开云体育

AGREE!

I just re read this and pictured myself doing the process. Oooops, Yes, dummy, we need to move the SMA adapter over to the cable connected to CH0. Otherwise, were dead in the water!

Ok, I will get this fixed and update the REV number.

Thanks again!

Alan

Sorry, too many posts lately on this subject, so I lost oversight. Please. where can I find the windows executable. Did not find it in .
Thanks Ernst

I have verified the pin assignments for the STM32F072 vs the STM32F303 for the LQFP-48 package from the ST datasheets. Unless I made a mistake they match exactly. I was very careful, but it would be nice if someone else checked also.

I read the assignments off the schematic and then checked them against the datasheet for the STM32F303 part.

The STM32F303CCT6 shows from Digikey at $4.37 quantity 100 vs $2.62 for the current part quantity 100 price. For 2400 it is $3.20 vs $1.92 so a $1.28 uptick in cost in production quantities.

I'm going to take hugen up on his offer to provide a unit with the STM32F303CCT6 part installed. Having triple the RAM and twice the flash should make it possible to add a lot of interesting features.

Units without the LCD and with provision for control via the USB port would be fantastic with a Pi Zero.

Have Fun!
Reg

BTW I did verify that the port auto-negotiates the speed and am able to connect to the console at 115200.

It's quite likely that the executable wouldn't run on 32 bit. It is built
using 64 bit python, because that's what I run on this machine. I suggest
using the master version in that case, or optionally that someone might be
kind enough to generate 32 bit executables if requested on this list.

With regard to the calibration from the device, I would expect that as long
as the output from the NanoVNA is stable, it should not make a difference
to the quality whether it is calibrated or not, as long as the app is
calibrated correctly.

I see good reason in what you said about averaging. Maybe even some code to
sort out the occasional outliers that show up. I'll put it on the TODO list.

And Herb, thank you very much for your kind comments. Programming is part
of my line of work, but this is the first project of this scale I've done
in Python, and it is the first time I've had to do all these RF
calculations. There is a certain joy to working out these equations,
getting them programmed in, and suddenly seeing a very recognizable value
or trace popping up on the screen.

I hope you enjoy the app,
--
Rune / 5Q5R

On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 08:58 PM, Rune Broberg wrote:

The newly published 0.0.5

Just tried the executable from your release folder, I cannot run this on my Win7 32bit. Could it be this is compiled for X64 only? Before I was always running the master version from Python.

Greetings Alan,

Thanks partially to the tips I got from your documentation I understand the calibration procedure quite well now. It is just that the next step in the procedure following "Note 6" that involves the CH0 cable (Note 11) is to install the OPEN male connector on CH0. This requires the female-to-female barrel to be connected to CH0 not CH1. The connection of a barrel connector to CH1 is mentioned later in "Note 13" for the LOAD test which infers it does not already have the barrel connector installed as requested in "Note 6". It just appears that it is just a simple typo in Note 6 that should state CH0 instead of CH1.

I hope this info is helpful and thanks again for the great documentation effort!
--
73
Tom
VA7TA

Rune,
So far release 0.0.5 is running well on my laptop. I reloaded some s1p files of S21 sweeps that I previously performed on some filters, and with your new marker readout capability was able to verify the -3dB frequency points and associated bandwidth for my bandpass filters. Outstanding work! I don't know what your day job is but you definitely have talent has a programmer.

On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 08:58 PM, Rune Broberg wrote:

The newly published 0.0.5 now allows saving/loading calibrations; and
2-port 1-path calibration as well. It still assumes perfect standards -
I'll work on those further in future releases. It has a slightly different
layout to allow more information from markers, and a mouse-controlled
marker as well (only controllable on the logmag displays though).

I look forward to hearing your feedback.

--
Rune / 5Q5R

Just tried .05, and it worked for excellent for me. Tried a calibration with 10 sweeps and the mouse marker.

One thing I noticed is that the calibration slot in the NanoVNA is still used when taking the calibration sweeps with your software. In my case this was really noticeable because I calibrated a small bandwidth before, and this was clearly visible when doing the load calibration sweep. I tried to "reset" the calibration on the NanoVNA and in your software, but this had no effect, the dip in the load sweep remained where it was calibrated before. I am unsure if this can have a negative effect on the accuracy of the calibration in your software. When I swept a load afterwards, I could not see any immediate negative effect.

One suggestion for improvement of your app could be averaging to reduce noise (by repeating the same frequency sweep a definable number of times and averaging each point of the different sweeps)

The newly published 0.0.5 now allows saving/loading calibrations; and
2-port 1-path calibration as well. It still assumes perfect standards -
I'll work on those further in future releases. It has a slightly different
layout to allow more information from markers, and a mouse-controlled
marker as well (only controllable on the logmag displays though).

I look forward to hearing your feedback.

--
Rune / 5Q5R

On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 17:33, Rune Broberg via Groups.Io <mihtjel=
[email protected]> wrote:

I agree on saving calibrations! The current development branch now has full
SOLT(I) calibration, and I'll try to get saving/loading in before releasing
0.0.5

--
Rune

On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 18:29, Harry McGavran Jr <w5pny@...> wrote:

Hi Rune --

Yes, I had done a sweep before the "short" calibration, but not the other
two.

It would be really nice if one could save a calibration to a file, so

that

he could recall the
file on later invocations of nanovnasaver instad of having to recalibrate
for similar
runs every invocation.

73 --
Harry, W5PNY

You'll need to put that question to either edy555 or hugen as they are the ones who created and modified the original firmware, respectively.

I'm trying to add an on-demand scan command and I'm using cmd_scan (already present in the firmware) as a template.
However cmd_scan causes the firmware to hang.
If I add a lot of printf statements it will scan but very slow
Someone aware why?

An interesting read. Yet another approach.

I agree on saving calibrations! The current development branch now has full
SOLT(I) calibration, and I'll try to get saving/loading in before releasing
0.0.5

--
Rune

Hi Rune --

Yes, I had done a sweep before the "short" calibration, but not the other two.

It would be really nice if one could save a calibration to a file, so that he could recall the
file on later invocations of nanovnasaver instad of having to recalibrate for similar
runs every invocation.

73 --
Harry, W5PNY

On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 13:58, kb3cs <kb3cs@...> wrote:

the damage is caused by the power level, not the output impedance of the
HD1. it is just that simple.

- 3g (base 19) -

The marketing hype specifically says its the impedance, not the power
level.

I somewhat doubt any walkie talkie antenna would be damaged by 10 W of
power. Certainly, the ones I have seen are just basically a coil of wire,
with no matching components.

I would also be a bit concerned about 10 W of RF close to my eyes - the
part of the body most likely to be damaged by high levels of RF.

--
Dr David Kirkby Ph.D C.Eng MIET
Kirkby Microwave Ltd
Registered office: Stokes Hall Lodge, Burnham Rd, Althorne, CHELMSFORD,
Essex, CM3 6DT, United Kingdom.
Registered in England and Wales as company number 08914892

Tel 01621-680100 / +44 1621-680100

i believe Google Translate is part of this conversation loop.

progress! your transceiver is a Retevis Ailunce HD1 VHF/UHF DMR handheld.

you report 3rd party antennas being damaged when used with this handheld.

you must first realize the typical handheld output power is 5W. the Ailunce HD1 output power is 1W or 10W (selectable).
it is no surprise to me 3rd party antennas are being damaged when the Ailunce HD1 is set to 10W out.

the damage is caused by the power level, not the output impedance of the HD1. it is just that simple.

- 3g (base 19) -

Gentlemen, many thanks for your help.

Python is now successfully installed and I can launch Rune's python code.

The issue was that Python wasn't on the path (as several suggested). Fixed by checking the appropriate box when installing Python 3.7.4.

I'm looking forward to playing with Rune's script when I return home.

Best,

- Jeff, k6jca

On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 19:18, Reginald Beardsley via Groups.Io
<pulaskite@...> wrote:

Please add the console RS-232 parameters:
9600 8N1 XON/XOFF
to the information above.

At least on Windows the console works at much higher rates than 9600.
I've been using it at 115200.
I also put much of this information in this thread in the wiki, which
may be a better place to keep track of the changes/current info than
an email thread.
Anyone can edit this page.

/g/nanovna-users/wiki/shellcommands

--buck

Attached is a comparison of Return Loss measurements for four different loads, at three different frequencies. Devices testing were two NanoVNAs, a Rigol Spectrum Analyzer/RF bridge, and an AAI Vector Impedance Analyzer. Tests were done at 50 MHz, 450 MHz, and 720 MHz. Data space is reserved for the third NanoVNA expected in a week or so.

WA8TOD

On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 09:36, -- <gpdxdveil@...> wrote:

I have 10W U/V transceiver.
Some of same transceiver users reports burnt after change 3rd party
antenna.
-'Don't use 50 Ohm matched aftermarket antenna. This transceiver not
matched 50 Ohm'
-'Burnt after even genuine Nagoya/Diamond antenna'

This sounds a combination of

1) Marketing rubbish to get you to use their antennas.

2) Poor engineering

The output impedance of this transmitter is likely to be considerably less
than 50 ohms. If the output impedance was 50 ohms and it connected to a 50
ohm antenna you would get maximum power transferred, but an efficiency of
only 50%.

The impedance of any antenna on a handheld transceiver will vary
*considerably* depending upon the position one holds it. So any handheld
device that is properly engineered will tolerate any degree of mismatch.

You would not be able to measure the output impedance of the transceiver
without a system called “load pull” If you connect the NanoVNA to the
output of the transceiver, would very quickly destroy the NanoVNA.

Depending on how much the transceiver cost, I think you should either

1) Throw it in the bin
2) Seek a refund.

Dave

-

--
Dr. David Kirkby,
Kirkby Microwave Ltd,
drkirkby@...

Telephone 01621-680100./ +44 1621 680100

Registered in England & Wales.
Company number 08914892.
Registered office:
Stokes Hall Lodge,
Burnham Rd,
Althorne,
Chelmsford,
Essex,
CM3 6DT,
United Kingdom