A good digital oscilloscope?
in [Design]
|
From: JosephKK on 14 Dec 2009 02:37 On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 13:20:43 -0600, "Tim Williams" <tmoranwms(a)charter.net> wrote: >"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message >news:0lcai5hpf04sealni6moe3orn09jbdk7eq(a)4ax.com... >> Older triggered-sweep scopes, like the Tek 545, had a "stability" >> knob. It usually set the threshold of the Schmitt trigger that >> followed the trigger discriminator. At high trigger frequencies, one >> would tweak it for a stable display. Turning the stability knob one >> way would free-run the timebase (before "auto" was invented), the >> other way would kill it. >> >> http://www.barrytech.com/tektronix/vintage/tek545bfront.jpg > >Yup, I played with one of those in lab once (school lab, for doing real >school lab work). The Rigols they hand out suck at X-Y plotting, so I >rolled that behemoth on over, plugged it in and away I went. > >The first thing I noticed is the knobs are all in terrible positions. I >guess they didn't have the luxury of putting things in nice places, since >everything is stacked up inside, tubes and terminal strips and all. Not >like the 475, where there still isn't a lot of free space, but it's all on >PCBs, positioned where it needs to be. > >The second thing I noticed is, the "delayed/B sweep" -- which sounds to me >like the delayed sweep on the 465 -- I couldn't get to work, at least as I >thought it should. > >Lastly, the manual (which was convieniently sitting on the cart) includes >complete schematics. What madness drove them to hybrid tube/SS circuits, >who knows! ;-) > >Tim What in tarnation is wrong with you? That front panel layout is entirely sensible for the design constraints. So is the SS/tube hybrid circuitry for the era. Yesteryears transistors are not today's transistors.
From: JW on 14 Dec 2009 05:49 On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 09:55:00 -0800 "JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote in Message id: <thaai5910p66m8l1bgd3g3sm9smcs3l65m(a)4ax.com>: >On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 06:17:00 -0500, JW <none(a)dev.null> wrote: > >>On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 19:45:24 +0000 info_at_cabling-design_dot_com(a)foo.com >>(DA) wrote in Message id: >><c2690$4b1c09d4$43de0cc0$11122(a)news.flashnewsgroups.com>: >> >>>Hi all, >>> >>>I think I'm going to try and treat myself to an oscilloscope this >>>Christmas. I've managed to go without one for the last 15 years or so and, >>>frankly, did not have a burning need or even much space for it. I do some >>>digital design (PIC based mostly) - LED, motor controls and such and >>>every once in a while I wish I has something to look at the signal with. >>> >>>So, I've looked around and saw this name come up often: Rigol DS1102E >>>100MHz Digital Storage Oscilloscope. There is also a 50MHz version which >>>is what I think I need. There has not been any need for me to look at >>>100MHz signals in a long time. I am not at all proficient with >>>oscilloscopes and have never used a digital one. Last one I used had a >>>round green screen :) which hints at how long ago that was... So flat(er) >>>learning curve would be important for me. >>> >>>Are there people here using this brand? Are they any good for use in >>>digital designs and, most importantly for me at this point, easy to learn? >>> >>>I guess, Rigol may not be the only ones making digital oscilloscopes these >>>days. What other brands/models should I also look at? >>> >>>Thanks for your suggestions! >> >>I'll sell you a Tektronix 500MHz 1GSa/S TDS540 for $800 + shipping. :) > >Since DA took a pass i must ask, does it include probes? Option 1M? No probes, but yes it does have option 1M.
From: Jan Panteltje on 14 Dec 2009 07:53 On a sunny day (Tue, 08 Dec 2009 13:13:43 -0800) it happened John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in <ogdth5hoo17m1fei5d6qjgqghik38bronc(a)4ax.com>: >I put tritium lights on the tops of the bedposts in the cabin... it's >really dark up there, and you can whack yourself in the head coming >back from peeing. I had to order them from England, as I think they >are illegal in the USA. > >ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Tritium.jpg > >John ftp://panteltje.com/pub/LED_lamp_img_1700.jpg
From: JW on 14 Dec 2009 11:13 On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 05:49:10 -0500 JW <none(a)dev.null> wrote in Message id: <vv5ci5lp808v8dtou3g79j5667k4cn2me7(a)4ax.com>: >On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 09:55:00 -0800 "JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> >wrote in Message id: <thaai5910p66m8l1bgd3g3sm9smcs3l65m(a)4ax.com>: > >>On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 06:17:00 -0500, JW <none(a)dev.null> wrote: >> >>>On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 19:45:24 +0000 info_at_cabling-design_dot_com(a)foo.com >>>(DA) wrote in Message id: >>><c2690$4b1c09d4$43de0cc0$11122(a)news.flashnewsgroups.com>: >>> >>>>Hi all, >>>> >>>>I think I'm going to try and treat myself to an oscilloscope this >>>>Christmas. I've managed to go without one for the last 15 years or so and, >>>>frankly, did not have a burning need or even much space for it. I do some >>>>digital design (PIC based mostly) - LED, motor controls and such and >>>>every once in a while I wish I has something to look at the signal with. >>>> >>>>So, I've looked around and saw this name come up often: Rigol DS1102E >>>>100MHz Digital Storage Oscilloscope. There is also a 50MHz version which >>>>is what I think I need. There has not been any need for me to look at >>>>100MHz signals in a long time. I am not at all proficient with >>>>oscilloscopes and have never used a digital one. Last one I used had a >>>>round green screen :) which hints at how long ago that was... So flat(er) >>>>learning curve would be important for me. >>>> >>>>Are there people here using this brand? Are they any good for use in >>>>digital designs and, most importantly for me at this point, easy to learn? >>>> >>>>I guess, Rigol may not be the only ones making digital oscilloscopes these >>>>days. What other brands/models should I also look at? >>>> >>>>Thanks for your suggestions! >>> >>>I'll sell you a Tektronix 500MHz 1GSa/S TDS540 for $800 + shipping. :) >> >>Since DA took a pass i must ask, does it include probes? Option 1M? > >No probes, but yes it does have option 1M. A picture as well, if you're interested: https://home.comcast.net/~spam_gobbler/TDS540.jpg You can email me at 66gtojayw AT comcast.net
From: Joerg on 14 Dec 2009 12:27
Jan Panteltje wrote: > On a sunny day (Sun, 13 Dec 2009 13:12:54 -0600) it happened "Tim Williams" > <tmoranwms(a)charter.net> wrote in <hg3ebq$rn3$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>: > >> "Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message >> news:hg399d$2na$1(a)news.albasani.net... >>> Consider this circuit: >> Ewwww! An UJT! >> >> It's a bad scope, okay, but not THAT bad! ;-) >> >>> The Venier speed ('stability?') is set by R1, and set a bit lower in >>> frequency (or fraction of that) then the signal observed. >> No, that's a bad way to control stability, you'd want to control dead time >> or discharge time (the latter isn't possible with an UJT). As shown, you're >> changing dV/dt, which needs to be in calibrated ranges. >> >> Tim > > 'Vernier' is the time base speed, or in this case frequency. > Actually that circuit needs a comparator so it can only trigger when the sweep is past > the most right point. Thing is, sync-scopes typically do not have any trigger signal fishing circuitry. They were budget scopes where that would have been too expensive. However, I've repaired tons of TV sets with mine. And ham radio gear, and class mate's digital circuits, and so on. Lo and behold the old scope still works. > UJTs are cool. > Unlike tubes, that get hot. > Only synced scopes I have seen were old and had tubes... > My Hameg is fully "transistorizated" :-) -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM. |