开云体育

Hi - I’m a new user and successfully loaded the latest version of Dislords firmware on a new Nanovna-H4 and installed the latest version of nanovna-saver on a W10 pc.
The nanovna-H4 worked a treat standalone on Ch0 on an antenna right after calibrating and saving in the range 50kHz to 900MHz.

I then successfully connected it to the PC SW and after calibrating over the 70cm band I successfully scanned the same antenna with good results displayed.
Unfortunately, while viewing the output swr plot I used the mouse wheel to see what effect it had and the frequency range shown on the graph changed but seemed to lock up at a low setting.
I re-scanned the antenna but this time I could not get the correct frequency range shown on the graph display with an error message warning data out of range. I re scanned with only SWR chosen in the display settings but same again.
I have tried in vain to get it working correctly since, including calibrating and scanning over 50kHz to 900MHz rather than the 70cm band.

I thought I’d fire up the saver software again but it still comes up with the same message after scanning.
The two data columns seem to show that the scans ran successfully, it’s just that the display fault shows every time with no swr plot and the frequency range stuck at a low setting.
Is it possible to reset the sw defaults and start again with any saved settings restored to default or is it a different problem?
The nanovna-H4 still works ok standalone and comes up with the correct calibration settings when switched on.

I have searched the forum for clues but found none that really helped.

Any help would be very welcome.

Thanks - John, EI1EM

In dubio, abstine

Great work Dave, much appreciated.

Have you thought about trying combinations of mixed material cores?

Say 1x#31 + 1x#43, and maybe 2+2 combo?

Always been on my todo list to try that, see if you do in fact get improved
impedance, lower loss, saturation, etc across more bands.



Thanks,

Chris.

On Mon, 18 Jan 2021, 11:42 am David Eckhardt, <davearea51a@...>
wrote:

OK guys and gals, attached is my final contribution (try me.....) to the
CMC choke evaluation. The bottom line I believe is that there is no

single

choke that addresses everything. Coax is much easier as the CM currents

on

the outside of the shield have no effect on the internal fields (assuming
good integrity of the shield material). All one needs to accomplish is

to

choke off and/or dissipate them before they have a chance to enter the
antenna and introduce local noise sources to the receiver. My open wire
feeders are a bit different. I certainly also require getting rid of the
CM currents on the open wire feeders, but I also strive to assure balance
of the DM CMC output port (equal amplitudes with opposite phases of the
current and voltage).

QUESTION on MY PART: Do my measured loss numbers made in a 50 ± j0 ohm
system impedance (as best I could) correlate with core or conductor

heating

at power in my antenna system impedance? TBD (when the bands are dead).


Please see the attachment. Of all I wound and tested, my choice would be
the single 31 material core (most right in the table), but I doubt it

will

handle the legal limit power. Also, likely, all these could be made to
perform better at the upper HF frequencies by winding fewer turns on the
cores. As I mentioned earlier, my main interest falls from 160 through
(maybe) 30-meters. So I attempt to cram as many bifilar turns on my CMCs
as I can without overlapping windings.

Yet another consideration is the system impedance in which the CMCs are
installed. Therefore, I made a measurement of my 450-foot long doublet
with the open wire feeders in the shack where I connect the CMCs. I

used a

small instrument not connected to anything other than the open wire

feeders

in the shack to make the measurements - the RF Vector Impedance Analyzer,
Model N2061SA. I could have used one of the NANOs, but the frequency
change operations on that particular instrument were far easier than
setting and calibrating each individual sweep using the NANOs. Forgive

me,

please........ I'll also attach that set of measurements just to scope
what I'm dealing with (40-meters is scary). You guys and gals who use
resonant systems and coaxial feeders have it easy? But, since I have the
instruments to make the measurements, I prefer the more difficult path

to a

'will oiled' antenna system. Besides, I don't want to support a feedline
and set of wires for each band even though I have the real estate
(40-acres, but typical of the Front Range of the Rockies, not much is
flat).

