Re: Upgrade firmware of NanoVNA H4 ---- what is the process?
Alton,
Everything you need is in the forum Wiki and File areas.?
Print off a copy of the user guide and that will get you started.?
There is a lot of information that has been created in the forum posts as well so do you the search tool and use hashtags as well.?
Enjoy!
On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 7:50 PM, ALTON MCCONNELL via groups.io<nu8l@...> wrote: Hello Everyone.
Wonderful project!
I received my H4 instrument about two weeks ago.? It was in a black box with gold printing with cables, cal stds, etc.
I should upgrade the firmware to the latest.? I have version 0.5.0.? Build time Feb 21, 2020. Kernal 5.1.0.
I am using a Levovo Thinkpad T500 with Win 10.
What steps are required to update my firmware?? Does anyone have a step by step guide for anon-professional Win 10 user?
Thanks!
Alton, NU8L
|
Re: Upgrade firmware of NanoVNA H4 ---- what is the process?
There is a pdf file in the files section like 2nd or third from the bottom entitled how to write firmware for windows, it something similar On Sun, May 24, 2020, 18:50 ALTON MCCONNELL via groups.io <nu8l= [email protected]> wrote: Hello Everyone.
Wonderful project!
I received my H4 instrument about two weeks ago. It was in a black box
with gold printing with cables, cal stds, etc.
I should upgrade the firmware to the latest. I have version 0.5.0. Build
time Feb 21, 2020. Kernal 5.1.0.
I am using a Levovo Thinkpad T500 with Win 10.
What steps are required to update my firmware? Does anyone have a step by
step guide for anon-professional Win 10 user?
Thanks!
Alton, NU8L
|
Upgrade firmware of NanoVNA H4 ---- what is the process?
Hello Everyone.
Wonderful project!
I received my H4 instrument about two weeks ago. It was in a black box with gold printing with cables, cal stds, etc.
I should upgrade the firmware to the latest. I have version 0.5.0. Build time Feb 21, 2020. Kernal 5.1.0.
I am using a Levovo Thinkpad T500 with Win 10.
What steps are required to update my firmware? Does anyone have a step by step guide for anon-professional Win 10 user?
Thanks!
Alton, NU8L
|
On the previous question about why using the OPEN cal standard instead of nothing. The standard prevents the ingress of any stray RF that might be floating around.
|
Re: NanoVNA firmvare, compiled by DiSlord #firmware with MiniSD support
#firmware
Try this variant of firmware vs you card Now for card init used low speed SPI bus (~280kHz) If not work, need try check Card slot pins, and card should be inserted as on foto Used pins: 2 - SD_CS
3 - SPI_MOSI
4 - VDD
5 - SPI_SCLK
6 - GND
7 - SPI_MISO And send logs All read/write after init go on max speed (36MHz), possibly it to big, datasheet say max speed = 25MHz
|
Larry and all, I executed the calibration via app/Saver, and tried a bunch of filters, some reversed also. I enclose the scans. For less narrow filters, I enlarged the scan window, but I assume the impact from calibration should be minimal (as I think DiSlord said). <> Virus-free. www.avg.com <> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 12:28 PM Larry Rothman <nlroth@...> wrote: Radu,
If you're using NanovnaSaver, use that app to perform and save the
calibration and see if you get different results. I know that you can save
a number of calls in the Saver app.
Larry
On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 1:58 PM, Radu Bogdan Dicher<vondicher@...>
wrote: Larry - I re-executed the calibration over 10.4 through 11MHz,
saved to
"1," and I always recall it before measuring. However, the letter changes
every time I start the scan (from "C1" to "c1") - I press sweep, flop!, it
changes. Not sure why, as far as I can tell I have the same settings on
device and computer application (center: 10.7MHz, span: 600kHz), and I
RECALL 1 it every time I prepare for scanning.
David - yes, I am using 56.2ohm and 301ohms, 1% tolerance resistors. It's
the closest I could come up with by calculating for minimum loss. The
filters are 150kHz Muratas (JAs), but I also measured about four different
bandwidths, and from multiple sources. I have at least 7 or 8 different
batches and they all have the 5dB difference L/R. I think my calibration is
not getting applied, based upon Larry's feedback above.
Still trying to figure out how to maintain calibration settings while
executing the scan.
Thank you both,
Radu.
<
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 6:19 AM <david.hostetler@...> wrote:
What I see in the plot that you posted is a filter that is about 170 kHz
wide at the -3 dB points and centered at 10.715 MHz. This is consistent
with a Murata SFELF10M7HA00-B0 that has a spec of 180 +/-40 kHz and a
center frequency of 10.7 MHz +/-30 kHz. The fact that all the filters
exhibit the same response wouldn't surprise me if you purchased them at the
same time, they probably came from the same batch, and the tolerance is
likely based on batch to batch differences caused by process variations
rather than random variations within a batch.
It is a little harder to understand/explain the fact that the low
frequency side runs out of dynamic range at -60 dB and the high side gets
there at 5 dB higher at -55 dB. Since these filters are symmetrical, have
you tried swapping the input and output by turning the filter around at the
fixture?
Also, you haven't really detailed your circuit for matching the 50 ohm of
the VNA to the 330 ohm of the filter. If I were doing it, I would use a
minimum loss matching pad. This would consist of a 54.281014769949586 ohm
resistor (it is the value that the calculator gave - LOL) across the input
and output coax to the VNA and a series resistor of 304.01167774007837 ohms
up to the filter input/output. This would give a loss of 13.867585162369918
dB on each side. 5% values: 56 and 300. 1% values: 54.9 and 301. I am sure
the 5% values would be just fine. You could bridge the filter location with
a short on your test fixture to determine the exact loss through the pads,
then place the filter in the fixture and easily find the filter insertion
loss.
<> Virus-free. www.avg.com <> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
|
Yes I just made a former out of 1/4" thick 'Tufnol' that measured 34mm x
13mm which is good for the two outer shields.
Then using 0.005" thick brass foil I marked out the shapes of the shields
34mm x 13mm and added 4mm tall sides to fold down. (see pics)
I carefully folded the foil over the former and bent the little tabs round
over the ends and soldered the flaps down.
Easy with ordinary soldering iron as the brass is so thin.
Once the shields were fabricated I rubbed them back and forth on a smooth
flat file to make sure all the sides were flush with the pcb.
ie filed off any high spots.
I then kept offering the shields to the pcb and marked out where I needed
to file away the side to avoid the SMD components going to the audio codec.
I then 'tinned' the edges with solder and tinned the 'fixing pads' on the
board.
Carefully lined up the shield and tinned one corner in place.
Final adjustments and then soldered the other pads.
Phew!
Dave
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 19:22, Dave VE3LHO <dave@...> wrote: Dave,
I am curious how you soldered (braized?) the brass shim. I've been
thinking about making my own shields (not for my nano) but am a bit
intimidated by my lack of experience with brass.
Thanks,
Dave L
On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 07:04 AM, Dave B wrote:
Hi just spent a UK windy afternoon confined to my radio 'shack' , so
decided
to upgrade the screening on my 'basic' clone nanoVNA to see if the INPUT
'noise' could be reduced.
I made the screens out of some 'shim' brass foil and formed them round some
srbp (Tufnol) formers THAT I made first.
I am pleased with the improvement that just a couple of hours 'metal bashing'
has produced.
Hopefully this will inspire others to have a go?
Dave
|
Radu,
If you're using NanovnaSaver, use that app to perform and save the calibration and see if you get different results. I know that you can save a number of calls in the Saver app.?
Larry
On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 1:58 PM, Radu Bogdan Dicher<vondicher@...> wrote: Larry - I re-executed the calibration over 10.4 through 11MHz, saved to
"1," and I always recall it before measuring. However, the letter changes
every time I start the scan (from "C1" to "c1") - I press sweep, flop!, it
changes. Not sure why, as far as I can tell I have the same settings on
device and computer application (center: 10.7MHz, span: 600kHz), and I
RECALL 1 it every time I prepare for scanning.
David - yes, I am using 56.2ohm and 301ohms, 1% tolerance resistors. It's
the closest I could come up with by calculating for minimum loss. The
filters are 150kHz Muratas (JAs), but I also measured about four different
bandwidths, and from multiple sources. I have at least 7 or 8 different
batches and they all have the 5dB difference L/R. I think my calibration is
not getting applied, based upon Larry's feedback above.
Still trying to figure out how to maintain calibration settings while
executing the scan.
Thank you both,
Radu.
<>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 6:19 AM <david.hostetler@...> wrote: What I see in the plot that you posted is a filter that is about 170 kHz
wide at the -3 dB points and centered at 10.715 MHz. This is consistent
with a Murata SFELF10M7HA00-B0 that has a spec of 180 +/-40 kHz and a
center frequency of 10.7 MHz +/-30 kHz. The fact that all the filters
exhibit the same response wouldn't surprise me if you purchased them at the
same time, they probably came from the same batch, and the tolerance is
likely based on batch to batch differences caused by process variations
rather than random variations within a batch.
It is a little harder to understand/explain the fact that the low
frequency side runs out of dynamic range at -60 dB and the high side gets
there at 5 dB higher at -55 dB. Since these filters are symmetrical, have
you tried swapping the input and output by turning the filter around at the
fixture?
Also, you haven't really detailed your circuit for matching the 50 ohm of
the VNA to the 330 ohm of the filter. If I were doing it, I would use a
minimum loss matching pad. This would consist of a 54.281014769949586 ohm
resistor (it is the value that the calculator gave - LOL) across the input
and output coax to the VNA and a series resistor of 304.01167774007837 ohms
up to the filter input/output. This would give a loss of 13.867585162369918
dB on each side. 5% values: 56 and 300. 1% values: 54.9 and 301. I am sure
the 5% values would be just fine. You could bridge the filter location with
a short on your test fixture to determine the exact loss through the pads,
then place the filter in the fixture and easily find the filter insertion
loss.
|
Re: NanoVNA firmvare, compiled by DiSlord #firmware with MiniSD support
#firmware
Excellent! Thanks again for all the hard work. On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 10:27 AM, DiSlord<dislordlive@...> wrote: In my test i use Samsung EVO Plus 128Gb HD XL Samsung EVO Plus 32Gb SD HC Kingston MicroSD HC1 16Gb All worked, detected 128Gb flash not write (used exFat filesystem, not supported), but card answer and read sectors ok All others card answer and work My card powerup log on 1 screenshot SD_SendCmd err CMD0, 0xFF, 0x00000000
CMD0 Ok
CMD8 Ok
CMD8 0xAA010000
CMD8 Ok, run ACMD41
ACMD41 99
ACMD41 0x0080FFC0
CardType 4 My card powerup log on 2 screenshot CMD0 Ok
CMD8 Ok
CMD8 0xAA010000
CMD8 Ok, run ACMD41
ACMD41 99
ACMD41 0x0080FFC0
CardType 4 Try made several screenshots, possible card can`t powerup from first 2 commands
|
Thin brass solders easily with regular electronic solder (at least it did before they took the lead out). You might want to tin it along the edges you are soldering together. Also cuts fairly easily with ordinary scissors.
|
On run external program scan, calibretion data always rebuild, and use interpolation
Do not pay attention to it, if start stop freq some, no difference
|
I never change the frequency range (center/span) - at least, not intentionally. I really only expect to be using this to sort IF filters, and for these a range from 10.4 to 11MHz or so works pretty well. If I leave everything alone and just insert a filter in my socket, the device seems to execute a spontaneous scan, "C1" stays in caps, and if I look on the device's screen, I still see the tilt (harder to read, as it's on the small device screen, but if on the left side the trace matches a horizontal grid line, on the right it goes right half way between two, and higher). If I run the scan from the Saver app, "C1" changes to "c1" but readings stay very much the same, as far as I can tell. <> Virus-free. www.avg.com <> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:13 AM Bill Cromwell <wrcromwell@...> wrote: Hi,
I wonder if before recall a saved calibration we should do a reset first.
73,
Bill KU8H
On 5/24/20 1:58 PM, Radu Bogdan Dicher wrote:
Larry - I re-executed the calibration over 10.4 through 11MHz, saved to
"1," and I always recall it before measuring. However, the letter changes
every time I start the scan (from "C1" to "c1") - I press sweep, flop!, it
changes. Not sure why, as far as I can tell I have the same settings on
device and computer application (center: 10.7MHz, span: 600kHz), and I
RECALL 1 it every time I prepare for scanning.
David - yes, I am using 56.2ohm and 301ohms, 1% tolerance resistors. It's
the closest I could come up with by calculating for minimum loss. The
filters are 150kHz Muratas (JAs), but I also measured about four different
bandwidths, and from multiple sources. I have at least 7 or 8 different
batches and they all have the 5dB difference L/R. I think my calibration is
not getting applied, based upon Larry's feedback above.
Still trying to figure out how to maintain calibration settings while
executing the scan.
Thank you both,
Radu.
<
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 6:19 AM <david.hostetler@...> wrote:
What I see in the plot that you posted is a filter that is about 170 kHz
wide at the -3 dB points and centered at 10.715 MHz. This is consistent
with a Murata SFELF10M7HA00-B0 that has a spec of 180 +/-40 kHz and a
center frequency of 10.7 MHz +/-30 kHz. The fact that all the filters
exhibit the same response wouldn't surprise me if you purchased them at
the
same time, they probably came from the same batch, and the tolerance is
likely based on batch to batch differences caused by process variations
rather than random variations within a batch.
It is a little harder to understand/explain the fact that the low
frequency side runs out of dynamic range at -60 dB and the high side
gets
there at 5 dB higher at -55 dB. Since these filters are symmetrical,
have
you tried swapping the input and output by turning the filter around at
the
fixture?
Also, you haven't really detailed your circuit for matching the 50 ohm
of
the VNA to the 330 ohm of the filter. If I were doing it, I would use a
minimum loss matching pad. This would consist of a 54.281014769949586
ohm
resistor (it is the value that the calculator gave - LOL) across the
input
and output coax to the VNA and a series resistor of 304.01167774007837
ohms
up to the filter input/output. This would give a loss of
13.867585162369918
dB on each side. 5% values: 56 and 300. 1% values: 54.9 and 301. I am
sure
the 5% values would be just fine. You could bridge the filter location
with
a short on your test fixture to determine the exact loss through the
pads,
then place the filter in the fixture and easily find the filter
insertion
loss.
--
bark less - wag more
<> Virus-free. www.avg.com <> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
|
Dave,
I am curious how you soldered (braized?) the brass shim. I've been thinking about making my own shields (not for my nano) but am a bit intimidated by my lack of experience with brass.
Thanks,
Dave L
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 07:04 AM, Dave B wrote:
Hi just spent a UK windy afternoon confined to my radio 'shack' , so decided
to upgrade the screening on my 'basic' clone nanoVNA to see if the INPUT
'noise' could be reduced.
I made the screens out of some 'shim' brass foil and formed them round some
srbp (Tufnol) formers THAT I made first.
I am pleased with the improvement that just a couple of hours 'metal bashing'
has produced.
Hopefully this will inspire others to have a go?
Dave
|
Hi,
I wonder if before recall a saved calibration we should do a reset first.
73,
Bill KU8H
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 5/24/20 1:58 PM, Radu Bogdan Dicher wrote: Larry - I re-executed the calibration over 10.4 through 11MHz, saved to
"1," and I always recall it before measuring. However, the letter changes
every time I start the scan (from "C1" to "c1") - I press sweep, flop!, it
changes. Not sure why, as far as I can tell I have the same settings on
device and computer application (center: 10.7MHz, span: 600kHz), and I
RECALL 1 it every time I prepare for scanning.
David - yes, I am using 56.2ohm and 301ohms, 1% tolerance resistors. It's
the closest I could come up with by calculating for minimum loss. The
filters are 150kHz Muratas (JAs), but I also measured about four different
bandwidths, and from multiple sources. I have at least 7 or 8 different
batches and they all have the 5dB difference L/R. I think my calibration is
not getting applied, based upon Larry's feedback above.
Still trying to figure out how to maintain calibration settings while
executing the scan.
Thank you both,
Radu.
<>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 6:19 AM <david.hostetler@...> wrote:
What I see in the plot that you posted is a filter that is about 170 kHz
wide at the -3 dB points and centered at 10.715 MHz. This is consistent
with a Murata SFELF10M7HA00-B0 that has a spec of 180 +/-40 kHz and a
center frequency of 10.7 MHz +/-30 kHz. The fact that all the filters
exhibit the same response wouldn't surprise me if you purchased them at the
same time, they probably came from the same batch, and the tolerance is
likely based on batch to batch differences caused by process variations
rather than random variations within a batch.
It is a little harder to understand/explain the fact that the low
frequency side runs out of dynamic range at -60 dB and the high side gets
there at 5 dB higher at -55 dB. Since these filters are symmetrical, have
you tried swapping the input and output by turning the filter around at the
fixture?
Also, you haven't really detailed your circuit for matching the 50 ohm of
the VNA to the 330 ohm of the filter. If I were doing it, I would use a
minimum loss matching pad. This would consist of a 54.281014769949586 ohm
resistor (it is the value that the calculator gave - LOL) across the input
and output coax to the VNA and a series resistor of 304.01167774007837 ohms
up to the filter input/output. This would give a loss of 13.867585162369918
dB on each side. 5% values: 56 and 300. 1% values: 54.9 and 301. I am sure
the 5% values would be just fine. You could bridge the filter location with
a short on your test fixture to determine the exact loss through the pads,
then place the filter in the fixture and easily find the filter insertion
loss.
--
bark less - wag more
|
Big letter mean used calibration data stored in flash
If you change frequency, or use multisegment scan from NanoVNA saver or another program, calibration table rebuild and use interpolated values from main data
Big 'C' mean not interpolated values
Small 'c' interpolated
In most cases mo matter, interpolation good work if start/stop freq range not big
|
Larry - I re-executed the calibration over 10.4 through 11MHz, saved to
"1," and I always recall it before measuring. However, the letter changes
every time I start the scan (from "C1" to "c1") - I press sweep, flop!, it
changes. Not sure why, as far as I can tell I have the same settings on
device and computer application (center: 10.7MHz, span: 600kHz), and I
RECALL 1 it every time I prepare for scanning.
David - yes, I am using 56.2ohm and 301ohms, 1% tolerance resistors. It's
the closest I could come up with by calculating for minimum loss. The
filters are 150kHz Muratas (JAs), but I also measured about four different
bandwidths, and from multiple sources. I have at least 7 or 8 different
batches and they all have the 5dB difference L/R. I think my calibration is
not getting applied, based upon Larry's feedback above.
Still trying to figure out how to maintain calibration settings while
executing the scan.
Thank you both,
Radu.
<>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 6:19 AM <david.hostetler@...> wrote: What I see in the plot that you posted is a filter that is about 170 kHz
wide at the -3 dB points and centered at 10.715 MHz. This is consistent
with a Murata SFELF10M7HA00-B0 that has a spec of 180 +/-40 kHz and a
center frequency of 10.7 MHz +/-30 kHz. The fact that all the filters
exhibit the same response wouldn't surprise me if you purchased them at the
same time, they probably came from the same batch, and the tolerance is
likely based on batch to batch differences caused by process variations
rather than random variations within a batch.
It is a little harder to understand/explain the fact that the low
frequency side runs out of dynamic range at -60 dB and the high side gets
there at 5 dB higher at -55 dB. Since these filters are symmetrical, have
you tried swapping the input and output by turning the filter around at the
fixture?
Also, you haven't really detailed your circuit for matching the 50 ohm of
the VNA to the 330 ohm of the filter. If I were doing it, I would use a
minimum loss matching pad. This would consist of a 54.281014769949586 ohm
resistor (it is the value that the calculator gave - LOL) across the input
and output coax to the VNA and a series resistor of 304.01167774007837 ohms
up to the filter input/output. This would give a loss of 13.867585162369918
dB on each side. 5% values: 56 and 300. 1% values: 54.9 and 301. I am sure
the 5% values would be just fine. You could bridge the filter location with
a short on your test fixture to determine the exact loss through the pads,
then place the filter in the fixture and easily find the filter insertion
loss.
|
At HF the Anritsu tee is likely not going to be that much better a cal
as the supplied SOL. To test it cal with the ANritsu Tee and then
measure the supplies SOL. Likely any difference you see will be
due to the N to SMA adaptors adding length to the calibration plane.
At upper UHF it may make a difference.
Generally while good there is a finite level of accuracy available
and you have to go to extremes to verify it.
Allison
-----------------
No direct email, it goes to bit bucket due address harvesting in groups.IO
|
You want to calibrate with as nearly to test jig configuration as possible.
For example, when measuring with alligator clips, I calibrate using alligator clips.
|
Re: NanoVNA firmvare, compiled by DiSlord #firmware with MiniSD support
#firmware
Hi DiSlord and Larry,
Thanks for all info.
DiSlord,? I did flash the latest? 0.9.1 firmware initially, but to be sure and in case you updated the 0.9.1 release I loaded the one you gave me the link to and flasherd it, same result.?? When I have the memory card inserted in the NanoVNa and start "Terra Term" it immediately reports :
SD_SendCmd err CMD0, 0xFF, 0x00000000
?SD_SendCmd err CMD0, 0xFF, 0x00000000
CardType 0
And I also get a report from my system that a portable storage device has been connected to it.? So I'm afraid that , for some reason, my SD card that is marked MicroSD HC I (Capital i) 8 GB not is detected by your firmware. ? So I have to wait untill I receive the ordered new card and see what happens then. If it's not working either, I will buy one of your type of cards.
Larry, thanks for your suggestion.
Best regards
Jos
|
Re: NanoVNA firmvare, compiled by DiSlord #firmware with MiniSD support
#firmware
|
Oristo
