Re: NanoVNA / SAA-2N ver/v2-2
I have the F V2 and it is everything a person could ask for except the inclusion of and SD Card and lacking of Dynamic Range for filter measurement.
For working with antennas is simple and allows a person to take the VNA to the antenna for precise measurements without the feed line influence.
|
Re: Stimulus Span change a bit the Smith measurement
Hi All
excuse me , i just doing the calibration again at the same time of the two different stimulus span , and remeasure the same inductor , and i have the same value of resistor loss , so the issue is resolved and explained , just a mismuch of calibration not done at the same time .
but as conclusion : it's rather to do comparaison with the same NanoVNA , same calibration , same stimulus span , nothing to change during comparaison .
Thanks to all .
73's Nizar
|
Re: Stimulus Span change a bit the Smith measurement
Hi
Thanks Roger and all contributers for their interesting comments ,
i am agree of almost all , it is true that making measurements of the low resistances of the inductances with the 50 Ohm divider bridge is very tedious, it is certainly not the best arrangement for this kind of measurement even with S21 methode, but remains a question which may have to do with the details of the calculation model by the firmware : why is there so much change in result just by changing the stimulus Span as long as we have done the calibration with the same 50 Ohm load and same NanoVNA , there is only the stimulus span which has changed in the meantime, this phenomenon has not been observed with NanoDeeplec -F.
Brian , I dont think that it's an interpolation error, indeed both calibration's are done alone with each span with 401 sweep point's for each , so there is no need to do interpolation .
Excuse me , the inductance is a 8 turn within T30-6 ( not T37-6) .
73's Nizar.
|
Re: test board, how to use
Thank's for all replies.
73 Math/PA3GDS
|
Locked
Re: Owen Duffys blog closed
Yes, I am going to lock this thread since it is far off topic. I think we've discussed this matter sufficiently. DaveD, co-owner KC0WJN On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 19:48 Steve, N5TIN via groups.io <sbondy= [email protected]> wrote: I have, reluctantly, muted this group for the time being.
Discussion about the morality or legality of absconding someone else's
work are not why I joined.
|
Locked
Re: Owen Duffys blog closed
Thank you Steve!
73, and thanks,
Dave (NK7Z)
ARRL Volunteer Examiner
ARRL Technical Specialist, RFI
ARRL Asst. Director, NW Division, Technical Resources
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 1/31/25 16:48, Steve, N5TIN via groups.io wrote: I have, reluctantly, muted this group for the time being.
Discussion about the morality or legality of absconding someone else's work are not why I joined.
|
Locked
Re: Owen Duffys blog closed
Edit...I did the same
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 1/31/2025 4:51 PM, Geoff Peters - AB6BT via groups.io wrote: Thanks Steve!
On 1/31/2025 4:48 PM, Steve, N5TIN via groups.io wrote:
I have, reluctantly, muted this group for the time being.
Discussion about the morality or legality of absconding someone else's work are not why I joined.
|
Locked
Re: Owen Duffys blog closed
Thanks Steve!
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 1/31/2025 4:48 PM, Steve, N5TIN via groups.io wrote: I have, reluctantly, muted this group for the time being.
Discussion about the morality or legality of absconding someone else's work are not why I joined.
|
Locked
Re: Owen Duffys blog closed
I have, reluctantly, muted this group for the time being.
Discussion about the morality or legality of absconding someone else's work are not why I joined.
|
Re: NanoVNA / SAA-2N ver/v2-2
Try removing and re-seating the display cable. Mine showed a white screen (gave me a mini heart attack) but re-seating the cable restored normal operation.
Best regards, Don Brant
|
Re: Stimulus Span change a bit the Smith measurement
On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 03:33 PM, Roger Need wrote:
The Q calculation is wrong.
OK, glad that's cleared up. I thought I must have done something really wrong to get 4 times the value you reported. I hope Nizar got his answer. I think the best one was provided by Jim Lux. It didn't make it into this thread, but Nizar can find it. If I had only a NanoVNA to measure Q, I'd calibrate it over as narrow a frequency range as possible to minimize interpolation error. Then I'd take extra care to make low-resistance connections, which can really matter when Q is high. Back into the woodwork... Brian
|
Re: Stimulus Span change a bit the Smith measurement
On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 03:12 PM, Brian Beezley wrote:
Roger, I think there is something wrong with your Q calculation. Using your X
and R, Q = 17.1 / 0.0935 = 183, close to what I measure, although I measure a
higher inductance.