Dave - W?LEV

On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 9:47 PM Jeff Anderson <jca1955@...>
wrote:

...and attached please find the promised photos:

- Jeff, k6jca

--
*Dave - W?LEV*
*Just Let Darwin Work*

OK guys and gals, attached is my final contribution (try me.....) to the
CMC choke evaluation. The bottom line I believe is that there is no single
choke that addresses everything. Coax is much easier as the CM currents on
the outside of the shield have no effect on the internal fields (assuming
good integrity of the shield material). All one needs to accomplish is to
choke off and/or dissipate them before they have a chance to enter the
antenna and introduce local noise sources to the receiver. My open wire
feeders are a bit different. I certainly also require getting rid of the
CM currents on the open wire feeders, but I also strive to assure balance
of the DM CMC output port (equal amplitudes with opposite phases of the
current and voltage).

QUESTION on MY PART: Do my measured loss numbers made in a 50 ± j0 ohm
system impedance (as best I could) correlate with core or conductor heating
at power in my antenna system impedance? TBD (when the bands are dead).


Please see the attachment. Of all I wound and tested, my choice would be
the single 31 material core (most right in the table), but I doubt it will
handle the legal limit power. Also, likely, all these could be made to
perform better at the upper HF frequencies by winding fewer turns on the
cores. As I mentioned earlier, my main interest falls from 160 through
(maybe) 30-meters. So I attempt to cram as many bifilar turns on my CMCs
as I can without overlapping windings.

Yet another consideration is the system impedance in which the CMCs are
installed. Therefore, I made a measurement of my 450-foot long doublet
with the open wire feeders in the shack where I connect the CMCs. I used a
small instrument not connected to anything other than the open wire feeders
in the shack to make the measurements - the RF Vector Impedance Analyzer,
Model N2061SA. I could have used one of the NANOs, but the frequency
change operations on that particular instrument were far easier than
setting and calibrating each individual sweep using the NANOs. Forgive me,
please........ I'll also attach that set of measurements just to scope
what I'm dealing with (40-meters is scary). You guys and gals who use
resonant systems and coaxial feeders have it easy? But, since I have the
instruments to make the measurements, I prefer the more difficult path to a
'will oiled' antenna system. Besides, I don't want to support a feedline
and set of wires for each band even though I have the real estate
(40-acres, but typical of the Front Range of the Rockies, not much is
flat).

Dave - W?LEV

On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 9:47 PM Jeff Anderson <jca1955@...>
wrote:

...and attached please find the promised photos:

- Jeff, k6jca

--
*Dave - W?LEV*
*Just Let Darwin Work*

Hi - I’m a new user and successfully loaded the latest version of Dislords firmware on a new Nanovna-H4 and installed the latest version of nanovna-saver on a W10 pc.
The nanovna-H4 worked a treat standalone on Ch0 on an antenna right after calibrating and saving in the range 50kHz to 900MHz.

I then successfully connected it to the PC SW and after calibrating over the 70cm band I successfully scanned the same antenna with good results displayed.
Unfortunately, while viewing the output swr plot I used the mouse wheel to see what effect it had and the frequency range shown on the graph changed but seemed to lock up at a low setting.
I re-scanned the antenna but this time I could not get the correct frequency range shown on the graph display with an error message warning data out of range. I re scanned with only SWR chosen in the display settings but same again.
I have tried in vain to get it working correctly since, including calibrating and scanning over 50kHz to 900MHz rather than the 70cm band.

I thought I’d fire up the saver software again but it still comes up with the same message after scanning.
The two data columns seem to show that the scans ran successfully, it’s just that the display fault shows every time with no swr plot and the frequency range stuck at a low setting.
Is it possible to reset the sw defaults and start again with any saved settings restored to default or is it a different problem?
The nanovna-H4 still works ok standalone and comes up with the correct calibration settings when switched on.

I have searched the forum for clues but found none that really helped.

Any help would be very welcome.

Thanks - John, EI1EM

In dubio, abstine

Hi - I’m a new user and successfully loaded the latest version of Dislords firmware on a new Nanovna-H4 and installed the latest version of nanovna-saver on a W10 pc.
The nanovna-H4 worked a treat standalone on Ch0 on an antenna right after calibrating and saving in the range 50kHz to 900MHz.

I then successfully connected it to the PC SW and after calibrating over the 70cm band I successfully scanned the same antenna with good results displayed.
Unfortunately, while viewing the output swr plot I used the mouse wheel to see what effect it had and the frequency range shown on the graph changed but seemed to lock up at a low setting.
I re-scanned the antenna but this time I could not get the correct frequency range shown on the graph display with an error message warning data out of range. I re scanned with only SWR chosen in the display settings but same again.
I have tried in vain to get it working correctly since, including calibrating and scanning over 50kHz to 900MHz rather than the 70cm band.

I thought I’d fire up the saver software again but it still comes up with the same message after scanning.
The two data columns seem to show that the scans ran successfully, it’s just that the display fault shows every time with no swr plot and the frequency range stuck at a low setting.
Is it possible to reset the sw defaults and start again with any saved settings restored to default or is it a different problem?
The nanovna-H4 still works ok standalone and comes up with the correct calibration settings when switched on.

I have searched the forum for clues but found none that really helped.

Any help would be very welcome.

Thanks - John, EI1EM

In dubio, abstine

Sorry, but the 'Saver app does not have that softswitch - only the
Nanovna-APP by OneOfEleven.
You can try that application - get it from the releases area here:

It is set up by context menus - hover mouse over just about anything and
right-click.
Enjoy!

On Wednesday, January 20, 2021, 2:11:52 p.m. EST, John Owen-Jones <
joj006@...> wrote:

Hi Larry - thanks for the quick reply - it’s the Nanovna-saver SW -
couldn’t see any soft switch on the SW that I have - but then I’m a newbie
to this SW so still finding my around the SW settings.
.....John

In dubio, abstine

On 20 Jan 2021, at 18:47, Larry Rothman <nlroth@...> wrote:

? John,
What's the name of the PC s/w you're using? There are a few of them.
If it's the Nanovna-APP s/w, be sure you didn't disable the calibration
data - there's a soft switch along the top of the display.
...Larry

On Wednesday, January 20, 2021, 1:40:51 p.m. EST, John Owen-Jones <
joj006@...> wrote:

Hi - I’m a new user and successfully loaded the latest version of Dislords
firmware on a new Nanovna-H4 and installed the latest version of
nanovna-saver on a W10 pc.
The nanovna-H4 worked a treat standalone on Ch0 on an antenna right after
calibrating and saving in the range 50kHz to 900MHz.

I then successfully connected it to the PC SW and after calibrating over
the 70cm band I successfully scanned the same antenna with good results
displayed.
Unfortunately, while viewing the output swr plot I used the mouse wheel to
see what effect it had and the frequency range shown on the graph changed
but seemed to lock up at a low setting.
I re-scanned the antenna but this time I could not get the correct
frequency range shown on the graph display with an error message warning
data out of range. I re scanned with only SWR chosen in the display
settings but same again.
I have tried in vain to get it working correctly since, including
calibrating and scanning over 50kHz to 900MHz rather than the 70cm band.

I thought I’d fire up the saver software again but it still comes up with
the same message after scanning.
The two data columns seem to show that the scans ran successfully, it’s
just that the display fault shows every time with no swr plot and the
frequency range stuck at a low setting.
Is it possible to reset the sw defaults and start again with any saved
settings restored to default or is it a different problem?
The nanovna-H4 still works ok standalone and comes up with the correct
calibration settings when switched on.

I have searched the forum for clues but found none that really helped.

Any help would be very welcome.

Thanks - John, EI1EM

In dubio, abstine

Dragan,

Are those catalogues, by any chance, available online?

My Thomson Ferrinox catalog is on paper, from 1985. If you need any
specific data I could scan the relevant pages for you, but the entire
catalog is nearly 100 pages, and I'm lazy...

I also have an Amidon catalog on paper, from 1995, but Amidon offers the
same contents online.

All the other catalogs I have are in digital format, I can send them to
you easily: Thornton, Cosmo, Epcos, Fair-Rite, Ferroxcube, Ferronics,
Laird, Delta Magnetics, MMPA, National Magnetics, several TDK catalogs, and
various individual datasheets.

Most of them can still be found online, anyway.

Had no luck finding any info ...

It takes time! To save time, I can send you the whole package. I don't
know if it works to send that through the group, as private message, or if
it's better to use direct e-mail.

Some of those manufacturers are out of business. But the data can still be
useful.

> I have attached a s2p file for a yoke from an old TV, I have

one (somewhere) from a CRT monitor. It would be interesting to
see if there are any major differences.

Those curves look reasonable for a material having ?i=1100, like that
Thomson material I mentioned.

Manfred