|
Re: Fixture PCB for VNA
Thanks - looks really nice.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
For checking SMT active devices, the engineers I used to work with, used? fixtures with toggle-clamps to hold the DUT in place. On Wednesday, October 23, 2019, 12:37:42 a.m. GMT-4, Daniel Marks <profdc9@...> wrote:
I made a fixture PCB for my VNA and I think it would be useful as well for the NanoVNA.? You can find it at: It has the following features: 1.? Calibration standards for open, short, load, thru for SMA and BNC 2.? Four spots to solder on 0805 SMD components to create test loads for SMA, and an area left so that one can label the loads. 3.? ZIF socket for leaded component testing, both SMA and BNC 4.? A spot to place a spring clip into the board so that you can lay components flat against the board and clip them in to test them. I do not think these calibration standards will necessarily work out to 900 MHz but should be useful for convenient testing at HF/VHF. A picture of the test fixture is below. Dan |
|
Re: [nanovna-f] NanoVNA-Saver 0.1.4
Hi,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Finally got it here: 73's pf, f5bqp Le 23/10/2019 ¨¤ 11:23, Pierre-Fran?ois (f5bqp_pfm) a ¨¦crit?:
Hello Rune, |
|
Re: NanoVNA-Saver 0.1.4
Who in the group has had a similar experience?In nanoVNA DISPLAY menu: * select the TRACE being used for Smith, e.g. turn off/on or turn off all others * select SCALE and set SCALE/DIV 1 x1 With NanoVNA-H_AA_20191018.dfu, SCALE - REFERENCE POSITION settings do not affect Smith format plot centering, but perhaps it may on some other firmwares Because of (IMO) poor menu arrangements, it is too easy to accidentally change trace settings for a wrong trace. |
|
Re: [nanovna-f] NanoVNA-Saver 0.1.4
Hello Rune,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Where is the link to get this new beauty, I dont see it. 73's Pierre-Fran?ois, F5BQP Le 23/10/2019 ¨¤ 09:56, Rune Broberg a ¨¦crit?:
Hello all, |
|
Re: NanoVNA-Saver 0.1.4
Hi Rune,
Hi nanovna-users, the go-ahead from Avast for 0.1.4 alpha just had arrived. Attached you find a pic of my Hugen mounted on a PE board with N Extension, and two pics with the same configuration, but very different results. Description: using my Hugen NanoVNA mounted on a PE board with N extension (pls disregard the 70 cm dipole shown on that older pic), after calibrating to this N-plane directly on the Hugen (just O-S-L for S11), never switching off, then after again calibrating to this same N-plane via saver 0.1.4 alpha (just O-S-L for S11), never switching off, I first compared calibration results on both Smith Charts, Hugen and saver, for O, S and L. Both were identical with respect to the 3 cal points on both Smith Charts, never switching off, then - for some test - I connected via N-male-to SMA-female adapter one of the two SMA-male-SMA-male cables that came with the Hugen, never switching off, in the range of 400MHz ... 500MHz, as entered in saver, which also showed up on the Hugen, too, ... I looked at the saver pic and an the Hugen photo shot (sorry for the poor quality without stand) and compared: The two are quite different: The saver screen shot shows - as I would expect - a circle close to the outer rim of the Smith Chart, even going a little bit outside |Gamma| =1 , which is possible for lossy lines and not an indication of an impossible result. The attenuation makes it spiraled towards the Smith center, which is 50 Ohms. The Hugen photo, however, shows a circle fully inside the traditional Smith Chart outer rim, centered around a point much less than 50 Ohms having a much smaller diameter. Imho your saver screenshot is as ok as can be expected, the Huigen pic, showing exactly the same thing, however is not. How comes? Probably I did something wrong, but I have no idea, what. Theoretically there is, however, also a remote possibility of both using different calculations. Checking both source codes for that is beyond my current possibilities. Who in the group has had a similar experience? Who perhaps knows why? What needs perhaps to be done differently? 73, Hans DJ7BA -----Urspr¨¹ngliche Nachricht----- Von: [email protected] <[email protected]> Im Auftrag von Rune Broberg Gesendet: Mittwoch, 23. Oktober 2019 09:57 An: [email protected]; [email protected] Betreff: [nanovna-users] NanoVNA-Saver 0.1.4 Hello all, I just released NanoVNA-Saver 0.1.4. Here are the release notes: This release adds a number of new features, some bug fixes, and some internal reorganisation: Adding markers: You can now add or remove markers, allowing you as many as you can fit on your screen. In fact, the software does not stop there: You can even add markers which you can't fit on your screen! New charts: A number of new chart types have been added, allowing you to plot |Z|, |S11| and |S21| in linear format, S11 and S21 logarithmic on the same |S11| chart at the same time, and the raw S11 and S21 real/imaginary S-parameter values. Calibration updates: The calibration assistant has become more talkative, and should be better at telling you what has gone wrong when it won't apply a calibration. When applying a new calibration, or applying after changing to a different calibration standard set, the previous sweep is immediately updated to show the effect of the new values. This should be useful for finding the right values for calibration standard sets. Bugfixes: Line thickness and point size should now load correctly and apply to charts after you restart the software. SWR marker colours should similarly also load correctly. The software should now be able to run and attempt to check for updates, and not crash when you don't have an internet connection. I hope these features and updates are useful to the community! I look forward to hearing the feedback from you all! And a little announcement: I have been really quite busy with this software for the past two or so months. I'm now going to take a little break and relax, and I therefore don't expect to make any new releases next week (*gasp*), and I might even be slow in responding to your emails. You have all been very kind in writing to me both showing your appreciation, as well as pointing out bugs, misunderstandings, potential improvements and new ideas. I appreciate this greatly, and I hope you will continue to do so, even as I take a week or so to relax ;-) -- Rune / 5Q5R -- Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren gepr¨¹ft. |
|
Re: How will you use your nanoVNA?
On 22.10.2019. 22:31, Jon Titus wrote:
Just curious. This group has a lot of activity centered on the nanoVNA. I have wondered how group members will use their nanoVNA, how often, and what for? Antenna testing, feedline testing, circuit design..?Mostly for occasional antenna and filter measuring. -- 73, YT9TP, Pedja |
|
Re: Fixture PCB for VNA
Nice board.
Daniel, can you go back to the subject line of your post and add the hashtag #test-jig? I think only originators of topics have access to do that. It would be interesting to compare the vertical mounted SMA against the side mounted SMA. I've read that the 90 turn in the signal causes measurement errors, but nothing about when this is a problem. |
|
Fixture PCB for VNA
I made a fixture PCB for my VNA and I think it would be useful as well for the NanoVNA. You can find it at:
It has the following features: 1. Calibration standards for open, short, load, thru for SMA and BNC 2. Four spots to solder on 0805 SMD components to create test loads for SMA, and an area left so that one can label the loads. 3. ZIF socket for leaded component testing, both SMA and BNC 4. A spot to place a spring clip into the board so that you can lay components flat against the board and clip them in to test them. I do not think these calibration standards will necessarily work out to 900 MHz but should be useful for convenient testing at HF/VHF. A picture of the test fixture is below. Dan |
Pierre-Fran?ois (f5bqp_pfm)
Oristo
YT9TP - Pedja
Starsekr
