Ok, to help you see the Smith Chart versus the Nano - you are using the best tool out here in this thread - the Nano-VNA "smith chart overlay" is to help demonstrate what many need to know when it comes to making the right choices in not just antenna, but the mount and the Location they all get put in.
If one of the three is not the best, right or ideal - all the other pieces of the puzzle just don't fit...
Ok, the numbers...
Your "1" shot
Number 2 shot
Ok, number 1 is "best" (1.2093 If I read this right)
Number 2 reading is "worse" 1.12108...
To help with this - look to the right "Green lettered"
Number 1 41.92Ω while number 2 is 41.88Ω
On the smith chart - that "+j Component" is inductive - usually means the "reason" it is off is due to what it senses as an INDUCTIVE reactance to the signal - it's reflection shows inductance.
You lengthened the antenna - you ADDED wire, or INDUCTANCE - So Number 2 is telling you - you went the wrong way. Your "+j Component" ...
Another thing - see the "ohmic" result?
Number 1 - 41.92Ω
Number 2 - 41.88Ω
So what this tells you is the readings the "resistive" element is lower on Number 2 - but was it due to length or was is due to inductance - length being "resistance" while Inductance is the uH change upwards.
In the first One - compared to the 2nd one - change the radiation or what it appears as in resistance - being lower in Number 2 - it uses the inductance changes as being the requirements the VNA needs to has recomputed the expected - FROM: (Where you want to go)
So when you added - the uH went up - and so did the SWR but the working Resistance went down.
Ok, SWR "best" is 50Ω - so return antenna to Number 1 setting...
(In the previous post - I mentioned you're beating yourself up fiddling and trying to beat the antenna to the Blue Point - this is those headaches when you're so close, you just want to scream...)
If one of the three is not the best, right or ideal - all the other pieces of the puzzle just don't fit...
Ok, the numbers...
Your "1" shot
Number 2 shot
Ok, number 1 is "best" (1.2093 If I read this right)
Number 2 reading is "worse" 1.12108...
To help with this - look to the right "Green lettered"
Number 1 41.92Ω while number 2 is 41.88Ω
On the smith chart - that "+j Component" is inductive - usually means the "reason" it is off is due to what it senses as an INDUCTIVE reactance to the signal - it's reflection shows inductance.
You lengthened the antenna - you ADDED wire, or INDUCTANCE - So Number 2 is telling you - you went the wrong way. Your "+j Component" ...
Another thing - see the "ohmic" result?
Number 1 - 41.92Ω
Number 2 - 41.88Ω
So what this tells you is the readings the "resistive" element is lower on Number 2 - but was it due to length or was is due to inductance - length being "resistance" while Inductance is the uH change upwards.
In the first One - compared to the 2nd one - change the radiation or what it appears as in resistance - being lower in Number 2 - it uses the inductance changes as being the requirements the VNA needs to has recomputed the expected - FROM: (Where you want to go)
So when you added - the uH went up - and so did the SWR but the working Resistance went down.
Ok, SWR "best" is 50Ω - so return antenna to Number 1 setting...
- Sidebar: This is a good example of Radiation; the losses or the gains - one being how much the reactive component changes the antennas "resistance" appearance. OR What it thinks it needs to make itself 50Ω - so the VNA calculates the components -/+ j and then tells you with the SWR change - your antenna has this "Value of resistance" which when your SWR is worse, non-1:1 or when it is lower - or HIGHER then the "Where you want to be" or your 50Ω results of idealized transfer to the "ether" Your end results is a number - the closer the number is to 50 the better off you'll be.
- So why is the low SWR show Inductance? When I add wire the SWR becomes worse - ok let's stop and figure out what was discussed earlier - Mount and Location are your two most likely culprits - against the antenna - because you didn't re-create the SIRIO original test conditions that show their antennas' MEETING the 50Ω mark or lowest SWR - or did they? I mean, What does it take to make this thing have a 1:1 SWR? Come on guys! HOW?
- No, they probably didn't take a photo of the antenna as it was mounted and tested - no verification except it was shipped in a container and shrink-wrapped to seal - SIGH...What you have to go on in trust is far less than what you actually got - which when you look at how this fly-by-wire mess of commercial manufacturing is these days, you're doing great - it could have gone far worse. You have a working antenna built in some fashion that works well - so why split hairs - let alone the Atom?
(In the previous post - I mentioned you're beating yourself up fiddling and trying to beat the antenna to the Blue Point - this is those headaches when you're so close, you just want to scream...)
Last edited: