Author Topic: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth  (Read 8208 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rad400Topic starter

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 12
Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« on: October 31, 2017, 01:01:23 am »
When a Rigol DS1054Z 50Mhz scope is updated to a 100Mhz, do you really get an improvement in the bandwidth?.   At 100MHZ are you down only 3db or considerably more?
 

Offline MarkF

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2523
  • Country: us
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #1 on: October 31, 2017, 01:29:32 am »
The 3dB bandwidth for the DS1104Z 100MHz scope is approx 160Mhz.
The 3dB bandwidth for the DS1074Z 75MHz scope is approx 90Mhz.
 
The following users thanked this post: Markus2801A

Offline rstofer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9886
  • Country: us
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #2 on: October 31, 2017, 01:41:12 am »
When a Rigol DS1054Z 50Mhz scope is updated to a 100Mhz, do you really get an improvement in the bandwidth?.   At 100MHZ are you down only 3db or considerably more?

You need to watch Dave's video on the subject.  There are two filters on the front end of each channel.  One for 50 MHz bandwidth and one for 100 MHz bandwidth.  The choice is made by the firmware.  If it thinks it is a 50 MHz scope, it chooses the 50 MHz filter.  If it thinks is is a 100 MHz scope it chooses the 100 MHz filter.  That's why tweaking the scope settings make a difference.

Set to 100 MHz, the scope has been tested and found to have rather more than 100 MHz of bandwidth to -3 dB.  I don't recall the number but it's up around 150 MHz.
 
The following users thanked this post: I wanted a rude username

Offline ebclr

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2328
  • Country: 00
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #3 on: October 31, 2017, 04:26:28 am »
1054Z hacked go far away from 100 Mhz, at least 130 Mhz without attenuation, and +- 200 Mhz with attenuation
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16561
  • Country: 00
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #4 on: November 01, 2017, 06:43:01 pm »
When a Rigol DS1054Z 50Mhz scope is updated to a 100Mhz, do you really get an improvement in the bandwidth?.

Yes.

At 100MHZ are you down only 3db or considerably more?

The 3dB point is usually around 130MHz (as measured by several people here).
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16561
  • Country: 00
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #5 on: November 01, 2017, 06:45:16 pm »
1054Z hacked go far away from 100 Mhz, at least 130 Mhz without attenuation, and +- 200 Mhz with attenuation

You can still see 300MHz+ signals on one, although very attenuated, obviously.
 

Offline rhb

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3476
  • Country: us
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #6 on: December 20, 2017, 12:49:27 am »
How about a screen shot of a sweep generator feeding a "hacked" scope? Has anyone posted that?
 

Offline xrunner

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7498
  • Country: us
  • hp>Agilent>Keysight>???
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #7 on: December 20, 2017, 01:20:56 am »
How about a screen shot of a sweep generator feeding a "hacked" scope? Has anyone posted that?

Fstart ?
Fstop ?
I told my friends I could teach them to be funny, but they all just laughed at me.
 

Offline rstofer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9886
  • Country: us
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #8 on: December 20, 2017, 01:52:58 am »
How about a screen shot of a sweep generator feeding a "hacked" scope? Has anyone posted that?

Fstart ?

I suppose something less than 50 MHz for those who don't think the original bandwidth has changed.  Say 10 MHz?

Quote
Fstop ?

No point in going beyond 200 MHz because it is pretty well establised that the -3dB point is around 130 MHz.

I have no idea if those values are realistic...
 

Offline xrunner

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7498
  • Country: us
  • hp>Agilent>Keysight>???
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #9 on: December 20, 2017, 03:10:28 am »
I suppose something less than 50 MHz for those who don't think the original bandwidth has changed.  Say 10 MHz?

...

No point in going beyond 200 MHz because it is pretty well establised that the -3dB point is around 130 MHz.

I have no idea if those values are realistic...

I don't strictly have an RF sweep generator, but I might be able to cobble together something, if another member doesn't beat me to it.  :)
I told my friends I could teach them to be funny, but they all just laughed at me.
 

Offline kahe40

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 19
  • Country: es
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #10 on: December 20, 2017, 02:40:49 pm »
here a  sweep 50M to 500M with 10M step, you see those spikes every 10M.
Rigol is not fast enough, but Micsig and Siglent show them clearly.
Center of Grid is around 225M, so you get an idea of BW and Freq.
Micsig goes down very fast, Siglent is the best of all
and Rigol has a linear degree, like a triangle.
Rigols 5ms are too short for the entire sweep (or user error?),
but I tried to make it comparable.
Sweep was done with RF-Explorer-SigGen,
yes, maybe it is a toy but better than nothing...

Micsig TO1104   https://ibb.co/hTupS6

Rigol 1074Z hack  https://ibb.co/mf2b76

Siglent 1202XE   https://ibb.co/cMZCfR


edit: have not found out, how to post pictures with iPad, sorry
« Last Edit: December 20, 2017, 02:45:58 pm by kahe40 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Markus2801A

Offline bingo600

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1977
  • Country: dk
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #11 on: December 20, 2017, 05:18:33 pm »
I measured mine to around 134Mhz , for the 3dB mark
DS1054Z (100Mhz Hacked)

/Bingo
 
The following users thanked this post: Markus2801A

Offline xrunner

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7498
  • Country: us
  • hp>Agilent>Keysight>???
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #12 on: December 20, 2017, 07:03:46 pm »

I suppose something less than 50 MHz for those who don't think the original bandwidth has changed.  Say 10 MHz?

No point in going beyond 200 MHz because it is pretty well establised that the -3dB point is around 130 MHz.


Here's my data. First up is from 10 MHz to 150 MHz. The -3dB point is where the cursors on the right intersect, about 130 MHz.

Second is from 10 MHz to 500 MHz, again where the cursors intersect is -3dB @ 130 MHz. But certainly the scope can easily display signals in excess of 500 MHz.

Note: Using TG output of a Rigol DS815 triggered externally, some amplitude anomalies are expected. The TG output was set to 0 dBm into 50 ohms at the scope.
I told my friends I could teach them to be funny, but they all just laughed at me.
 

Offline rhb

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3476
  • Country: us
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #13 on: December 21, 2017, 01:31:02 am »
The Rigol has  a very strange response.  It looks like a filter  skirt with the corner frequency below 50 MHz.
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16561
  • Country: 00
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #14 on: December 21, 2017, 05:38:06 am »
here a  sweep 50M to 500M with 10M step, you see those spikes every 10M.
Rigol is not fast enough, Rigol has a linear degree, like a triangle.

What sort of settings are these?


Rigol has 1GSa/s and 24M pts.

The Rigol has  a very strange response.  It looks like a filter  skirt with the corner frequency below 50 MHz.

Just a display artifact from the settings, nothing to do with frequency response.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2017, 05:41:04 am by Fungus »
 

Offline Mechatrommer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11537
  • Country: my
  • reassessing directives...
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #15 on: December 21, 2017, 07:23:05 am »
How about a screen shot of a sweep generator feeding a "hacked" scope? Has anyone posted that?


But certainly the scope can easily display signals in excess of 500 MHz.
no, beyond 500MHz, you will see aliased signal...
Nature: Evolution and the Illusion of Randomness (Stephen L. Talbott): Its now indisputable that... organisms “expertise” contextualizes its genome, and its nonsense to say that these powers are under the control of the genome being contextualized - Barbara McClintock
 

Offline xrunner

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7498
  • Country: us
  • hp>Agilent>Keysight>???
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #16 on: December 21, 2017, 01:38:34 pm »
no, beyond 500MHz, you will see aliased signal...

Yes, if you don't care about amplitude or frequency accuracy. 900 MHz signal shown below, is displayed quite nicely. The amplitude and frequency you would measure with the scope will be wrong, but that's not the point.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2017, 01:44:27 pm by xrunner »
I told my friends I could teach them to be funny, but they all just laughed at me.
 

Offline scopeman

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 307
  • Country: us
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #17 on: December 21, 2017, 03:34:10 pm »
Hello,

You should re-run this test with a known good 50 ohm feed through termination and start with a 50KHz signal with six divisions of
signal and increase the frequency to the point where you have 4.2 divisions of signal and repeat this for each attenuation setting to get a better idea of what the bandwidth of the scope itself is.

Sam
"scopeman"
W3OHM
 

Offline Mechatrommer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11537
  • Country: my
  • reassessing directives...
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #18 on: December 21, 2017, 03:48:07 pm »
no, beyond 500MHz, you will see aliased signal...
900 MHz signal shown below, is displayed quite nicely.
thats called 100MHz garbage

The amplitude and frequency you would measure with the scope will be wrong, but that's not the point.
if the point is try to make out something from garbage, then yes i get your point.
Nature: Evolution and the Illusion of Randomness (Stephen L. Talbott): Its now indisputable that... organisms “expertise” contextualizes its genome, and its nonsense to say that these powers are under the control of the genome being contextualized - Barbara McClintock
 

Offline xrunner

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7498
  • Country: us
  • hp>Agilent>Keysight>???
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #19 on: December 21, 2017, 04:05:02 pm »
if the point is try to make out something from garbage, then yes i get your point.

You aren't understanding the point I'm making. It's not garbage - it's a signal, it's useful information. If you want to trace a signal on a board to see if it exists then it's just fine for that above ~130 MHz. The signal is very easy to view on the DS1054Z hundreds of MHz higher than it's bandwidth limit (which is simply the -3dB point - not where it completely stops working).  :-//
I told my friends I could teach them to be funny, but they all just laughed at me.
 

Offline rhb

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3476
  • Country: us
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #20 on: December 21, 2017, 06:46:56 pm »
To paraphrase Harry Calahan, "A man's got to know his scope's limitations."  Unfortunately, many people are held  by economic considerations in a state of ignorance.  The linear loss of amplitude on the Rigol, *is* a serious issue if you're trying to measure the rise time of a pulse.

Thank you to those who have provided screenshots.  I'd like to suggest, though, that you document the signal generator used.  There are two terms in the equation.

It would be very interesting to see a head to head of a hacked DS1054Z vs a DS1104Z using a top tier signal generator.
 

Offline stlspartan

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 6
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #21 on: November 09, 2019, 01:23:44 am »
(sorry for posting on an old thread)  I was chasing a ~124 Mhz noise signal on my hacked 100 Mhz DS1054z and came here and read through the thread and watched the videos.

Conclusions:

1) The scope has full 3db bandwidth out to ~130 Mhz.  Nice! 
2) When I hear "bandwidth "and "3 db down" I think of filters.  So when folks said the 3db down point of the scope was ~130Mhz I assumed it would be rolling off at 6db/octave or faster.  But what I gather from the photos and videos is that it isn't as simple as that with a system like a digital scope.  It seems that there is a plateau and that the scope maintains considerable response out to 200 Mhz. 

I know that uncalibrated response isn't as good as something you can measure with - but for me this is a delightful finding - that I can see a lot of waveform information to 200Mhz on my crazy cheap scope.

 

Offline radiolistener

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3282
  • Country: ua
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #22 on: November 09, 2019, 02:59:08 am »
3 dB bandwidth will be better, but things are not so easy to evaluate it by taking into account only 3 dB bandwidth.

It depends on your goal. Sometimes smaller 3 dB bandwidth will be even better.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2019, 03:05:29 am by radiolistener »
 

Offline rhb

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3476
  • Country: us
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #23 on: November 09, 2019, 10:51:04 pm »
Perhaps you should google "aliasing".

The Nyquist for the DS1054Z displaying 3-4 channels  is 125 MHz.  So if the response is only -3 dB at 130 MHz there is a *lot* of garbage if you do an FFT.  Not that Rigol has a usable FFT implementation. But even if you pull data from the scope and use Octave all you will get is garbage.

The reality is that sampling at 250 MSa/s, anything over 70 MHz is corrupted by aliasing and excessively sharp roll off. If the filter rolls off fast enough to prevent aliasing you get really large overshoot on a step function.

Buy a <40 ps square wave generator from Leo Bodnar and test the Rigol with that.  Then consider what it it tells you.

My LeCroy DDA-125 has a 1.5 GHz BW sampling at 2 GSa/s in 4 channel mode.  Everything above 500 MHz is garbage if you do an FFT.  But it *really* does have a < 233 ps rise time.  IIRC I measured 226 ps with 20% overshoot as specified in the datasheet.  Don't try to check a trace for ringing with that.

Reg
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16561
  • Country: 00
Re: Rogol 1054Z actual bandwidth
« Reply #24 on: November 10, 2019, 02:26:49 am »
Perhaps you should google "aliasing".

The Nyquist for the DS1054Z displaying 3-4 channels  is 125 MHz.  So if the response is only -3 dB at 130 MHz there is a *lot* of garbage if you do an FFT.

You're allowed to turn channels off for critical measurements though.

(or just to check if there's a radical change in the display...)

 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf