开云体育

Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been updated in the Files area of the [email protected] group. *File:* NanoVNA Console Commands Oct-4-19.pdf *Uploaded

Hi Martin, that's a very interesting suggestion. I've put it on my backlog under "Future / Cool ideas" ;-) I *think* the firmware allows it. Probably. But I'm not entirely sure how to do it.

The document points to /g/nanovna-f

Personally, I prefer Smith plot displayed at the same time, over a span (e.g. 2:1) of application frequencies, as a quick check that components are behaving "reasonably".

If I correctly interpret Kurt, then with appropriate software: * attach an unterminated length of balanced transmission line * interactively dial that delay so that Smith plot does not spiral inward

Hi Rune, Would it be possible to use Saver as a mechanism to run the internal Nano calibration routine, and save these plus any other settings, without having to use the Nano interface. Then store the

Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the [email protected] group. *File:* NanoVNA Console Commands 9-5-25a.pdf *Uploaded

I think that that sort of feature - especially Q - would be really great.

Martin: That would be great if it can be done. I have several RLC commercial meters, none going above 100KHZ, and they all give similar but different answers. Regards Fred WD9HNU

Hi Rune, Ah OK, then I misunderstood the reasoning between about the various different frequency limits in the various versions of firmware. I was under the impression that the Nano's lower frequency

Hi Rune, Understood. I really like Saver and very much appreciate what you have achieved so far, especially in such a short space of time, and I'm very grateful for your effort and dedication. A lot

I have not read the article by Owen, but I would agree on this single point about return loss. But I never commented to you, as it is a subject of much debate. If there was a very clear majorty for

Thanks, Herb and Rune! Wiki now has a "Hardware Versions" link: /g/nanovna-users/wiki ====================== Perhaps the nanoVNA-F could be added? Thanks, David -- SatSignal Software

It is often useful to think about frequencies in terms of octaves or harmonics, where 900 is less than an octave above 500MHz, so potentially of interest e.g. for filter evaluations

[email protected]> wrote: *As soon as I looked at Rune's software, I thought "Return loss should not

Hi Martin, there are firmware versions that go to 1500MHz. The frequency limit does nothing to limit the number of data points, and very, very little to limit other features within the NanoVNA. It's

Hi All, I've been reading the comment about frequency range vs sample size and other issues and I'd like to suggest / discuss some thoughts. Although it's nice to have the capability to measure up to

Hi Martin, I too read Owen's post. I'm not particularly fond of his way of implying that I would be "resistant to correction"; and calling what I do "very hammy". If it is one's intention to post like

Thanks, Herb and Rune! Wiki now has a "Hardware Versions" link: /g/nanovna-users/wiki

Although more difficult to implement in the firmware, and a PITA for users, it would not be surprising if even better performance could be obtained by * Setting C0 to 0 * Reading C1 from the datasheet