开云体育

Let me apologize if my yesterday's post was not clear. The pictures I posted are actually the result of the recommendation you gave me. I took a 30cm RG-316 cable I have and calibrated at the very

Putting your hand near the antenna (or, really, anything) will also "load" it with a lossy medium, improving the match. As noted before, though, most people do this by using a tool to design it (e.g.

1) Do you have the eval board? (Always useful to look at a "known good" implementation) 2) I'm not sure it's expecting copper under the coil. The figure in the data sheet sort of looks like only the

Yes, you're on the right track. However, I'd strongly recomment you place several appropriate clamp-on ferrites on your feedline right where it exits the assembly. Also place a few at the VNA,

you should albsoutely calibrate on cable end and use one as short as it is practical (just a few inches would be best!!) only THEN you have exact values to type into simsmith .. then calculate parts

John, Thanks once again for the precious advices. As I’ve put the antenna exactly as I t has been manufactured, could I simply populate the matching network instead of stretching the spirals ?

Nicolas, Your results actually look pretty good. An SWR of 2.4:1 represents a loss of only 17%. Small changes in the spacing of the turns on your antenna should enable you to put the minimum SWR at

Another jig in this post…. /g/nanovna-users/message/20848

Clifton, My test jigs and other members were discussed several years ago in this topic. There are 125 messages and lots of good info. /g/nanovna-users/message/20809

Once again, Thanks to all of you for your inputs. Poorly translated from french, I would say that I did not know in what type of gearbox I was going to put my finger in ! Well, I ran some other

Can you show a closeup picture of the TEST JIG for your NanoVNA please. ________________________________ Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2025 5:01 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: testing

Can you show a closeup picture of the TEST JIG for your NanoVNA please. ________________________________ Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2025 1:26 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: testing non-50

as shorfter the cable as better your setup dg9bfc sigi Am 23.02.2025 um 20:32 schrieb Nico via groups.io:

Nico, You don't necessarily need more connectors. You could calibrate at the end of your RG174 cable by detaching it from your board, then using a small 50 ohm chip capacitor, an open circuit, and a

When you use the edelay feature in a NanoVNA to move the reference plane from the SMA connector to a distant point you really need to have a short cable so the attenuation is minimal. This is not

These are very interesting points, thank you very much for that. I was questioning myself wondering if my technique was appropriate. Thanks again for confirming it can be improved. I will follow

I own an MFJ259, a RigExpert AA-55 and a NanoVNA H & H4. The MFJ is the poorest performer of the bunch and not really useful for measuring resistance or reactance to any degree of accuracy. The

Hi Jim MFJ company says that MFJ259 antenna analyser becomes inaccurate when measuring reactances below 7 Ohm or above 650 Ohm, i am really impressed with the good S21 responses you have even with

May be it's a new version in program, that you must enter the velocity factor as .66 and not in percent. Your measured data are ok, but the 2m RG174 has a loss of 2dB @ 900 Mhz. So the real mismatch

it?s close ... but you will get much better results if you use a short cable ... and calibrate at the end of that cable dg9bfc sigi Am 23.02.2025 um 04:46 schrieb Nico via groups.io: