 1of11 are not fully sharing
their
work.
I suggest you to have some respect.
|
Re: NanoVNA vs. MFJ-259B Antenna Analyzer
On 9/9/20 2:52 PM, n9xcr@... wrote: I would have to say the NanoVNA is probably putting a hurt on MFJ's sales of analyzers.
It really addresses a totally different need. The MFJ is a handy device - Having a meter needle/LCD display to see the "dip" at resonance is a pretty fast way to trim a dipole. (with all it's idiosyncracies, but then, so does the NanoVNA have idiosyncracies). Nobody trims a dipole using a smith chart <grin> Smith charts are really more of a design tool, especially if you're designing/adjusting a matching network. You measure the device you want to match (or you get supplied with the chart by the mfr) and then you can piecemeal together a LC matching network by drawing lines on the chart. I'd hate to tune a multisection filter or a multistub tuner with a smith chart - that mag S11, mag S21 vs frequency is what you want for that. One of the more interesting applications I see for the NanoVNA going forward is to support making a backyard/living room antenna range for microwave antennas. The other thing it would be great for is measuring the self and mutual Z in an array antenna like a 4 square. Right now, everyone sort of runs a model and assumes that it's like the model. Or you use the 1/4 wave "current forcing" scheme, which has some limitations. The NanoVNA would also be invaluable for doing something like a 3 element beam with identical length elements, bringing all 3 elements to the ground with coax, and then putting Ls and Cs to "tune" the beam. Just like a SteppIR, except without the moving parts in the air.
|
Re: Has OneOfEleven gone again?
I believe that the subject of the post is
the issue although I don't see anything
wrong with it either.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 00:48, Dave VE3LHO <dave@...> wrote: I wondered the same thing myself.
The 404 may have been glitch at github or maybe a mistyping of the url but
I didn't think it was terribly disrespectful to ask about it.
But maybe we are missing something.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 02:54 PM, <n9xcr@...> wrote:
Am I missing something here?
On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 12:36 PM, CT2FZI wrote:
This is a very lame post.
Your behaviour is the reason devs like 1of11 are not fully sharing
their
work.
I suggest you to have some respect.
|
Re: Has OneOfEleven gone again?
I wondered the same thing myself.
The 404 may have been glitch at github or maybe a mistyping of the url but I didn't think it was terribly disrespectful to ask about it.
But maybe we are missing something.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 02:54 PM, <n9xcr@...> wrote:
Am I missing something here?
On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 12:36 PM, CT2FZI wrote:
This is a very lame post.
Your behaviour is the reason devs like 1of11 are not fully sharing their
work.
I suggest you to have some respect.
|
Re: NanoVNA vs. MFJ-259B Antenna Analyzer
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 11:17 PM, Frank Howell wrote: Have a nice day, See, a little love shared there. They say it makes the world go round Frank ;)
|
Re: NanoVNA vs. MFJ-259B Antenna Analyzer
I used to have an MFJ-259. Errors and misreadings were common, especially at the extremes of frequency ranges. Also, tolerance on readings were about 20% or worse - bad...... And MFJ misleads on being capable of reading the complex portion of the impedance. Most don't. Only a few at the high end of their pricing do, with bad tolerance. Not so with the NANOVNA's! Dave - W?LEV On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 10:16 PM Frank Howell <frankmhowell@...> wrote: Carson,
Read any manual for a MFJ A-A..you'll see the section on calibration. MFJ
sells calibration sets for their MFJ259/269 A-As.
Frank
K4FMH
---
Frank M. Howell, PhD
Professor Emeritus, Mississippi State University
Ridgeland MS 39157
---
-- *Dave - W?LEV* *Just Let Darwin Work*
|
Re: Transmission Line Tools
Roger's TLW also runs in Wine on Linux.
|
Re: Transmission Line Tools
Transmission Line Details seems to run just fine under Wine in Linux.
|
[Note: I posted the following SAA-2N review on the V2 users group. The attached stock photo is only representative of the internals of the SAA-2N and the warped faceplate shown does not appear to be an issue with the production units.]
Users have started receiving the SAA-2N from hugen's first production run. Pre-orders were taken a few weeks back but shipment was delayed while hugen was waiting on the MSDS safety report for the new 3000mAh battery. I received my SAA-2N three days ago, which was about two weeks after I was notified that the product had been shipped.
My SAA-2N arrived via UPS in a medium-sized brown box. According to hugen, the total shipping weight for the SAA-2N is 1kg, which explains the $23.00 shipping charge for express delivery. The delivered cost for the SAA-2N, including shipping, still came in under $100.
Opening the box revealed a 7-1/2" x 5" padded storage bag with a SAA-2N label. Hugen distinguishes his products from other manufacturers by providing value added features such as a storage bag, custom enclosure, and a complete set of accessories. None of those features are technical innovations but they weigh heavily in a customer's purchasing decision - all other things considered.
The SAA-2N provides the following value added features over the original SAA-2:
1. Metal enclosure with N-type connectors and buttons relocated to the side rather than between the connectors. To me this is a more ergonomic placement of the buttons, especially for those users with large hands. The enclosure design follows the familiar case design of the NanoVNA-H4 with the protruded edges to protect the connectors.
On the back or the SAA-2N enclosure is a product label, which after reading it I thought, "Uh-Oh". As sometimes happens when translating from Chinese-English, hugen tried to acknowledge OwOComm as the original designer of the SAA-2, but the "Designed by OwOComm, Assembled in China" on the rear label has the potential of suggesting an affiliation with OwOComm. From previous posts on this group, we are aware OwOComm does not endorse any of hugen's SAA-2 products. All product support for the SAA-2N is entirely hugen's responsibility. After learning of the potential for misunderstanding, hugen has posted that he will remove the reference to OwOComm from the rear label in his next production run.
2. 3.95" resistive TFT color display. The driver for this display was primarily designed by DiSlord based on his display driver for the NanoVNA-H4. Without DiSlord's contributions we would most likely still be waiting for a V2 with a display greater than 3.2".
3. A 3000mAh battery. This battery should provide plenty of additional power for the 4" display. The MSDS safety information should quell the fears of users who worry about such things.
4. Micro USB data cable x1
5. 50cm N-type male to male RG142-PUR RF cable x2. I not familiar with the construction of these cables and was leery at first use. Comparison testing against lab quality double shielded cables showed that, for their intended 4GHz range, the cables performed quite well. [Note: I just saw information that hugen posted regarding the RG142-PUR RF cable and it is also double shielded, which is good news.]
6. N-type male calibration kit - OPEN x1, SHORT x1, and LOAD x1. This inclusion sealed the deal for me. I wasn't sure how good these standards would be when I ordered the SAA-2N but I've always known hugen to perform due diligence in sourcing his accessories. Preliminary assessment by Kurt Poulsen, who knows a thing or two about such things, is that the standards are reasonably constructed. Keeping the cost of the SAA-2N under $100.00 while including the SOL standards and RG142 double cables is a logistics accomplishment. If further testing by Kurt affirms the quality of the SOL standards, I might purchase another SAA-2N just to have a second set of N-Type standards.
7. N-type female to female connector x1
8. Touch screen paddles and lanyard x1
9. EVA storage bag. The bag holds the SAA-2N and all its accessories plus spare room for additional sma and bnc adapters. The storage bag also protects the SAA-2N during shipment, which is fortunate given that my shipping box showed numerous dings from heavy handed postal workers.
The rf performance of the SAA-2 has been previously reviewed. It is suffice to say that Gabriel did a fantastic job with the open source hardware design. When constructed in accordance with the open source design, the SAA-2 fully meets its specifications up to 3GHz. Most users find that 3GHZ is conservative and the specifications are met up to 3.5GHZ with deteriorated performance to 4GHz.
In regards to the SAA-2N hugen has stated, "There is no innovation, just a new shell. Since this group has been dissatisfied with the SMA connector and the 2.8-inch display, we installed the N-type RF connector and the 4-inch LCD on the original SAA2 and fixed it with a metal shell."
Given that no rf performance enhancing changes were made to the SAA-2N, I was primarily concerned about the impact of adding the 4" display and repackaging the pcb board into a metal enclosure.
Since the 4" display driver was ported from DiSlord's mature NanoVNA-H4 code, I am confident there will be no major issues related to adding the new 4" display. In adding the display, hugen didn't just slap a 4" display onto a SAA-2 pcb board, stick it in a box, and call it a day. Referencing the attached stock photo, you can see that hugen designed a new daughter board for the display and used it for mechanical support, while at the same time repositioning the location of the three push button switches. [Note: In the attached stock photo, the panel looks warped and the N-type connectors possibly misaligned. The final production unit that I received did not have either of those two issues and looks like the issue may only occur if the N-type connectors are over tightened to the metal faceplate while out of the case. While in the case the back of the faceplate in re-enforced by a ledge in the case.]
Regarding the metal enclosure, I had the following concerns:
1. The designer of the SAA-2 cautioned that a metal enclosure might degrade the SAA-2's isolation performance. I did not notice any measurable performance degradation in hugen's 2.8" SAA-2 packaged in a metal enclosure. I also have not seen any complaints from users of a 3.2" display V2 product packaged in a metal enclosure. Two days of comparison testing between a SAA-2 purchased from Tindie and the SAA-2N have not shown any significant differences.
2. The shielding effectiveness of an enclosure is no better than the largest aperture in the enclosure. With the 4" aperture for the color display, the shielding effectiveness of the enclosure is poor. I was concerned that the shields on the pcb may have been removed in the mis-guided belief that they were no longer necessary due to the metal enclosure. The attached photo shows shields are still intact inside the SAA-2N. The metal enclosure primarily provides a secure base for mounting the N-type connectors and protecting the electronics.
My overall impression of the SAA-2N is positive. It is well packaged, the 4" display is an upgrade to the original 2.8" display, and the N-type connectors are more mechanically sound when switching to BNC and SMA adapters than the other way around on the SAA-2. The accessories included with the SAA-2N attest to hugen's developing procurement skills.
The SAA-2N does not provide a performance upgrade over the SAA-2, but re-packaging into a metal enclosure with 4" display also did not cause any noticeable performance degradation. I found that when measuring components with N-type connectors, there was less noise in my measurements than when using transitions to make the same measurements using the SAA-2. This will probably my last VNA purchase unless a product with the performance of the SAA-2N, but backwards compatible to the NanoVNA-H4 is introduced.
hugen referenced the following stores as official sites, but there are other distributors on-line, and R&L Electronics is an official distributor in the US:
(PayPal support)
- Herb
|
Re: NanoVNA vs. MFJ-259B Antenna Analyzer
OneOfEleven,
Any objective reading would infer the "glee" over MFJ being "peed-off." They're not. And...sales do not seem to be hurt much as they can't keep up manufacturing production of their A-As.
Have a nice day,
Frank
---
Frank M. Howell, PhD
Professor Emeritus, Mississippi State University
Ridgeland MS 39157
---
|
Re: NanoVNA vs. MFJ-259B Antenna Analyzer
Carson,
Read any manual for a MFJ A-A..you'll see the section on calibration. MFJ sells calibration sets for their MFJ259/269 A-As.
Frank
K4FMH
---
Frank M. Howell, PhD
Professor Emeritus, Mississippi State University
Ridgeland MS 39157
---
|
Re: Transmission Line Tools
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 06:08 AM, Perdad wrote: Thank you for the nice suggestions !
Though I can't make the TLW3 to Graph anything on a modern Win10, get Run Time
Error 339.
I have tried all the different compatiblity modes but no luck. If anyone knows
how to fix this,
please give a hint.
Perdad, The download link that I gave from the ARRL is missing a couple of files. I have put everything required in one zip file. I have verified that it now runs on Windows 7 and windows 8.1 (64 bit systems). (don't have windows 10). To run the program do the following: 1. Download TLW-3.zip from my Google Drive 2. Unzip to somewhere in your My Documents Folder 3. You will need to manually copy the file TeeChart5.ocx to the C:\windows\SysWOW64 directory and register it with Windows using the regsvr32 command. Both require administrator access I have included a batch file TLW3-Install.bat that does this for you. You need to right click it and run as administrator. You can look at it with the Notepad editor to make sure it is safe if you like. 4. Just click on TLW3.exe to execute the program. You can create a shortcut if you want to run it from an icon on your desktop. Please let me know if it works for you.... Roger
|
Re: NanoVNA vs. MFJ-259B Antenna Analyzer
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 10:45 PM, Frank Howell wrote: I can say for certain that Martin Jue is not peed-off, as you put it, over the
NanoVNA. He's been designing the next generation of the MFJ antenna analyzer
line for the past two years. You may not know that Martin actually invented
the antenna analyzer as a singular product.
Sorry to disappoint your thoughts... Why would I be disappointed ? I was only thinking the obvious. It's far better to share love, not hatefulness, xx
|
Re: Has OneOfEleven gone again?
Am I missing something here?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 12:36 PM, CT2FZI wrote:
This is a very lame post.
Your behaviour is the reason devs like 1of11 are not fully sharing their
work.
I suggest you to have some respect.
|
Jim Shorney
Jim Allyn - N7JA
K4FMH
Roger Need