Is it possible to somehow verify that the U551 chip is the one causing problems?

It is possible that U551 has been damaged.

Here are the pictures of the front and back of the circuit board of the nanovna in as high of a resolution as I can provide with the metal shielding removed.

My bad, the 30ghz was a typo, the s-a-a-2 goes up to 3ghz. I am new to groups.io, so the pictures didn't attach properly. Hopefully they attach this time. I will add more closeup pictures of the circu

Yes you are right, I had just spent a while reading posts between Eric and a couple of users on the tinysa site and had forgotten that I had switched sites before replying. ___________________________

Erik has nothing to do with VNA products - he manufactures the tinySA... Th OP has a product which is an owocomm design.

Firstly any nano vna advertised as performing up to 30GHz is making false claims about its specifications. Secondly it sounds like you didn’t discharge any static from the antenna before connecting th

Hello, I recently purchased a nanovna s-a-a-2 (hardware version v2_2, 50k-30ghz, owocomm design), and after around 2 weeks of work the measurements on the s11 port decided to malfunction. At the time

It is - with the NanoVNA-F, version 2.0 or newer firmware. It saves the s1p files. ( Not a help for the -H models, though. (Not enough memory - already crammed full!)

Checked your picture, black and white are not made by us, but it seems that your black version uses the same circuit as ours, we only found a little difference on the PCB, as long as the test is norma

Thanks Roger!

Here is a photo of a Hugen 3.4. looks the same as Jason's

Close up of the other one

Close up of white one.

Jason, It could be a genuine Hugen 3.4. Hugen posted that he does sell them with "sandwich" type construction instead of in a plastic case with the gift box. Roger

Captured in the wild. I am aware the white one is an inferior clone but the black one appears to have a newer pcb and has a version 3.4 screened on the pcb. Is this a genuine one? It has a different b

I am not a fan of the Si5351. It was intended to be used for digital clock generation for processors and peripherals, not for RF signal generation where reasonable signal quality is needed. Its only a

225 MHz output can be achieved by operating the PLL at 900 MHz with a divider of four; that's within the spec for the PLL's VCO but the chip is not guaranteed to meet all its specifications at that fr

No version of the Si5351 is specified to operate about 200 MHz. The original Si5351A, B, and C were specified to 160 MHz. The later revision, the Si5351A-B (or B-B or C-B) are specified to work up to

Gee, it would sure be nice if some of the firmware upgrade instructions actually mentioned that you need to reset the threshold level. :-)