开云体育

The ability to send the edited post or not is only available to moderators with the proper permission or to owners of groups.

Dave - VE3HTC / VE3DTR

I saw an message that made me think that there is a TDR function available for my NanoVNA-H v3.4

Can someone point me to this firmware?

..jpw J P Watters
KC9KKO
Morris, IL USA

Hi Larry

Yes! That was the answer. It now calibrates with both programs and the results are the same both with the Windows programs and compared to the NanoVNA itself when used on its own.
I watched a YouTube video about the update and followed it meticulously but there was nothing else mentioned after calibrating the screen.
It's actually very nice that the NanoVNA App allows communication without having to bother starting something like Putty.

Thanks once again.

73,
John

you made measure on Bandwidth 4k, old firmware work on 1k by default (need set to 1k as minimum for compare)
Old firmware measure on 8mA by default (but this give not linear results on long span range) set Power to 8mA after calibration reset (in CALIBRATE->POWER)

I belong to numerous other groups and none of those with message editing turned-on have the option to "Save without sending". All I see is "Save and Send", "Cancel", or "Delete". That must be another setting the group owner can make, if, they desire to do so.
--
*Don - W3DRM*

I updated the firmware, then I ran "clearconfig" as the next step.
Then I went through the calibration, starting with resetting the calibration as the first step (as per the regular calibration instructions).

/Andreas - SA0ZAP

Did you press Reset or to calibrating?
When updating firmware, do you run the clearconfig 1234 command prior to recalibrating?


I have noticed that on my NanoVNA-H v3.4 the latest FW versions things
have looked different after a calibration than it used to.

I decided to do a comparison of some FW versions to see if that could
make things clearer.

I am no expert so maybe my tests are not performed in a good way, I
tried to search the forum to get some idea of how to verify the
performance. I came to the conclusion that the S21 noise floor was one
measurement that people seem to be comparing.

So I have attached screenshots taken after the following procedure:
After each FW change I ran "clearconfig" trying to make sure there was
no stale config data causing issues and also the default settings for
that FW is then used.

Calibration was made like this:

Pigtail connected to port 1 at all times
SMA-to-BNC-50ohm termination connected to port 2 except for through calibration

Connect "open" - calibrate for open
Connect "short" - calibrate for short
Connect "load" - calibrate for load - then calibrate for isolation
Remove female-to-female adapter that was used with pigtail
Remove the termination on port 2 and connect pigtail - calibrate for through

Then the termination/load was once more connected to port1 and port2
and the screenshot was then taken using NanoVNA saver.

The filenames describes what FW was used, for example:
nanovna-0-900-dislord-1.0.48-fw.png
This would be from DiSlord's repository - version 1.0.48


To me the most prominent difference is the change on the S21 LOGMAG
measurement that is almost a flat line on the edy555 FWs and also on
hugen-0.4.5-4 but on the rest of my tests there seems to be a higher
noise floor. But also note that there are two hugen-1.0.45 screenshots
attached and they vary quite a bit so I am not sure how reliable my
tests have been.

This was what I had noticed and what got me started doing some tests.

I have also noticed a difference on the S11 noise floor which looks
best on edy555-0.8.0 FW, and I have compiled and tested many
intermediate FWs from DiSlord's repo but I think I will expand on that
in a separate post as this is too long already.


I don't know if my very non-scientific tests are relevant or not,
maybe it does not matter much for the use of the NanoVNA and I should
not care, your opinions and thoughts are very welcome.

/Andreas - SA0ZAP

John,
Did you clear the memory immediately after flashing?
Use the command console using putty or teraterm and run the 'clearconfig 1234' command then recal your touch and RF on the device


On Sun., 7 Mar. 2021 at 9:16 a.m., John Tyler<john@...> wrote: Hi
Yesterday I uploaded 1.0.45 firmware from DisLord to my H4. Everything went fine and stand alone there are no problems. I then connected to NanoVNA Saver 3.8. I calibrated using that program as I have done before but the SWR trace of my antenna was nothing like I knew it should be. It appeared to be resonant everywhere which of course was rubbish. After finding, with help, the NanoVNA App this morning I tried calibrating with that- exactly the same. I calibrated the NanoVNA and then switched to using that calibration with the program rather than the App calibration and it was good. So my question is what I have I done wrong and why doesn't it calibrate correctly with either of those Windows programs?

Thanks for any help.
John

Hi Bert
In NanoVNA Saver I used the calibration wizard which is what I've always done before the firmware update. It went through fine, showing no errors, just calibrating Port 0. I didn't do anything with Port 1 because I didn't think of it. With the NanoVNA App, which I only started trying this morning, I couldn't find any wizard so I just clicked the buttons. Again I only calibrated Port 0. The odd thing I noticed with that program is that after doing the measurements I could save the calibration and all the measurements had a tick showing that they had been done but I couldn't find a kind of 'finish' button. That program allows me to switch between using the calibration file on the VNA or the one produced by the program. Switching between the two shows that the VNA one gives good results but the one in the program doesn't.
I could go back to the original firmware but I really like the stand alone functions of the new version.

73,
John

Has anyone gotten nanovan saver to work on a Raspberry Pi?

Thank you, larry

Did you use the Calibration Wizard or did you just use the SOLT buttons? Did you get any errors when you did the calibration?

I couldn't get the SOLT butons to work on NanoVNA Saver v3.8. I also found that when using the Calibration Wizard, I had to put a 50 ohm termination on Port 1. If I tried calibrating without the extra termination, the calibration would fail.

Bert, VK3TU

I have noticed that on my NanoVNA-H v3.4 the latest FW versions things
have looked different after a calibration than it used to.

I decided to do a comparison of some FW versions to see if that could
make things clearer.

I am no expert so maybe my tests are not performed in a good way, I
tried to search the forum to get some idea of how to verify the
performance. I came to the conclusion that the S21 noise floor was one
measurement that people seem to be comparing.

So I have attached screenshots taken after the following procedure:
After each FW change I ran "clearconfig" trying to make sure there was
no stale config data causing issues and also the default settings for
that FW is then used.

Calibration was made like this:

Pigtail connected to port 1 at all times
SMA-to-BNC-50ohm termination connected to port 2 except for through calibration

Connect "open" - calibrate for open
Connect "short" - calibrate for short
Connect "load" - calibrate for load - then calibrate for isolation
Remove female-to-female adapter that was used with pigtail
Remove the termination on port 2 and connect pigtail - calibrate for through

Then the termination/load was once more connected to port1 and port2
and the screenshot was then taken using NanoVNA saver.

The filenames describes what FW was used, for example:
nanovna-0-900-dislord-1.0.48-fw.png
This would be from DiSlord's repository - version 1.0.48


To me the most prominent difference is the change on the S21 LOGMAG
measurement that is almost a flat line on the edy555 FWs and also on
hugen-0.4.5-4 but on the rest of my tests there seems to be a higher
noise floor. But also note that there are two hugen-1.0.45 screenshots
attached and they vary quite a bit so I am not sure how reliable my
tests have been.

This was what I had noticed and what got me started doing some tests.

I have also noticed a difference on the S11 noise floor which looks
best on edy555-0.8.0 FW, and I have compiled and tested many
intermediate FWs from DiSlord's repo but I think I will expand on that
in a separate post as this is too long already.


I don't know if my very non-scientific tests are relevant or not,
maybe it does not matter much for the use of the NanoVNA and I should
not care, your opinions and thoughts are very welcome.

/Andreas - SA0ZAP

Hi
Yesterday I uploaded 1.0.45 firmware from DisLord to my H4. Everything went fine and stand alone there are no problems. I then connected to NanoVNA Saver 3.8. I calibrated using that program as I have done before but the SWR trace of my antenna was nothing like I knew it should be. It appeared to be resonant everywhere which of course was rubbish. After finding, with help, the NanoVNA App this morning I tried calibrating with that- exactly the same. I calibrated the NanoVNA and then switched to using that calibration with the program rather than the App calibration and it was good. So my question is what I have I done wrong and why doesn't it calibrate correctly with either of those Windows programs?

Thanks for any help.
John

On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 09:14 AM, David J Taylor wrote:

But getting one post after another after another labelled "Edited...." can get
/very/ annoying for those of use using email!

On posts I have edited, at the end/bottom there's a choice to save without sending, or to save and send. (I choose the 'don't send' one).

And I have my group messages email set to "daily summary", so I only get one group email per day. Others may differ, but I have not found any topic that I needed to follow in 'real time'. Nightly is good enough.
--
Doug, K8RFT

Thanks very much for that. It seems to be fairly well hidden in the H firmware. Now I just need to work out how to use it!

John

$ 150, sales start this summer.

On 3/6/21 4:36 PM, David Geng wrote:

On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 03:44 PM, geoff M0ORE wrote:

SMA-RP

But still that connector is confusing, and the wifi SMA-RP does not look like that. I can't find that kind of SMA connector (both inner and outer thread), although I'm interested to know more about its performance, etc.

the other picture showed an sacrificial adapter screwed into it. So it's like the 2.92mm plug on the front of some test equipment, intended to have a jack-jack barrel installed in it.

On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 03:44 PM, geoff M0ORE wrote:

SMA-RP

But still that connector is confusing, and the wifi SMA-RP does not look like that. I can't find that kind of SMA connector (both inner and outer thread), although I'm interested to know more about its performance, etc.

Thanks will try tomorrow

Mike

Sent from Mail ( ) for Windows 10

*From:* W3DRM - Don ( drmcroberts@... )
*Sent:* Saturday, March 6, 2021 3:57 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [nanovna-users] nanovna saver

Here is the link to all of the Nano-Saver release on GitHub:

NOTE: The first thing you will see is v0.3.9. The EXE files for it have not been released as yet/

Scroll down the page until you see v0.3.8 (the current released version) and look for "Assets". Under that, you will find a list of files where you can download the various versions for Linux, MacOS & Windows. These files are all ZIP files so will have to save them to you hard drive and then expand them. You'll then see the nanovan-saver.exe. Just open that file and NanoVNA-Saver will open. It does not install itself on your computer so you can save it anywhere you like for use.

I sounds like you probably downloaded the source ZIP file which contains only the source files, not the EXE file.

--

*Don - W3DRM*

How 'bout here: