¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 Groups.io
Date

Locked Re: Correct button?

 

Hi Alan,
I just want to point out that the polynomial + delay + impedance method for
characterising standards is itself just an approximation.

In this day and age (of cheap storage) it is simpler to just sweep the
standards on a calibrated VNA, get an s-param file for each one and use
that data in the calcs - with some interpolation for the in-between
frequencies.
This gives the highest accuracy as there is no modelling error.
It also means you can use any old standard you like. The polynomial models
don't fit poorly made standards very well over a wide frequency range,
hence the need for high quality expensive parts.

However I'm not sure if this device has the storage available to do it this
way, if not the old school approach might be the best way.

Regards,
Roger

On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 at 08:49, alan victor <avictor73@...> wrote:

Thanks! That is helpful. The fact that the polynomial code to describe the
open is present implies he was aware of the situation and at this point
elected to put it aside. So for all intent and purpose, the loads are
assumed to be ideal and that tends to agree with the final sweep to check
the loads after cal. The check returns them to be IDEAL... And they are
anything but ideal as that is the electrical-physical nature of a SMA
connector.

Alan

________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of
Roger Henderson <hendorog@...>
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 8:32 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] Correct button?

I checked the code repo's posted and this is what I think the situation is
with the standards:

The load is assumed to be perfect - i.e. the assumption is that nothing is
reflected from the load.
The open is assumed to have a single C0 capacitance term of 50e-15F
The short is either assumed to be perfect, or is assumed to be 180degrees
away from the open. I am not quite sure on that.

There is some unused code which looks to be intended to create a
C0,C1,C2,C3 model of the open, but it is not used.

Roger

On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 14:37, alan victor <avictor73@...> wrote:

You are correct and I confirmed on the big box, that is the function
performed.

This turns CAL ON or OFF. Again, I suspect hp as well others, added this
function as an aid to be sure the correction data sets make sense as a
corrective measurement is conducted on a component. Its much easier to do
this then preset the instrument and have to do a complete re calibration.

Alan

________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of
alan
victor <avictor73@...>
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 1:20 AM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] Correct button?

Good suggestion and it does appear to toggle in that manner.

Now, I have to think why I would toggle corrections ON and OFF, other
than
to see if the corrections ON make sense.

I am not sure this is a good place to bring up the fact that the
STANDARDS
provided with the nanoVNA are taken, I believe, by the device and the
firmware as IDEAL. Point in fact, they are NOT. Not an issue at lower
frequencies unless you want to split hairs. But as you approach 900 MHz,
bottom line, when measuring a component, you are not going to get the
correct answer.

I emailed the developer on this topic but as of now, no response.

Alan

________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of
Roger Henderson <hendorog@...>
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 1:10 AM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] Correct button?

I would guess it is a mode switch between: 'Apply calibration
corrections'
and 'Don't apply calibration corrections'

This feature is present in other VNA's. Am not in front of a device to
confirm it though.

Regards,
Roger

On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 13:06, alan victor <avictor73@...> wrote:

Good question Ernst. Let me take a look and see if I can figure it
out. I
have a guess that it may have to do with the fact that the standards,
open,
short, load are NOT perfect. But... the softkey selection does not lead
to
additional menu selection. So far now, it appears to be a PLACE HOLDER
for
further work.

Alan

________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of
dk1vi <dk1vi@...>
Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2019 11:44 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: [nanovna-users] Correct button?

Hi,
what is the purpose of the "CORRECT" button in the calibration menu?
I have not read anything about it or did I miss something?
Ernst




















Re: Possible location of latest VNA source code??

Lapo Pieri
 

Hi,
11:32 Mon 29 Jul 19 , DMR wrote:
After compilation it works exactly the same as yours.

There is still a problem, an error occurs when compiling if
USE_PROCESS_STACKSIZE = 0x200
USE_EXCEPTIONS_STACKSIZE = 0x200

With these values, everything compiles without errors.
USE_PROCESS_STACKSIZE = 0x100
USE_EXCEPTIONS_STACKSIZE = 0x100
Where are these vars?

Hi hugen! Share the full working code please.
I take the full code from here:



Are we talking about different source code?

Lapo, IK5NAX


Re: nano cases...

 

I agree... to a point. This thing isn't a "real" VNA (in the commercial respect). I don't know if I would have used it when I schlepped up a water tower in Melbourne Australia. I had a Keysight N9914 :-)

On 7/29/2019 10:19 AM, Burt K6OQK wrote:
Personally, I'd rather see this instrument in a tablet size, something I can easily see; in a real metal box with Type-N connectors and sturdy switches and push-buttons.?? My need is for an instrument that I can carry to antenna sites for broadcast antenna work.?? I understand where some folks like tiny pocket size instruments, not sure why, but I'm probably going to go to something like an HP e5061B - a totally different area of an instrument.?? I like the 8753c or ES but they are pretty big and heavy for schleping to transmitter sites.

Burt, K6OQK

At 05:32 AM 7/29/2019, Frank S wrote
I don't think it is worth putting a Pinto engine into a Cadillac Escalade. It doesn't make it a pocket size antenna analyzer anymore

On 7/29/2019 4:51 AM, Dr. David Kirkby from Kirkby Microwave Ltd wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 06:17, kh6sky <kh6sky@...> wrote:

These cases look nice and fulfill a need but my tendency to spastically
knock stuff off the bench means I will use a larger metal box with switches
and connectors moved to the outer box. The power and control switches seem
too delicate to last.?? Another reason to put the unit in a box is the
delicate USB connector.
I agree entirely. I think any case should extend out *everything* so you
never put any strain on the device apart from the screen, which I can see
no way of avoiding.

So I think these should be on a case

1) RF connectors - I would use N, not SMA,
2) USB
3) Toggle switch
4) Power switch

For the LED, one could have 3 possibilities
* Small hole
* light pipe
* desolder LED and run wire.

For the battery, I guess one can get away with using the tracks on the


If the plastic case were re-enforced around the USB connector it might help
prevent disasters like mine.
I personally don???t think any amount of reinforcement is going to work as a
long term solution. That will only delay the inevitable a while.

Dave.

Dave.

Burt I. Weiner Associates
Broadcast Technical Services
Glendale, California U.S.A.
biwa@...
K6OQK


Re: Smith chart impedance printout

Lapo Pieri
 

Hi,
19:27 Mon 29 Jul 19 , alan victor wrote:
Sure Lapo. That is great. However they are all practical representations. In fact why stop there. You could convert the result to its parallel equivalent admittance and provide that as well.

I suspect that if you are doing antenna work and wish to design an impedance matching network, YES. The usual process is to specify the LOAD, the antenna as a complex Z or Y and not as a R and C/L unit. However, a little calculator can handle the conversion. But you are right, it would just be more convenient to have the vna spit it out.

I think best to provide this as a user selection menu item. What do you think?
I think I have to study the code a bit more to make more complex mods,
stay tuned ;-)

Lapo, IK5NAX


Re: Smith chart impedance printout

Lapo Pieri
 

16:07 Mon 29 Jul 19 , alan victor wrote:
Wait a second. The display is available as R+jX. Just switch to
polar.format.
And if you desire you can dedicate trace 0 to a Smith plot while you
dedicate trace 1 to a polar plot. Of course in polar format you will
have to multiply the polar vector by Zo of the chart/system which of
course is 50 ohms.
No, polar format display coefficient of reflection, not impedance!

Lapo, IK5NAX


Re: Smith chart impedance printout

 

Hi Lapo,

Wait a second. The display is available as R+jX. Just switch to polar.format. And if you desire you can dedicate trace 0 to a Smith plot while you dedicate trace 1 to a polar plot. Of course in polar format you will have to multiply the polar vector by Zo of the chart/system which of course is 50 ohms.

Alan


Locked Re: Correct button?

 

Thanks! That is helpful. The fact that the polynomial code to describe the open is present implies he was aware of the situation and at this point elected to put it aside. So for all intent and purpose, the loads are assumed to be ideal and that tends to agree with the final sweep to check the loads after cal. The check returns them to be IDEAL... And they are anything but ideal as that is the electrical-physical nature of a SMA connector.

Alan

________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Roger Henderson <hendorog@...>
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 8:32 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] Correct button?

I checked the code repo's posted and this is what I think the situation is
with the standards:

The load is assumed to be perfect - i.e. the assumption is that nothing is
reflected from the load.
The open is assumed to have a single C0 capacitance term of 50e-15F
The short is either assumed to be perfect, or is assumed to be 180degrees
away from the open. I am not quite sure on that.

There is some unused code which looks to be intended to create a
C0,C1,C2,C3 model of the open, but it is not used.

Roger

On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 14:37, alan victor <avictor73@...> wrote:

You are correct and I confirmed on the big box, that is the function
performed.

This turns CAL ON or OFF. Again, I suspect hp as well others, added this
function as an aid to be sure the correction data sets make sense as a
corrective measurement is conducted on a component. Its much easier to do
this then preset the instrument and have to do a complete re calibration.

Alan

________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of alan
victor <avictor73@...>
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 1:20 AM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] Correct button?

Good suggestion and it does appear to toggle in that manner.

Now, I have to think why I would toggle corrections ON and OFF, other than
to see if the corrections ON make sense.

I am not sure this is a good place to bring up the fact that the STANDARDS
provided with the nanoVNA are taken, I believe, by the device and the
firmware as IDEAL. Point in fact, they are NOT. Not an issue at lower
frequencies unless you want to split hairs. But as you approach 900 MHz,
bottom line, when measuring a component, you are not going to get the
correct answer.

I emailed the developer on this topic but as of now, no response.

Alan

________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of
Roger Henderson <hendorog@...>
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 1:10 AM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] Correct button?

I would guess it is a mode switch between: 'Apply calibration corrections'
and 'Don't apply calibration corrections'

This feature is present in other VNA's. Am not in front of a device to
confirm it though.

Regards,
Roger

On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 13:06, alan victor <avictor73@...> wrote:

Good question Ernst. Let me take a look and see if I can figure it out. I
have a guess that it may have to do with the fact that the standards,
open,
short, load are NOT perfect. But... the softkey selection does not lead
to
additional menu selection. So far now, it appears to be a PLACE HOLDER
for
further work.

Alan

________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of
dk1vi <dk1vi@...>
Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2019 11:44 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: [nanovna-users] Correct button?

Hi,
what is the purpose of the "CORRECT" button in the calibration menu?
I have not read anything about it or did I miss something?
Ernst















Locked Re: Correct button?

 

I checked the code repo's posted and this is what I think the situation is
with the standards:

The load is assumed to be perfect - i.e. the assumption is that nothing is
reflected from the load.
The open is assumed to have a single C0 capacitance term of 50e-15F
The short is either assumed to be perfect, or is assumed to be 180degrees
away from the open. I am not quite sure on that.

There is some unused code which looks to be intended to create a
C0,C1,C2,C3 model of the open, but it is not used.

Roger

On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 14:37, alan victor <avictor73@...> wrote:

You are correct and I confirmed on the big box, that is the function
performed.

This turns CAL ON or OFF. Again, I suspect hp as well others, added this
function as an aid to be sure the correction data sets make sense as a
corrective measurement is conducted on a component. Its much easier to do
this then preset the instrument and have to do a complete re calibration.

Alan

________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of alan
victor <avictor73@...>
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 1:20 AM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] Correct button?

Good suggestion and it does appear to toggle in that manner.

Now, I have to think why I would toggle corrections ON and OFF, other than
to see if the corrections ON make sense.

I am not sure this is a good place to bring up the fact that the STANDARDS
provided with the nanoVNA are taken, I believe, by the device and the
firmware as IDEAL. Point in fact, they are NOT. Not an issue at lower
frequencies unless you want to split hairs. But as you approach 900 MHz,
bottom line, when measuring a component, you are not going to get the
correct answer.

I emailed the developer on this topic but as of now, no response.

Alan

________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of
Roger Henderson <hendorog@...>
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 1:10 AM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] Correct button?

I would guess it is a mode switch between: 'Apply calibration corrections'
and 'Don't apply calibration corrections'

This feature is present in other VNA's. Am not in front of a device to
confirm it though.

Regards,
Roger

On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 13:06, alan victor <avictor73@...> wrote:

Good question Ernst. Let me take a look and see if I can figure it out. I
have a guess that it may have to do with the fact that the standards,
open,
short, load are NOT perfect. But... the softkey selection does not lead
to
additional menu selection. So far now, it appears to be a PLACE HOLDER
for
further work.

Alan

________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of
dk1vi <dk1vi@...>
Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2019 11:44 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: [nanovna-users] Correct button?

Hi,
what is the purpose of the "CORRECT" button in the calibration menu?
I have not read anything about it or did I miss something?
Ernst















Re: Smith chart impedance printout

 

Sure Lapo. That is great. However they are all practical representations. In fact why stop there. You could convert the result to its parallel equivalent admittance and provide that as well.

I suspect that if you are doing antenna work and wish to design an impedance matching network, YES. The usual process is to specify the LOAD, the antenna as a complex Z or Y and not as a R and C/L unit. However, a little calculator can handle the conversion. But you are right, it would just be more convenient to have the vna spit it out.

I think best to provide this as a user selection menu item. What do you think?

73' Alan



________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Lapo Pieri <ik5nax@...>
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2019 5:51 PM
To: nanovna-users <[email protected]>
Subject: [nanovna-users] Smith chart impedance printout

Hi,
I think that Smith chart presentation of impedance as
<real_part>[ohm] <series cap or ind>[F|H] is not practical in many case of
use. So I decide to modify the code to show impedance in
<real_part>+/-j<imag_part> format, you can find the patch to plot.c to
obtain this.
If I found a bit of time I could split Smith chart in two, one as original
and one as just proposed. Do you think it worth?

Lapo, IK5NAX

--------

diff --git a/plot.c b/plot.c
index 10074c3..c5c92e5 100644
--- a/plot.c
+++ b/plot.c
@@ -576,16 +576,22 @@ gamma2imp(char *buf, int len, const float coeff[2], uint32_t frequency)
// float z = sqrtf(zr*zr + zi*zi);
int n;

- n = string_value_with_prefix(buf, len, zr, S_OHM[0]);
- buf[n++] = ' ';
+ n = string_value_with_prefix(buf, len, zr, '\0');
+ if(zi<0)
+ buf[n++]='-';
+ else
+ buf[n++]='+';
+ buf[n++]='j';
+ string_value_with_prefix(buf+n, len-n, fabs(zi), S_OHM[0]);

- if (zi < 0) {
- float c = -1 / (PI2 * frequency * zi);
- string_value_with_prefix(buf+n, len-n, c, 'F');
- } else {
- float l = zi / (PI2 * frequency);
- string_value_with_prefix(buf+n, len-n, l, 'H');
- }
+
+ /* if (zi < 0) { */
+ /* float c = -1 / (PI2 * frequency * zi); */
+ /* string_value_with_prefix(buf+n, len-n, c, 'F'); */
+ /* } else { */
+ /* float l = zi / (PI2 * frequency); */
+ /* string_value_with_prefix(buf+n, len-n, l, 'H'); */
+ /* } */
}

void


Re: Possible location of latest VNA source code??

 

Hugen has already committed his changes back to edy555's original github repository.
Have a look at

On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 02:32 PM, DMR wrote:



Hi hugen! Share the full working code please.


Re: Possible location of latest VNA source code??

DMR
 

Lapo Pieri,
After compilation it works exactly the same as yours.

There is still a problem, an error occurs when compiling if
USE_PROCESS_STACKSIZE = 0x200
USE_EXCEPTIONS_STACKSIZE = 0x200

With these values, everything compiles without errors.
USE_PROCESS_STACKSIZE = 0x100
USE_EXCEPTIONS_STACKSIZE = 0x100

Hi hugen! Share the full working code please.


Smith chart impedance printout

Lapo Pieri
 

Hi,
I think that Smith chart presentation of impedance as
<real_part>[ohm] <series cap or ind>[F|H] is not practical in many case of
use. So I decide to modify the code to show impedance in
<real_part>+/-j<imag_part> format, you can find the patch to plot.c to
obtain this.
If I found a bit of time I could split Smith chart in two, one as original
and one as just proposed. Do you think it worth?

Lapo, IK5NAX

--------

diff --git a/plot.c b/plot.c
index 10074c3..c5c92e5 100644
--- a/plot.c
+++ b/plot.c
@@ -576,16 +576,22 @@ gamma2imp(char *buf, int len, const float coeff[2], uint32_t frequency)
// float z = sqrtf(zr*zr + zi*zi);
int n;

- n = string_value_with_prefix(buf, len, zr, S_OHM[0]);
- buf[n++] = ' ';
+ n = string_value_with_prefix(buf, len, zr, '\0');
+ if(zi<0)
+ buf[n++]='-';
+ else
+ buf[n++]='+';
+ buf[n++]='j';
+ string_value_with_prefix(buf+n, len-n, fabs(zi), S_OHM[0]);

- if (zi < 0) {
- float c = -1 / (PI2 * frequency * zi);
- string_value_with_prefix(buf+n, len-n, c, 'F');
- } else {
- float l = zi / (PI2 * frequency);
- string_value_with_prefix(buf+n, len-n, l, 'H');
- }
+
+ /* if (zi < 0) { */
+ /* float c = -1 / (PI2 * frequency * zi); */
+ /* string_value_with_prefix(buf+n, len-n, c, 'F'); */
+ /* } else { */
+ /* float l = zi / (PI2 * frequency); */
+ /* string_value_with_prefix(buf+n, len-n, l, 'H'); */
+ /* } */
}

void


Re: Possible location of latest VNA source code??

Lapo Pieri
 

Hi,
02:32 Mon 29 Jul 19 , hugen@... wrote:
You may have pressed the touch screen while adc is initializing.
No, I don't I'm sure

It might be better to add a wait.
I agree. I don't know STM32, I usually develop on NXP LPCxxxx but it seems
to me good.

void adc_init(void)
{
rccEnableADC1(FALSE);

/* Calibration procedure.*/
ADC->CCR = 0;
while (ADC1->CR & ADC_CR_ADEN)
;
ADC1->CR |= ADC_CR_ADCAL;
while (ADC1->CR & ADC_CR_ADCAL)
;

ADC1->CR = ADC_CR_ADEN;
while (!(ADC1->ISR & ADC_ISR_ADRDY))
;
}
Ok, now it works but after a full power-down.
I mean: after re-build and fw load
($ dfu-util -d 0483:df11 -a 0 -s 0x08000000:leave -D build_900/ch.bin)
on subsequent reset it hangs again just after start and stop frequency
printout; switching off and then on rapidly (blue led remains on) it hangs
again. Switching off, waiting for blue led to go down and switching on again
it works. Why?

Many thanks!

Lapo, IK5NAX


Re: Idea for a bracket for mounting N connectors

 

I have added the second drawing that shows a complete rear cover plate that covers the sides.


Idea for a bracket for mounting N connectors

 

Folks,
A number of you were commenting on maybe using female N connectors on this unit but were concerned about breaking the SMA connectors off the circuit board.

I did a little 'doodle' at lunchtime about how I thought you could fabricate a steel bracket to hold two N-SMA adapters to the NanoVNA.
If you are no sure of mounting at the one end of the device, you could always use a thicker plate steel and use it to replace the entire rear panel of the VNA. That would provide more rigidity as would sides to the bracket - In fact, a solid back cover could be produced that had sides to cover the edges of the VNA.

Anyone who has worked with sheet metal can make this very easily, although I would not use aluminum/brass/copper - too flexible.
Probably 18-20 gauge would be ideal.

I have another drawing to add that shows a rear cover plate - probably Tuesday (gotta get back to work)


Re: Best unit to purchase?

jim
 

Yep .. still had no (easier) way of compensating hugen so...
and that was my original intention (stare and compare)

Jim

On Monday, July 29, 2019, 4:41:28 PM UTC, Hans J Albertsson <hans.j.albertsson@...> wrote:

So total was $71.90?

Please, Jim, once you get the Hugen NanoVNA, compare the two units'
hardware and describe the differences, as far as you can!

TiA.

Den m?n 29 juli 2019 17:58jim via Groups.Io <ab7vf@...>
skrev:

? Same vendor I used ...Ordered july 3, recieved july 26 ...
In order to (maybe) compensate Hugen for his efforts, I also ordered one
via "taobao focus" ( "hugen79") .....cost of unit $53.54 shipping/handling
by shipper $18.36 ...shipped july 28 ..not here yet
Jim

? ? On Monday, July 29, 2019, 3:12:00 PM UTC, Larry Rothman <
ac293@...> wrote:

? Ed,
I got mine from Aliexpress vendor:


It's a very nice unit, comes in a plastice case with all the
attachments/cables/cal and has a battery.
It took 21 days to Toronto, Canada.
Check my previous posts.

Cheers,
Larry


On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:06 AM, kg7swp@... wrote:


Looking over my unit, it's a Worse clone". I am returning it, as some of
the
measurements are bad.,
Which website should I use to get the proper unit?

Thank you,
Ed





Re: Best unit to purchase?

 

So total was $71.90?

Please, Jim, once you get the Hugen NanoVNA, compare the two units'
hardware and describe the differences, as far as you can!

TiA.

Den m?n 29 juli 2019 17:58jim via Groups.Io <ab7vf@...>
skrev:

Same vendor I used ...Ordered july 3, recieved july 26 ...
In order to (maybe) compensate Hugen for his efforts, I also ordered one
via "taobao focus" ( "hugen79") .....cost of unit $53.54 shipping/handling
by shipper $18.36 ...shipped july 28 ..not here yet
Jim

On Monday, July 29, 2019, 3:12:00 PM UTC, Larry Rothman <
ac293@...> wrote:

Ed,
I got mine from Aliexpress vendor:


It's a very nice unit, comes in a plastice case with all the
attachments/cables/cal and has a battery.
It took 21 days to Toronto, Canada.
Check my previous posts.

Cheers,
Larry


On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:06 AM, kg7swp@... wrote:


Looking over my unit, it's a Worse clone". I am returning it, as some of
the
measurements are bad.,
Which website should I use to get the proper unit?

Thank you,
Ed





edy555 design notes on CALIBRATION sets

 

There is a wealth of good information in these notes. Thanks Larry for the translation. It is clear the developer put a great deal of effort into the project.

Reading the description of the work in the area of calibration, I see that significant effort was addressed in the algorithm addressing the coupler performance. This is clear as the majority of the CAL routine steps address the coupler tracking, directivity and frequency response.

Reading carefully "Trying out the calibration process of nanoVNA with Python" you will see that the designer recognizes that the CAL kit pieces are not perfect. However, he state they are adequate to provide a reasonable agreement with measured frequency response vs. actual. The cost performance tradeoff is reasonable as the first order of business was to handle the coupler degradation to measured vs. actual response data.

So at this point, create the best short, open and 50 ohm load... the supplied are not too bad. Perhaps the open as suggested in a prior post can be improved. However, KEY is the VNA is under the impression that these cal standards are IDEAL.

What does this mean. Without going through extensive arithmetic and explanation, consider the fact that the measured short when CAL is complete is precisely located at the short side of the chart as a single dot. This is not the case for a true SMA short. There is clockwise (CW) rotation as frequency increases. Hence there is series inductance present with a real SMA CAL standard. As well, that rotation is removed from your DUT. So expect for example, for this case, that the actual value of you L is a bit larger than measured.

At low frequnecies the difference is negligible. So if you desire to use the nanoVNA as a component measurement tool, like an LCR meter, conduct your measurments at say 1 MHz or even 50 kHz!

More on this topic I am sure will be forthcoming.

Alan


Re: Best unit to purchase?

jim
 

Same vendor I used ...Ordered july 3, recieved july 26 ...
In order to (maybe) compensate Hugen for his efforts, I also ordered one via "taobao focus" ( "hugen79") .....cost of unit $53.54 shipping/handling by shipper $18.36 ...shipped july 28 ..not here yet
Jim

On Monday, July 29, 2019, 3:12:00 PM UTC, Larry Rothman <ac293@...> wrote:

Ed,
I got mine from Aliexpress vendor:?

It's a very nice unit, comes in a plastice case with all the attachments/cables/cal and has a battery.
It took 21 days to Toronto, Canada.
Check my previous posts.

Cheers,
Larry


On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:06 AM, kg7swp@... wrote:


Looking over my unit, it's a Worse clone". I am returning it, as some of the
measurements are bad.,
Which website should I use to get the proper unit?

Thank you,
Ed


Re: Best unit to purchase?

 

Here is an SWR meter (to 60MHz) with Bluetooth Mini60S

On 7/29/2019 11:11 AM, Larry Rothman wrote:
Ed,
I got mine from Aliexpress vendor:

It's a very nice unit, comes in a plastice case with all the attachments/cables/cal and has a battery.
It took 21 days to Toronto, Canada.
Check my previous posts.

Cheers,
Larry


On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 11:06 AM, kg7swp@... wrote:

Looking over my unit, it's a Worse clone". I am returning it, as some of the
measurements are bad.,
Which website should I use to get the proper unit?

Thank you,
Ed