开云体育

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 08:28 AM, @Alezis wrote:

I decided to make a test because I did try to tune an antenna in a vehicule
this past afternoon from 28-29MHz and the readings I was getting with the VNA
were way out compared to the radio. My VNA was displaying SWR of 3 over and
the radio displayed 1.4... I did reset/recalibrate and still same result.

So I did try to compare my VNA with my IC7300 on my home station HF antenna.
Sometime reading are out but most of the time, really close or near perfect
match.

Hi Alezis

Does your ICOM have an antenna tuner of any kind built in I wonder ? .. that would change everything.

Also, when you move the antenna between the ICOM and the VNA is the way the coax is grounded changed at all ? .. some coax/antenna arrangements can have a big dependency on the grounding method (if any is used), but knowing nothing of your setup I can only guess at the moment.

Is the coax acting like an antenna in anyway do you think ? .. ie not entirely baluned/choked from the antenna.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 07:59 AM, @Alezis wrote:

Stangely, v0.1.57 does not seem to crash anymore when I pick an invalid com
port...

Well, that version is from like years ago so I can't exactly remember what it was I changed ;)

That was when I was making some big changes to my serial port code.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 11:05 AM, RandMental wrote:

Dear @DiSLord, @OneOfEleven @Holger and others

I am very impressed with the progress made on both the -H and -H4 firmware
and the NanoVNA-Saver and the work you are doing.
..
I thus want to urge that we pause chasing new features and higher performance,
and work together to release and test stable versions of the firmware and PC
programs. ..

I would also recommend to update the individual githubs with latest stable source versions such other potential contributors may test/debug/improve.
Great work guys, congratulation!

Hello!

With the recent excellent firmwares by DiSlord where the ADC is on the 192kHz sampling frequency we now have very good (very low) noise floor level.

As I read DiSlord's plans - he wants to make the IF higher than the current (recent?) 12kHz, he sees some further advantages in that move.

However, as the LPFs (or are them simplistic BPFs?) after the mixers are just 6dB/octave (a single RC-network), is it good indeed to bring the to be digitised signal's spectrum closer to the sampling frequency? Now the 12kHz IF is reasonably far/low away from the ADC's 192kHz. Making IF equals to 28kHz would (as I see it) create more artifacts from the unfiltered HF-noises in the IF signal.

I think the IF should be related to the ADC's sampling frequency - the sampling frequency should be an even multiple of the IF value. The recent 12kHz is exactly one sixteenth of the 192kHz. I guess - untill the LPF is made more steep - we should not increase the IF value.

Please comment.

Anton

Dear @DiSLord, @OneOfEleven @Holger and others

I am very impressed with the progress made on both the -H and -H4 firmware and the NanoVNA-Saver and the work you are doing.

However, I want to raise a concern as I see this project go the way of many other open-source community projects where the energy and initiative starts running low before the project and development has been stabilised for general use. The last few weeks have especially been chaotic for the normal users, with various releases trying to maximise performance.

I thus want to urge that we pause chasing new features and higher performance, and work together to release and test stable versions of the firmware and PC programs. If we don't we risk losing the support of the many users that have no interest in development and maximum performance, but just want a stable, usable NanoVNA for their RF and antenna projects work.

I tried using Nanovna-Saver and the TDR function and it isn't apparent on how to accomplish this. I was hoping that there was some step by step procedure out there I could follow. Is there anyone that could walk me through the steps to do this?

Thanks

Mike WA3O

@OneOfEleven,

my nanovna-h v3.3 display is pretty much matching what nanovna.exe application displays (something I had a hard time to acheive with nanovna saver, reading were always higher than on the VNA). What I see on the screen of the vna with your firmware is pretty close or spot on with the nanovna app.

I decided to make a test because I did try to tune an antenna in a vehicule this past afternoon from 28-29MHz and the readings I was getting with the VNA were way out compared to the radio. My VNA was displaying SWR of 3 over and the radio displayed 1.4... I did reset/recalibrate and still same result.

So I did try to compare my VNA with my IC7300 on my home station HF antenna. Sometime reading are out but most of the time, really close or near perfect match.

Where I am having some dispecrancies between my radio SWR and my nanovna-h running your firmware mod specially in low frequency like 3-4MHz. Reading from the radio show 1.15 SWR and nanovna display 1.67. And strangely, on 28MHz my home antenna is getting the same readings on the VNA and radio (where as when I was trying on the mobile, it was way out).

What can cause this behaviour (not sure if it is related to the firmware you are working on though, this is why I ask).

See attachment for comparing both VNA and radio readings.

Thank you !

On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 12:24 PM, OneOfEleven wrote:

I'll update the comms logging to show useful info before the lockups Alezis.

Just having a break from it at the moment with doing others things.

I don't know why but v0.1.57 does not seem to crash anymore when I pick the wrong com port. It just disconnect now so I guess it is fixed ??

I've waited and no lockup or greyed out application ! All does seem to respond !

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 05:48 PM, Larry Rothman wrote:

Have you tried looking at the system and application logs when you get the
lockup?

Stangely, v0.1.57 does not seem to crash anymore when I pick an invalid com port...

Hi hugen!

Are you planning to sell the tinySA also on Taobao? I prefer to order there, better shipping...

Xie Xie,
Hans

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 02:57 PM, Larry Rothman wrote:

Ah, undocumented debug commands?
I really need to find time to update my updated copy of Cho's userguide and
command line doc with all the new abilities.?

I'm still trying to find the Easter egg....? ;-)

... Larry

I remove it on normal release, this command used for change settings on fly, and see results.

PS i also remove old debug command like stat, test, port

ps - Life was a lot more simple, when I wrote all the code myself and did not use Github

:) It was a different complexity of code, I guess..

The Eclipse has got a "Program manager" in the left pane, where you can select which projects are "active". I have about 50 projects there, clicking on a project you can open it or close. An opened is the active one..

On 8/4/20 12:44 PM, Mike via groups.io wrote:

Hello Group,
Is there any tutorials on measuring phasing harness for Chrisman phased verticals?

Wouldn't it just be using something like the TDR function (e.g. in NanoVNA-Saver) to get the right electrical length?

You could also do a thru measurement for phase and get the right. for 1/4 wave monopoles, 1/4 wave apart, you need 84 and 161 degrees.

for other impedances and antennas, you need to calculate it - see attached excel spreadsheet.

Ah, undocumented debug commands?
I really need to find time to update my updated copy of Cho's userguide and command line doc with all the new abilities.?

I'm still trying to find the Easter egg....? ;-)

... Larry


On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 at 4:31 PM, DiSlord<dislordlive@...> wrote: On Tue, Aug? 4, 2020 at 01:26 PM, OneOfEleven wrote:

I like the 4kHz bandwidth in your FW DiSlord. It scans faster :)

It can be ~ x1.5 faster, but i use more safe mode (not overclock i2c bus, and use more stable delays) my device allow 900k i2c (400k default) and use more faster timings allow increase speed from 520ms to 320ms.

You can test more faster i2c (900k)
Run in console 'i 10 10 23 30'

and after set delays
't 0 2'
't 1 2'

Have you tried looking at the system and application logs when you get the lockup?



On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 at 5:11 PM, cldp@...<cldp@...> wrote: On Mon, Aug? 3, 2020 at 03:07 PM, @Alezis wrote:

On Mon, Aug? 3, 2020 at 04:01 AM, OneOfEleven wrote:

Thank you for letting me know.

I've been trying to find the problem, but I highly suspect the bluetooth
driver has a bug from what I've read around the net.
I've set up 4 different types of serial USB to try to find the problem,
including the same type of bluetooth comport you have Alzeis, but I can't

yet

reproduce the lock up, I get no lock ups. I won't stop looking until I find
the cure.

I am not sure but I think this serial link over bluetooth comes from a Samsung
phone USB driver...

umm... I might add that it might be a HP driver but I cannot find the executable driver to download and you could test.

Here is what I found.

Vendor ID of the serial link over bluetooth lead to these page which seem to point a HP driver (of coure all the sites results want to install an application that is supposed to correct wrong or missing driver rather than the driver download itself...)

On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 03:07 PM, @Alezis wrote:

On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 04:01 AM, OneOfEleven wrote:

Thank you for letting me know.

I've been trying to find the problem, but I highly suspect the bluetooth
driver has a bug from what I've read around the net.
I've set up 4 different types of serial USB to try to find the problem,
including the same type of bluetooth comport you have Alzeis, but I can't

yet

reproduce the lock up, I get no lock ups. I won't stop looking until I find
the cure.

I am not sure but I think this serial link over bluetooth comes from a Samsung
phone USB driver...

umm... I might add that it might be a HP driver but I cannot find the executable driver to download and you could test.

Here is what I found.

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 09:31 PM, DiSlord wrote:

It can be ~ x1.5 faster, but i use more safe mode (not overclock i2c bus, and
use more stable delays) my device allow 900k i2c (400k default) and use more
faster timings allow increase speed from 520ms to 320ms.

You can test more faster i2c (900k)
Run in console 'i 10 10 23 30'

and after set delays
't 0 2'
't 1 2'

That works well, no apparent problems from what I can see !

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 01:26 PM, OneOfEleven wrote:

I like the 4kHz bandwidth in your FW DiSlord. It scans faster :)

It can be ~ x1.5 faster, but i use more safe mode (not overclock i2c bus, and use more stable delays) my device allow 900k i2c (400k default) and use more faster timings allow increase speed from 520ms to 320ms.

You can test more faster i2c (900k)
Run in console 'i 10 10 23 30'

and after set delays
't 0 2'
't 1 2'

OK well maybe it was the ribbon. Because it wasn't working with the battery. But now it is. I got it. She's fully working. The888store can get bent. Thank you for your help guys. I love this little tool. I'll end up buying a much better one but I will be active in the group and as I learn I hope to share and maybe even help you guys back. Take it easy and God bless!!!