Category: NanoVNA

NanoVNA – tiny palm size VNA.

nanoVNA-H – measure 144MHz Yagi gain – planning / feasibility

This article documents a feasibility study of using the modified nanoVNA-H to measure the gain of a 4 element 144MHz Yagi, the DUT.

The intended configuration is the DUT will be connected to the tx port (Port 1 or CH0 in nanoVNA speak), and a known ‘sense’ antenna connected to its rx port (Port 2 or CH1 in nanoVNA speak).

nanoVNA |s21| noise floor

To make useful measurements of the received signal, the rx signal level must be a reasonable amount higher than the noise floor, 10dB should be sufficient.

Above is a plot of the |s21| noise floor around 146MHz. Continue reading nanoVNA-H – measure 144MHz Yagi gain – planning / feasibility

Last update: 2nd February, 2020, 7:11 AM

nanoVNA-H – measure 40m low pass filter for WSPRlite flex

This article demonstrates the use of a nanoVNA-H to measure the response of a low pass filter designed to pass 7MHz frequencies but attenuate harmonics. The inductors and capacitors make a seven element Chebyshev filter as designed by G3CWI for use in a 50Ω system.

Implementation

Above, the filter is assembled on a piece of matrix board with two BNC connectors. The inductors are fixed with hot melt adhesive, and the whole thing served over with heatshrink tube. It is not waterproof. Continue reading nanoVNA-H – measure 40m low pass filter for WSPRlite flex

Last update: 2nd February, 2020, 7:11 AM

Antennas – disturbing the thing being measured – open wire lines

A common question in online forums relates to inability to reconcile analyser measurements of an antenna system with the transmitter system antenna facing VSWR meter.

The cause is often that the antenna system was changed significantly to connect the analyser.

Seeing recent discussion by the online experts of how the measure the impedance of an antenna system looking into a so-called balanced feed line gives advice that is likely to cause reconciliation failure.

I will make the point firstly that the line is not intrinsically balanced, it is the way the it is used that may or may not achieve balance of some type. I will refer to that type of line as open wire line.

Let’s explore the subject using some NEC models.

I have constructed an NEC-4.2 model of an approximately half wave dipole at 7MHz, it is 20m above the ground, and fed slightly off centre with open wire line constructed using GW elements. At the bottom, I have connected a 2 segment wire between the feed line ends, and two sources in series. Continue reading Antennas – disturbing the thing being measured – open wire lines

Last update: 2nd February, 2020, 7:12 AM

nanoVNA – a surfit of choices

An oft cited advantage of the nanoVNA are choices:

  • hardware (several clones of the basic thing, the ‘improved’ -H series, the coming -H with bigger screen, the -F with bigger screen… and the future v2);
  • firmware (lots and lots of forks, some hardware targeted);
  • external clients (PC clients, web interfaces, Python / Octave / Matlab code etc).

There is not necessarily interoperatibilty between all instances of each level of this tree. For example, nanovna-F may not share firmware images with the original nanoVNA and its clones, and vice versa due to a different display protocol.

Some PC clients support features not implemented in all current firmware versions, eg screen capture. Continue reading nanoVNA – a surfit of choices

Last update: 2nd March, 2020, 11:28 AM

MFJ-1786 loop antenna – measurements and NEC-4.2 model at 10.1MHz – analysis tools

Further to MFJ-1786 loop antenna – measurements and NEC-4.2 model at 10.1MHz, the question arises as to what commonly used tools readily permit the transformations and analysis.

Some relveant theory: for a load where R is approximately constant and X varies, the half power points occur where R=|X|, and following on from that s11=0.2±j0.4, s11=0.4472∠63.43°, |s11|=-6.99dB, ReturnLoss=6.99dB (yes, the +ve sign is correct), VSWR=2.618 etc.

Finding the points where ReturnLoss is approximately 6.99dB with the cursor on the above diagram is quite easy. Continue reading MFJ-1786 loop antenna – measurements and NEC-4.2 model at 10.1MHz – analysis tools

Last update: 2nd February, 2020, 7:12 AM

nanoVNA-H – coax connectors

The NanoVNA is a new low cost community developed VNA with assembled units coming out of China for <$50.

The NanoVNA uses PCB end launch SMA connectors, and if one is tightened to anywhere near the SMA specification torque of 1Nm, the assembly is ‘soft’ as the board flexes… a warning that this may cause damage (track cracking or outright separation of the SMA connector).

If you have a bare board, you can counter this torque with a wrench applied across the flats of the female connector, but in my -H, it is fitted in a plastic case and the flats are not accessible. Continue reading nanoVNA-H – coax connectors

Last update: 2nd February, 2020, 7:11 AM

nanoVNA-H – supplied cables

The NanoVNA is a new low cost community developed VNA with assembled units coming out of China for <$50.

I reported issues with the cables supplied with my nanoVNA-H at nanoVNA-H – Chinese junk?

Kurt Poulsen reported some cable measurements, including measurement of a cable supplied with a nanovna. In this case, the cable is a little longer than mine, and although his report does not identify the cable type, it seems that RG174 type cable is reported by most users.

Above is Poulsen’s measurement of s11 of an open circuit 33cm cable of presumably RG174 type. Continue reading nanoVNA-H – supplied cables

Last update: 2nd February, 2020, 7:11 AM

nanoVNA-H – a summary of the experience so far

The NanoVNA is a new low cost community developed VNA with assembled units coming out of China for <$50.

I purchased what appears to be a ‘genuine’ nanoVNA-H and it has firmware NanoVNA-H_20191018.dfu installed. During checkout of the delivered device, an issue became evident, an issue worth describing in its own article.

Nevertheless, one online expert assured me it is a fake because genuine ones use green solder mask. Continue reading nanoVNA-H – a summary of the experience so far

Last update: 2nd February, 2020, 7:11 AM

nanoVNA-H – sweep of a coax line section with OC termination

This article discusses the use of the (modified) nanoVNA-H raw accuracy and the implications for calibrated measurements.

Introduction

VNAs achieve much of their accuracy by applying a set of error corrections to a measurement data set.

The error corrections are obtained by making ‘raw’ measurements of a set of known parts, most commonly a short circuit, open circuit and load resistor (the OSL parts). The correction data may assume each of these parts is ideal, or it may provide for inclusion of a more sophisticated model of their imperfection. This process is known as calibration of the instrument and test fixture. nanovna-Q appears to have some fixed departure compensation to suit the SMA cal parts, less suited to other test fixtures.

So, when you make a measurement at some frequency, the correction data for THAT frequency is retrieved and used to correct the measurement.

What if there is not correction data for THAT frequency? There are two approaches:

  • a calibration run is required for exactly the same frequency range and steps (linear, logarithmic, size) as the intended measurement; and
  • existing calibration data is interpolated to the frequency of interest.

The interpolation method is convenient, but adds uncertainty (error) to the measurement. Some commercial VNAs will NOT interpolate.

The nanoVNA will interpolate, and with interpolation comes increased uncertainty.

An uncorrected sweep of a reasonably known DUT is revealing of the instrument inherent error.

The DUT is a 12m length of LMR400.

Expected behavior

Let’s first estimate how it should behave.

The VNA contains a directional coupler nominally designed / calibrated for Zo=50+j0Ω, and in use, VNAs are invariably used to display measurements in terms of some purely real impedance, commonly 50Ω.

Though the DUT characteristic impedance (Zo) is nominally 50Ω, it is not EXACTLY 50+j0Ω and so there are departures in the displayed values wrt 50Ω from what might happen in terms of the actual Zo.

We can calculate the magnitude of Gamma for our 12m OC section of LMR400 over a range of frequencies.

|Gamma| vs frequency is a smooth curve as a result of line attenuation increasing with frequency. As a result in the small departure in Zo, |Gamma| wrt 50Ω has a superimposed small decaying oscillation. Continue reading nanoVNA-H – sweep of a coax line section with OC termination

Last update: 2nd February, 2020, 7:11 AM