Brian, You are indeed correct. The Q calculation is wrong. I ran the simulation at I will let the author know... Roger Roger
|
Re: Stimulus Span change a bit the Smith measurement
Roger, I think there is something wrong with your Q calculation. Using your X and R, Q = 17.1 / 0.0935 = 183, close to what I measure, although I measure a higher inductance.
Brian
|
Re: Stimulus Span change a bit the Smith measurement
On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 02:51 PM, Brian Beezley wrote:
My results are somewhat different, especially Q. I don't know for sure that
the core is type 6, but it's bright yellow and matches the current photos at
Amidon where I got it years ago. I recall I was using type 6 at the time for a
project. Inductance measured about 270 nH and Q 200 at 14.1 MHz after I spread
the turns a bit. 0.5" leads.
There can be some variation in production batches. Amidon does not make their own cores - they buy them from suppliers like Micrometals and Fair_rite. The wire diameter and how you wind can affect inductance and resistance at a particular frequency. Subsequently Q is affected. Your inductance is pretty close to the calculated value for 8 turns. Here is a graph from Micrometals showing Q with 12 turns of #20 on a T37-6. Using smaller wire would lower Q.. Results are close to what you measured.
|
Locked
Re: Owen Duffys blog closed
oops - I meant nanovna
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 1/31/25 18:06, Tom KG3V wrote: I have no axe to grind here, so do whatever you want. From my small amount of experience in this area, I would not copy and post online, stuff that has a copyright statement. All you have to do is include that notice to protect your intellectual property. But, as you say, you have to be willing to fight to protect it.
I know we are getting away from the purpose of this reflector, so I will have no more comments on this thread. Let's get back to what really maters - VNWA.
73,
Tom, KG3V
On 1/31/25 17:52, Tim Dawson wrote:
Because anyone can read at will, and there is no charge to do so. If there are any 3rd party contributions, it is questionable whether any copyright could apply to that as well.
It also comes into question if he really cared that much about copyright, or just grabbed that jibber and spew from another site since it looked good . . .
(Not sure on this one) I also wonder, since copyright is effectively ownership (prevent others from claiming/profiting from your work) if it were presented with full credit and zero financial issue, is it protected?
Not sure - I just can't fathon anyone spending more that 3 seconds disputing something that earned him nothing (but would cost quite a bit to defend). It just seems to violate the entire spirit and attitude of Ham radio by about? 97 percent . . .
On January 31, 2025 5:33:50 PM EST, Tom KG3V <KG3V@...> wrote:
I have not been following this real closely, but why do you say it was released to "public domain?" I saw a clear Copyright notice with "all rights reserved" last time I looked at that blog.
73,
Tom, KG3V
On 1/31/25 14:15, Tim Dawson wrote:
Not sure there is any path there, since it was released to the public domain.
It would be the same as stopping publication of a book, and demanding that all existing copies be destroyed - purely nonsensical.
"Fair use" is also a factor.
- Tim
On 1/31/25 13:57, arnold slag via groups.io wrote:
It's backed up so hurry and pick before he will give a notice and take down:
Op ma 27 jan 2025, 16:47 schreef Fred_M via groups.io <dl4zao=
[email protected]>:
Sad news:
(mostly electronics) is no longer available.
regards
Fred
|
Locked
Re: Owen Duffys blog closed
I have no axe to grind here, so do whatever you want. From my small amount of experience in this area, I would not copy and post online, stuff that has a copyright statement. All you have to do is include that notice to protect your intellectual property. But, as you say, you have to be willing to fight to protect it.
I know we are getting away from the purpose of this reflector, so I will have no more comments on this thread. Let's get back to what really maters - VNWA.
73,
Tom, KG3V
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 1/31/25 17:52, Tim Dawson wrote: Because anyone can read at will, and there is no charge to do so. If there are any 3rd party contributions, it is questionable whether any copyright could apply to that as well.
It also comes into question if he really cared that much about copyright, or just grabbed that jibber and spew from another site since it looked good . . .
(Not sure on this one) I also wonder, since copyright is effectively ownership (prevent others from claiming/profiting from your work) if it were presented with full credit and zero financial issue, is it protected?
Not sure - I just can't fathon anyone spending more that 3 seconds disputing something that earned him nothing (but would cost quite a bit to defend). It just seems to violate the entire spirit and attitude of Ham radio by about 97 percent . . .
On January 31, 2025 5:33:50 PM EST, Tom KG3V <KG3V@...> wrote:
I have not been following this real closely, but why do you say it was released to "public domain?" I saw a clear Copyright notice with "all rights reserved" last time I looked at that blog.
73,
Tom, KG3V
On 1/31/25 14:15, Tim Dawson wrote:
Not sure there is any path there, since it was released to the public domain.
It would be the same as stopping publication of a book, and demanding that all existing copies be destroyed - purely nonsensical.
"Fair use" is also a factor.
- Tim
On 1/31/25 13:57, arnold slag via groups.io wrote:
It's backed up so hurry and pick before he will give a notice and take down:
Op ma 27 jan 2025, 16:47 schreef Fred_M via groups.io <dl4zao=
[email protected]>:
Sad news:
(mostly electronics) is no longer available.
regards
Fred
|
Locked
Re: Owen Duffys blog closed
Because anyone can read at will, and there is no charge to do so. If there are any 3rd party contributions, it is questionable whether any copyright could apply to that as well.
It also comes into question if he really cared that much about copyright, or just grabbed that jibber and spew from another site since it looked good . . .
(Not sure on this one) I also wonder, since copyright is effectively ownership (prevent others from claiming/profiting from your work) if it were presented with full credit and zero financial issue, is it protected?
Not sure - I just can't fathon anyone spending more that 3 seconds disputing something that earned him nothing (but would cost quite a bit to defend). It just seems to violate the entire spirit and attitude of Ham radio by about 97 percent . . .
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On January 31, 2025 5:33:50 PM EST, Tom KG3V <KG3V@...> wrote: I have not been following this real closely, but why do you say it was released to "public domain?" I saw a clear Copyright notice with "all rights reserved" last time I looked at that blog.
73,
Tom, KG3V
On 1/31/25 14:15, Tim Dawson wrote:
Not sure there is any path there, since it was released to the public domain.
It would be the same as stopping publication of a book, and demanding that all existing copies be destroyed - purely nonsensical.
"Fair use" is also a factor.
- Tim
On 1/31/25 13:57, arnold slag via groups.io wrote:
It's backed up so hurry and pick before he will give a notice and take down:
Op ma 27 jan 2025, 16:47 schreef Fred_M via groups.io <dl4zao=
[email protected]>:
Sad news:
(mostly electronics) is no longer available.
regards
Fred
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
|
Re: Stimulus Span change a bit the Smith measurement
On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 02:38 PM, Roger Need wrote:
Attached is a simulation of a T37-6 Micrometals powdered iron core.
My results are somewhat different, especially Q. I don't know for sure that the core is type 6, but it's bright yellow and matches the current photos at Amidon where I got it years ago. I recall I was using type 6 at the time for a project. Inductance measured about 270 nH and Q 200 at 14.1 MHz after I spread the turns a bit. 0.5" leads. Brian
|
Re: Stimulus Span change a bit the Smith measurement
On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 01:59 PM, Team-SIM SIM-Mode wrote:
The inductance is a 8 turns around T37-6 Core at 14.124 Khz.
Nizar, Attached is a simulation of a T37-6 Micrometals powdered iron core. Note how small a resistance is calculated at your operating frequency. Roger
|
Locked
Re: Owen Duffys blog closed
I have not been following this real closely, but why do you say it was released to "public domain?" I saw a clear Copyright notice with "all rights reserved" last time I looked at that blog.
73,
Tom, KG3V
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 1/31/25 14:15, Tim Dawson wrote: Not sure there is any path there, since it was released to the public domain.
It would be the same as stopping publication of a book, and demanding that all existing copies be destroyed - purely nonsensical.
"Fair use" is also a factor.
- Tim
On 1/31/25 13:57, arnold slag via groups.io wrote:
It's backed up so hurry and pick before he will give a notice and take down:
Op ma 27 jan 2025, 16:47 schreef Fred_M via groups.io <dl4zao=
[email protected]>:
Sad news:
(mostly electronics) is no longer available.
regards
Fred
|
VE6LX
Donald S Brant Jr
Roger Need
