开云体育

Hmm that seemed to work! I wonder why?

One more thing to try. You can do a thru calibration without doing an OSL calibration if all you are interested in is the S21 loss/gain. I often do that if I am checking an attentuator or filter over

Yes, I was doing that too. I also did as Roger suggested and hit RESET several times with no luck.

Hernán, Ensure that you do a "CAL->RESET" before you do the OPEN, SHORT, LOAD, ISOLATION, THRU calibration. Skipping that step can result in a bad calibration state even though all screen indications

Are you doing a RESET before Calibration. I find sometimes I have to touch RESET a few times to perform the operation. Roger

I had tried with another set of cables with the same result. I measured the cables not connected to anything and on DC they measure fine. Connected to the VNA both read 50 ohms (DC)

Check your cables with an ohm meter (DMM). Your photo is fuzzy but it looks like you have a short.... Roger

I recently tried to measure the loss in my cables for HF ham radio. I did the calibration steps, but when I do the THRU calibration, after calibrating the CH1 LOGMAG line isn't flat at 0dB. It looks

Hot on the heels of his beta 0.8 firmware release for the NanoVNA, DiSlord has followed it up with an additional beta firmware release which adds user selectable averaging via a "DISPLAY->BANDWIDTH"

Regarding, "...am leaning more toward the -F because of the IPS display being (much?) more visible outdoors (in bright light)." Although it is cloudy so I cannot do the experiment in sunlight just now

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 12:09 PM, Nbridgema wrote: The -F and -H4 are different hardware/firmware platforms, but both interface with NanoVNA-Saver, so give the same analysis and documentation

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 07:39 AM, DougVL wrote: I have been looking at the same question, but am leaning more toward the -F because of the IPS display being (much?) more visible outdoors (in bright

I have the original small screen version and both the -F and -H4. They all work well with Saver. However, you must the latest version of Saver on your PC / laptop. Dave - W?LEV [email protected]>

The -F and -H4 are different hardware/firmware platforms, but both interface with NanoVNA-Saver, so give the same analysis and documentation benefits. ... or so I've been told; have not yet received

WB2UAQ, Reminder the 468/F is a rule of thumb approximation at best. That will be altered by wire diameter, height above ground, and if the wire has insulation. In all cases of testing over decades it

I have two friends - one with the F, the other the H4. The screen on the F is *much* better. Dave

... and forgot to mention that the affected slides are nr 49-50-51 Luc ON7DQ

Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa ... BIG thanks to Eric, KE6US, for finding another stupid error I made. I made a demo LPF for 40m, but it seems I used the correct capacitor values from the W3NQN table,

I have been looking at the same question, but am leaning more toward the -F because of the IPS display being (much?) more visible outdoors (in bright light). I have an early model now updated to

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 04:13 AM, RickkS wrote: I had a similar thing happen with the brightness on my H4. I couldn't find any information on adjusting the brightness.