Yeah!, I see it too. It bothers me because it means that for some reason the H-field has over 7x higher amplitude at 5MHz compared to 1MHz - that's 50x more power, where we are expecting less power ! According to MPTT, in order to obtain maximum power transfer to a reactive load, the reactance of the source should be of equal magnitude but opposite sign. ..but the VNA's transmitter source impedance is 50Ω+0j, isn't it ?
I guess the problem is the calibration on "thru" with the H-Field probe. I again calibrated it in thru in the middle, but could it be that the H-field is distributed differently without the nylon? Yes, the VNA transmitter suppose to be 50 Ohm. There wasn't anything unusual going on at 5MHz when you were doing the purely electric series measurement before. What was the H-probes's orientation and position when you acquired that signal ?
No, nothing unusual going on, no equipment other then the nano and PC was on. H-probe was as in the last video at 2:23, see picture below. Does the H-probe have a flat response according to the VNA? You can check it by clamping the i-Probe on a piece* of Litz wire, which shorts the VNA's transmitter. I will check again later today the "serial measurement", including the flat response of the VNA. So you turned off the error detection and are ignoring the data transmission errors. Yes, seems like it Anyway, is the green graph the Real and the blue graph the Imaginary component on your S21 Real/Imaginary plot ?
Well, thats not clear from the Graph, as it does not specify, but looking at the nanoVNA itself, the blue is the real, the green the imaginary. Itsu
|