Author Topic: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread  (Read 204739 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline billfernandez

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 137
  • Country: us
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #100 on: January 07, 2016, 10:17:02 am »
Hagrid:  It looks like you follow exactly the same steps I do to delete a stored waveform.  I wonder why it works for me and not for you.
 

Online CustomEngineerer

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 438
  • Country: us
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #101 on: January 07, 2016, 02:17:58 pm »
The first time I tried to delete a stored waveform the same thing happened to me. I tried again a little later and it worked. I don't remember exactly what I did different but I don't seem to have a problem deleting them anymore. Maybe make sure you aren't actively using the waveform before you try to delete it, change the waveform to one of the standard built in ones (sin or square or something else). Or when you get to the window to delete it, try to click on something else (using the multiturn knob) and then select the waveform again and delete it. Just tried again and didn't make a difference, it deletes them everytime for me regardless of what I try. Sorry. I do know that I was initially having problems with the first arb waveform I sent to the scope using EasyWave. I couldn't get it to display correctly so I kept try to change the waveform in EasyWave and then resending to the SDG2042X with the same file name. When I would view it on my scope it would look like a couple of different waveforms combined, but none of the ones I had tried to create. I was about to give up on easy wave and so I tried a different name for the waveform file and ever since then it has worked fine. I've also been able to delete them since. I have no idea what caused this behavior.

Edit: Strike through bogus suggestions and added extra info after.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2016, 02:37:58 pm by CustomEngineerer »
 

Offline Hagrid

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 20
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #102 on: January 07, 2016, 05:36:32 pm »
(solved: http://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/the-siglent-sdg2042x-thread/msg838169/#msg838169)
Hello again, I tried it now again. I can delete files but only some. If a waveform is called "wave3" I can delete it without any problems.
"Sin(3x)_10kp" for example can not be deleted. If I import another waveform with the same name it gets overwritten. Why is it impossible to delete files if they have some special names? This is strange.

Greetings Hagrid
« Last Edit: January 09, 2016, 12:02:53 am by Hagrid »
 

Online CustomEngineerer

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 438
  • Country: us
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #103 on: January 07, 2016, 05:47:53 pm »
When I initially had troubles deleting the file it was named "wave1". But again, its no longer a problem. I can now delete it regardless of the name. I have used a bunch of different names, from "wave[12345]" to names describing what the waveform is, and its not a problem to delete them anymore.
 

Offline Salas

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 291
  • Country: gr
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #104 on: January 07, 2016, 07:56:24 pm »
I got one too. Well loaded with functions and performance for the price but It could have a quieter fan. I kinda miss my previous Instek ARB gen for noiseless and straightforward operation but this one has more stuff and modes to offer so its OK. I wonder if it will bring more noise when extended to 120MHZ like scopes with wider bandwidth do? I also saw the 120 MHZ sine signal kinda crooked on Dave's video. I see that the 40MHz sine fidelity is fine in my test though. So are there performance trade offs in extending to the full bandwidth option?
 

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11961
  • Country: nz
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #105 on: January 07, 2016, 08:09:28 pm »
I got one too. Well loaded with functions and performance for the price but It could have a quieter fan. I kinda miss my previous Instek ARB gen for noiseless and straightforward operation but this one has more stuff and modes to offer so its OK. I wonder if it will bring more noise when extended to 120MHZ like scopes with wider bandwidth do? I also saw the 120 MHZ sine signal kinda crooked on Dave's video. I see that the 40MHz sine fidelity is fine in my test though. So are there performance trade offs in extending to the full bandwidth option?
That's a nice waveform considering it's 9V p-p @ 40 MHz.
Often attempting to produce a large amplitude HF waveform with an AWG will affect waveform fidelity. If you look at various HF waveforms posted on EEVblog you'll notice the p-p settings set quite low for this reason.
As the HW in the SDG2kX range is all the same AFAIK there should be no difference in operation if you decide to improve it.  ;)
Avid Rabid Hobbyist & NZ Siglent Distributor
 

