A good digital oscilloscope?
in [Design]
|
From: Jan Panteltje on 7 Dec 2009 17:54 On a sunny day (Mon, 07 Dec 2009 14:44:29 -0800) it happened Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in <7o5eqhF3mttuiU1(a)mid.individual.net>: >> TRIO CS-1562A >> Lost the diagram unfortunately, anyone has it? Websearch came out empty. > > >Here ya go, with manual, pretty much the first web search hit :-) > >The schematic is on page 27, typical Japanese style, all crammed into >one rather small page: > >http://www.casa.co.nz/Equipment/Scope/Trio-CS1562A-Man-A3-16p.pdf Hey, I appreciate that, couple of years ago I spends hours looking for that diagram, somebody scanned it, great, thank you!!!! >> Its a nice scope, good TV trigger, dual channel. >> Graticule is broken... > > >How did that happen? Grandkids playing too rough? Weller dropped on it, I had the scope vertical on the ground, the Weller dropped (transformer part) on the screen from the table. Now it is 2 halves. I have some acryl plastic, maybe one day will I draw a grid on it... But with this diagram I can see if I can fix the brightness control, needs total disassembly for that.... I recalibrated it without knowing what each pot was exactly, but it is close.
From: Joerg on 7 Dec 2009 18:00 Jan Panteltje wrote: > On a sunny day (Mon, 07 Dec 2009 14:44:29 -0800) it happened Joerg > <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in <7o5eqhF3mttuiU1(a)mid.individual.net>: > [...] >>> Its a nice scope, good TV trigger, dual channel. >>> Graticule is broken... >> >> How did that happen? Grandkids playing too rough? > > Weller dropped on it, I had the scope vertical on the ground, > the Weller dropped (transformer part) on the screen from the table. > Now it is 2 halves. > I have some acryl plastic, maybe one day will I draw a grid on it... You may not have to draw. Could you print onto overhead projector film? The stuff that executives used instead of PowerPoint back in the Neanderthal days. If you put that between the CRT surface and a plastic piece it would look nicer than something drawn by hand. [...] -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: John Larkin on 7 Dec 2009 18:28 On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 11:56:59 -0800, qrk <SpamTrap(a)spam.net> wrote: >On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 20:29:24 -0800, John Larkin ><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 22:18:04 -0600, "Tim Williams" >><tmoranwms(a)charter.net> wrote: >> >>>I never was too impressed with digital scopes. None of them have nearly >>>enough buttons, so you spend all your time wading through menus. The Rigol >>>I've used (don't remember the number) has awful menus, they are not always >>>quite what they say they are, and they take forever to go away. >>> >>>Some digital scopes have better refresh than others. The HP (Agilent??) >>>54622D's in all the labs at school here work fairly well, though at least >>>two button presses are required to reach any given menu option. Refresh is >>>okay, though still chunky on slower sweeps (>1ms/div). >>> >>>My impression of the cheapass Tek TDS's (the thin rectangular ones) is >>>similar to the Rigol. >>> >>>I'm most familiar with my Tek 475, but it would be nice to have storage, >>>single sweep* and averaging. One of those intermediate scopes, the ones >>>with analog AND digital, they're perfect for everything. >>> >>>*Just because it's an analog scope doesn't mean you don't get storage or >>>single sweep type readings, it just means it takes more setup. This >>>photograph was taken with a 10 second exposure, capturing three photoflash >>>discharges: >>>http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/Images/Photoflash_Discharge2_sm.jpg >>> >>>Tim >> >>I like my TDS2012. I rarely use an analog scope any more. >> >>John > >I find that I use an analog scope (Tek 465) for analog stuff. Can't >get a feeling for noise issues with a digital scope. For pulse >amplifier stuff and when you need arithmetic, digital is the way to >go. I find analog scopes confusing. All the traces are the same color. John
From: Jan Panteltje on 7 Dec 2009 18:29 On a sunny day (Mon, 07 Dec 2009 15:00:29 -0800) it happened Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in <7o5fogF3lr6q7U1(a)mid.individual.net>: >Jan Panteltje wrote: >> On a sunny day (Mon, 07 Dec 2009 14:44:29 -0800) it happened Joerg >> <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in <7o5eqhF3mttuiU1(a)mid.individual.net>: >> > >[...] > >>>> Its a nice scope, good TV trigger, dual channel. >>>> Graticule is broken... >>> >>> How did that happen? Grandkids playing too rough? >> >> Weller dropped on it, I had the scope vertical on the ground, >> the Weller dropped (transformer part) on the screen from the table. >> Now it is 2 halves. >> I have some acryl plastic, maybe one day will I draw a grid on it... > > >You may not have to draw. Could you print onto overhead projector film? >The stuff that executives used instead of PowerPoint back in the >Neanderthal days. If you put that between the CRT surface and a plastic >piece it would look nicer than something drawn by hand. Yes that could work. With drawing I ment use sharp knife to make grooves in the acryl, and then rub some ink into it perhaps. Yes I have those clear sheets for making PCB layouts on the inkjet printer. That would indeed be nicer, but it would have to stick onto the acryl somehow. Just be studying that diagram, there is an intensity preset pot, good, maybe that is all I need to tweak, (it is too bright, cannot dim it). Could accidently have turned that during calibration...
From: Jan Panteltje on 7 Dec 2009 18:33
On a sunny day (Mon, 07 Dec 2009 15:28:47 -0800) it happened John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in <qr3rh511l7ab2rmhp1ov6rg1dfcvpm3pul(a)4ax.com>: >On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 11:56:59 -0800, qrk <SpamTrap(a)spam.net> wrote: > >>On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 20:29:24 -0800, John Larkin >><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 22:18:04 -0600, "Tim Williams" >>><tmoranwms(a)charter.net> wrote: >>> >>>>I never was too impressed with digital scopes. None of them have nearly >>>>enough buttons, so you spend all your time wading through menus. The Rigol >>>>I've used (don't remember the number) has awful menus, they are not always >>>>quite what they say they are, and they take forever to go away. >>>> >>>>Some digital scopes have better refresh than others. The HP (Agilent??) >>>>54622D's in all the labs at school here work fairly well, though at least >>>>two button presses are required to reach any given menu option. Refresh is >>>>okay, though still chunky on slower sweeps (>1ms/div). >>>> >>>>My impression of the cheapass Tek TDS's (the thin rectangular ones) is >>>>similar to the Rigol. >>>> >>>>I'm most familiar with my Tek 475, but it would be nice to have storage, >>>>single sweep* and averaging. One of those intermediate scopes, the ones >>>>with analog AND digital, they're perfect for everything. >>>> >>>>*Just because it's an analog scope doesn't mean you don't get storage or >>>>single sweep type readings, it just means it takes more setup. This >>>>photograph was taken with a 10 second exposure, capturing three photoflash >>>>discharges: >>>>http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/Images/Photoflash_Discharge2_sm.jpg >>>> >>>>Tim >>> >>>I like my TDS2012. I rarely use an analog scope any more. >>> >>>John >> >>I find that I use an analog scope (Tek 465) for analog stuff. Can't >>get a feeling for noise issues with a digital scope. For pulse >>amplifier stuff and when you need arithmetic, digital is the way to >>go. > >I find analog scopes confusing. All the traces are the same color. > >John You can spatially separate those. |