Offline Salas

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 291
  • Country: gr
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #106 on: January 07, 2016, 08:56:16 pm »
~10V p-p actually 8) OK lets lobby for Noctua replacement fans now ;)
 

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2668
  • Country: fi
  • Starting with DLL21
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #107 on: January 07, 2016, 11:07:20 pm »
I got one too. Well loaded with functions and performance for the price but It could have a quieter fan. I kinda miss my previous Instek ARB gen for noiseless and straightforward operation but this one has more stuff and modes to offer so its OK. I wonder if it will bring more noise when extended to 120MHZ like scopes with wider bandwidth do? I also saw the 120 MHZ sine signal kinda crooked on Dave's video. I see that the 40MHz sine fidelity is fine in my test though. So are there performance trade offs in extending to the full bandwidth option?

Why there is oscilloscope  BW rejection ON in this image, or what is this "B" meaning? 

What is signal true level?
« Last Edit: January 07, 2016, 11:10:47 pm by rf-loop »
If practice and theory is not equal it tells that used application of theory  is wrong or the theory itself is wrong.
It is much easier to think an apple fall to the ground than to think that the earth and the apple will begin to move toward each other and collide.
 

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11961
  • Country: nz
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #108 on: January 07, 2016, 11:12:51 pm »
I got one too. Well loaded with functions and performance for the price but It could have a quieter fan. I kinda miss my previous Instek ARB gen for noiseless and straightforward operation but this one has more stuff and modes to offer so its OK. I wonder if it will bring more noise when extended to 120MHZ like scopes with wider bandwidth do? I also saw the 120 MHZ sine signal kinda crooked on Dave's video. I see that the 40MHz sine fidelity is fine in my test though. So are there performance trade offs in extending to the full bandwidth option?

Why there is 20MHz BW rejection ON in this image? 

What is signal true level?
:-DD
Nothing wrong with rf-loop's eyes, but mine  :palm: I missed that.  |O
Avid Rabid Hobbyist & NZ Siglent Distributor
 

Offline Hagrid

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 20
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #109 on: January 08, 2016, 12:19:00 am »
(Solved: http://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/the-siglent-sdg2042x-thread/msg838169/#msg838169)
Hello, I have some more information about the deleting problem.
I have tested some file names.
Not recognized symbols: öäü§²³°€~´

"wave[3]": Can be deleted takes a while, like a file with a regular name. My file was about 64kB in size. The SDG2042X told me it was deleted. After the message I pulled the flash drive out, but the file was still on the flash drive. I tried it another time and noticed my flash drive blinking about 3 seconds after the message. I pulled it out after the blinking and the file was deleted. A 22MB big file behaved the same so no problem here.
"wave{3}": Same as "wave[3]".
"wave_3" : Same as "wave[3]".

Filenames containing: "`'&#()-_;@" could NOT be ereased on my device.

I have loaded some waveforms containing these symbols before I knew I could not erase them. So what am I supposed to do now?
I have written them a PM, hopefully I get an answer and we get a fix  ;D.

Greetings, Hagrid
« Last Edit: January 09, 2016, 12:01:08 am by Hagrid »
 

Offline Salas

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 291
  • Country: gr
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #110 on: January 08, 2016, 03:23:56 am »
I got one too. Well loaded with functions and performance for the price but It could have a quieter fan. I kinda miss my previous Instek ARB gen for noiseless and straightforward operation but this one has more stuff and modes to offer so its OK. I wonder if it will bring more noise when extended to 120MHZ like scopes with wider bandwidth do? I also saw the 120 MHZ sine signal kinda crooked on Dave's video. I see that the 40MHz sine fidelity is fine in my test though. So are there performance trade offs in extending to the full bandwidth option?

Why there is oscilloscope  BW rejection ON in this image, or what is this "B" meaning? 

What is signal true level?

I had forgotten the 100MHZ limit on the 200MHZ scope on. The level displayed is true (LMR-195 coax, scope input ratio X1, HiZ).
 
The following users thanked this post: msraya

Offline Salas

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 291
  • Country: gr
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #111 on: January 08, 2016, 03:31:53 am »
Here I run it again with all the parameters showing :)
 

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2668
  • Country: fi
  • Starting with DLL21
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #112 on: January 08, 2016, 09:00:26 pm »
Here I run it again with all the parameters showing :)

As you told there B can be 20MHz or 100MHz BW rej so in 100MHz position all ok.



-------------------------
Not just for you  but also common sidenote:

Even with as low as 40MHz "nearly DC" impedance matching is still important for quality mesurements.

Here in  connect signal from 50ohm source impedance  using 50ohm coaxial and connect it to oscilloscope 1Mohm input.
Result is perhaps between garbage to nearly right but without more checks you do not know how much there is error with oscilloscope displayed level.  It is sure in this case error is not big but this source of errors need keep in mind.



Here very simplified example where I do not make "show" where I set this test for maximal error.

There is two enough indentical cables but lenght 60cm and 120cm, in this case (not China Export junk cables) good quality RG58 test cables and of course with Suhner connectors. (note: type RG58 cable, even if it is best quality, is total junk for real high grade lab works other than DC - audio)

Test
Source 50ohm and level passed for 6Vpp on the output connector if load is 50ohm and also set for 6Vpp when there is no load.

Images 1 and 2.
oscilloscope input 50ohm.

1. Connected using 60cm cable.
2. Connected using 120cm cable.

Level do not change much

images 3 and 4
oscilloscope input 1Mohm

3. 60cm 
4. 120cm
(and images are in right order!)

Level change  enough for show that cable lenght is markable error source when there is high level error with impedance match. Even with low 40MHz freq.
 
Who knows now what is level with 40cm or 100cm cable... or 150cm cable, or if sstill keep 50ohm cable but cable type change.
(btw, in free air 40MHz wavelenght is ~7,5m and in cable it is less, perhaps something like ~5m)
 
« Last Edit: January 08, 2016, 09:19:51 pm by rf-loop »
If practice and theory is not equal it tells that used application of theory  is wrong or the theory itself is wrong.
It is much easier to think an apple fall to the ground than to think that the earth and the apple will begin to move toward each other and collide.
 

Offline Hagrid

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 20
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #113 on: January 09, 2016, 12:00:02 am »
Hello again, I managed to get rid of those evil, undeleteable waveforms. So if somebody has the same problem like me he might be interested in the solution.
There has already be mentioned early in this thread the ability to connect to the device via telnet. That is what I did. after some searching I found the location where the waveforms are stored: "usr/bin/siglent/usr/usr".
Unfortunetally I wasn't able to delete a single file because they contained symbols which result in a syntax error if I typed in their name in the command.
So I deleted the last "usr" directory, in my case there were only the waveforms I wanted to delete. In "usr/bin/siglent/usr" are some files which I don't want to touch. I think it is not such a good idea to delete random files ;). I created a new empty usr directory so the path "usr/bin/siglent/usr/usr" is complete now again. After a look on the device I was confirmed that the files were gone, yey.

If somebody tries this please make sure you don't delete the whole usr directory. I bet this would be quite a desaster. Please make sure that "/usr/bin/siglent/usr/usr only containes the waveforms you want to delete. I don't know if this location will stay the same if Siglent release an update some day.
You do this at you own risk, don't poke the wrong files.
I hope they keep the telnet open. Looks like it can be sometimes really handy.

Greetings, Hagrid
« Last Edit: January 09, 2016, 06:11:20 am by Hagrid »
 

Offline Salas

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 291
  • Country: gr
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #114 on: January 09, 2016, 12:39:51 am »
@ rf-loop

Thanks for the side note. I was only after a visual signal shape fidelity check at max output frequency & amplitude though.

I run some AF FFT by the way. Not bad for a general purpose gen. 1V RMS and 0.3VRMS. Channel 2 is doing better in my unit.

A full spectrum flatness spec confirmation test remains to be done by someone with calibrated wide bandwidth equipment.
 

Offline fitch

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 20
  • Country: us
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #115 on: January 15, 2016, 11:41:19 pm »
Just curious, using analogNewbie's hack, is there a way to restore the original serial number?

Thanks.
 

Offline mojoe

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 235
  • Country: us
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #116 on: January 16, 2016, 06:34:34 am »
I was disappointed to read that this series only goes up to 25 MHz for square waves. I need 30 MHz. Can the arb function be used to generate a 30 MHz square wave?

Are there any similar products from other vendors that will do 30 MHz square waves?

Also, to the person who said that the arb function can be used to generate sine waves beyond the normal top frequency, please elaborate. I don't have one of these yet, so I'm not up on using an arb function.

Thanks.
 

Offline billfernandez

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 137
  • Country: us
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #117 on: January 18, 2016, 04:11:27 pm »
Just curious, using analogNewbie's hack, is there a way to restore the original serial number?

I haven't done the hack, but his hack is simply to remove a file (which you should make a backup of before removing).  When the generator detects that the file is missing it will recreate a generic version without your password.  I expect that if you were to delete the auto-generated file, and replace it with the file you backed up, that the generator would have its password restored (since it's coded into the file). 
 

Offline JohnG

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 129
  • Country: us
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #118 on: January 23, 2016, 01:39:18 am »
I can add a few comments regarding the performance of this generators, some positives and some bugs (big ones for me :-\). My background for the last several years is as a power electronics engineer, first for a couple big companies, and now a small one for the last year or so. For the latter, I have been getting by with an old HP6012, but having pulse width change over time and from day to day has been a big problem, and sometimes I need signals for modulation, to test startup, transient behavior, etc., but a high-end ARB/pulse gen has been out of reach. The big problem with most of the budget ones has been pulse jitter that basic makes them unusable, along with limited duty cycle range. I'm happy to say that the SDG2042X meets these needs for me and I have been happy with that.

A very nice feature for me is the dual output, with the ability to delay or phase shift one pulse with respect to another. Many power converters have two switches that must be operated roughly out of phase with each other, but often with some small but important deadtime where both are off, or overlap time where both are on. It looks like the 2042X can do this, but...

There is are some show-stopper bugs for me in the synchronization of the two outputs during enabling of outputs, and during changing of pulse widths, and perhaps more. I did not dig deeper, since I get paid for other things, and I need to get paid.

Bug 1: With a pulse output on both channels, and channel 2 delayed with respect to channel 1, if you enable channel 1, then channel 2, the waveform initially looks good. However, a fast scope shows that when channel 2 is enabled, there is actually a small glitch where there is no delay. If these are controlling two switches in a half-bridge power converter, during the glitch you are shorting the power bus with your transistors. Not good. Hopefully this shows up in the first attachment, where I have the scope on infinite persistence. If you look closely, you can see the bright traces, and the faint trace. The bright trace shows a double trace in channel 2, and this is not jitter. This only happens as you enable channel 2. If you look more closely, you can see a faint green trace where channel 2 is not delayed. This only happens for a brief period after enabling channel 2.


Bug 2: If you adjust the delay setting on the fly, the same thing happens as with Bug 1. I spent some more time with triggering to try and capture this, in the second attachment. I start with channel 2 delayed from channel 1 by 10ns, and I have the scope set to trigger if the delay becomes longer than 15 ns. The top trace shows several ms of capture, and the bottom trace shows a zoomed in view prior to the trigger. When the delay is set to 10ns, the scope is not triggering, and then I change the delay to 20 ns, which causes the scope to trigger.

If you look at the zoomed-in waveform, before about -2.5454 ms, the delay is about 10 ns, as set. After this, the delay goes to zero, and stays that way for over 2 ms, with one dropout along the way. Finally, at t=0, the delay hits 20 ns as desired.

This basically means that the dual pulse output is of very limited use for me. 2 ms of the wrong setting will easily fry a couple of small power transistors (GaN power FETs in my case) when they are shorting a power bus. I really hope this can be fixed in a firmware update, and I've seen that Siglent hangs around here, so I hope they are looking.

I'm still keeping the generator. It meets or exceeds all my other needs. I just really wanted to be able to use the two channels for driving a power half-bridge without needing a bunch of other stuff to synchronize every thing. I will note that the Rigol 4162 that I got at my old job also could not do this properly, and it had so much jitter as to be much less useful.

John
 

Offline alank2

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1907
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #119 on: January 23, 2016, 02:56:52 am »
Reports these bugs to Steve @ Siglent and he will get them on the bug list to get fixed.  They have fixed many bugs that I reported.  PM me if you want his email address.
 

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11961
  • Country: nz
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #120 on: January 23, 2016, 05:54:50 am »
Reports these bugs to Steve @ Siglent and he will get them on the bug list to get fixed.  They have fixed many bugs that I reported.  PM me if you want his email address.
Yes, Steve should see this, but he's in China ATM so I'll point Tech support to JohnG's post also.
Avid Rabid Hobbyist & NZ Siglent Distributor
 

Offline JohnG

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 129
  • Country: us
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #121 on: January 23, 2016, 05:57:52 am »
Thanks, I did email Steve with the info as well.

John
 

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11961
  • Country: nz
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #122 on: January 23, 2016, 06:08:23 am »
Thanks, I did email Steve with the info as well.

John
Welcome to the forum and thanks for providing feedback.

Of course it's now the weekend in China so it'll take a couple of days to get a response.
Avid Rabid Hobbyist & NZ Siglent Distributor
 

Offline markone

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Country: it
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #123 on: January 23, 2016, 01:32:45 pm »
-snip

Bug 1: With a pulse output on both channels, and channel 2 delayed with respect to channel 1, if you enable channel 1, then channel 2, the waveform initially looks good. However, a fast scope shows that when channel 2 is enabled, there is actually a small glitch where there is no delay. If these are controlling two switches in a half-bridge power converter, during the glitch you are shorting the power bus with your transistors. Not good. Hopefully this shows up in the first attachment, where I have the scope on infinite persistence. If you look closely, you can see the bright traces, and the faint trace. The bright trace shows a double trace in channel 2, and this is not jitter. This only happens as you enable channel 2. If you look more closely, you can see a faint green trace where channel 2 is not delayed. This only happens for a brief period after enabling channel 2.


Bug 2: If you adjust the delay setting on the fly, the same thing happens as with Bug 1. I spent some more time with triggering to try and capture this, in the second attachment. I start with channel 2 delayed from channel 1 by 10ns, and I have the scope set to trigger if the delay becomes longer than 15 ns. The top trace shows several ms of capture, and the bottom trace shows a zoomed in view prior to the trigger. When the delay is set to 10ns, the scope is not triggering, and then I change the delay to 20 ns, which causes the scope to trigger.

Good to know, i have some questions about :

-have you also noticed pulse width+ distorsion during parameters change ?
-have you operated the generator by hand on UI panel or by remote interface ?
-are you using the last available FW version ?

In the past i developed a fast prototyping system for induction heating cooktoop (a module with 2 channel, 7KW total power), based on fpga system where i was driving two half bridge drivers (couple of 80A/600V IGBTs each with IC floating gate drivers), but honestly i never dared two go straight to drive them, at logic level of course, with a pulse generator, even if the system was HW protected for cross conduction events / output overcurrent by mean of "leg" current sensors / ultrafast comparators and latched inhibition logic, for the simple reason that is too risky also to play on the fly by hand with parameters, considering that also a missed conduction cycle is a serious problem on that kind of application (the load is a resonant circuit).

I assume that you are working with a low power / low voltage system and you do not strictly need such kind of subsidiary protection systems, but if this kind of work is a recurrent activity then would be nice to develop a dedicated driving system to preserve your circuit & your safety.

I haven't yet studied the instrument control interface command set at all (... but i will have to do soon), maybe there are instructions to apply pulse width, delay, phase changes in a syncronous way on both channels without glitch, with a proper sequencing, that of course has to be put in place by am external program.

It could be a workaround viable during the wait for the firmware fix, since in the meantime i will not hold my breath ;-)

 

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14423
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: The Siglent SDG2042X Thread
« Reply #124 on: January 23, 2016, 01:34:41 pm »
Not SDG2000 specific but I also noticed the SDG1000 series does not do very clean startups of waveforms!
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf