EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
General => General Technical Chat => Topic started by: 84GKSIG on October 11, 2013, 08:45:45 am
-
Hey there, this being an electronics forum the likely hood of every one here having some form of test equipment wont be uncommon, I love looking at the stuff and learning how to use it all.
So basically here's what I'm asking, post a photo of your test equipment, can be a photo of one or more, new or old! home made? why not!
(http://i541.photobucket.com/albums/gg387/84GKSIG/toolsnstuff/IMG_0512.jpg)
Trio CS-1650 CRO
Bwid 509B CRO
powersupplies make and model must of fallen off some where during its life but if any one knows what it is, let me know. :-+
cheers guys, hope to see some updates!
-
Trio CS-1650 CRO
I have the same scope in the shop. Only thing it is labeled as a B&K.
Hope to restore it one day. was one of the first scopes I had in a self own shop.
-
its a pretty awesome little scope for what it is, I,ve used a couple but it was the very first I could call my own and only about it mid last year? in amazing condition and I do plan on keeping it up and running ;D
When I got the scope it had been taken great care of, even came with the manual.
(http://i541.photobucket.com/albums/gg387/84GKSIG/toolsnstuff/IMG_0963.jpg)
(http://i541.photobucket.com/albums/gg387/84GKSIG/toolsnstuff/IMG_0964.jpg)
thought it was interesting how you said about yours being labeled as a B&K - never heard of the brand? wonder if theres any other differences ?
that scope sent me on a bit of a scope hunt, ended up getting this one for pretty cheap but not working, had a play and seems to be all good after replacing some caps, its an advance instruments OS 1000
(http://i541.photobucket.com/albums/gg387/84GKSIG/toolsnstuff/IMG_0835.jpg)
here it is on the work bench upside down after having the cap replaced in that shot!
-
Pix is my radio workbench as of 1970-71 era.
-
Here's a recent shot of my workbench. It's a mix of test equipment from the 1950s till now. I mostly use it for restoring old test equipment for my collection.
(http://www.stevenjohnson.com/web-pics/workbench-2013-09.jpg)
Now if you want to see some of my really old test equipment check here:
http://www.stevenjohnson.com/testers-misc.htm (http://www.stevenjohnson.com/testers-misc.htm)
-
Nice pic, SLJ, around the Power Designs Supplies, the Tek TM500 modules, and other greats of old, the little Rigol 1000 series sits!
-
Nice pic, SLJ, around the Power Designs Supplies, the Tek TM500 modules, and other greats of old, the little Rigol 1000 series sits!
I find I really don't use the Rigol for looking at a waveform as much as I use it for measurements. The waveform display just tells me the signal is there and then I use the measurements display on it to give me all the info without having to count the graticule's. I use it more as an overgrown DMM that displays everything at once.
(http://www.stevenjohnson.com/web-pics/rigol-display01.gif)
The frequency display in the upper right is very accurate on it. Not sure why the freq. readout below is a little off. They really should match but as long as I know which one to use it's not a problem.
The vintage Tek gets used for all the waveform stuff.
-
(http://www.stevenjohnson.com/web-pics/rigol-display01.gif)
The frequency display in the upper right is very accurate on it. Not sure why the freq. readout below is a little off. They really should match but as long as I know which one to use it's not a problem.
The display in the upper right is counting how often the trigger circuit is triggered. It's not based on the display, but it seems to have a long enough gate time that it's very accurate, as you note. The other measurement is based on the display, I believe. It's the equivalent of letting the computer do a cursor-based measurement. It requires that you have at least a full waveform on the screen, while the trigger counter doesn't have this requirement.
If you feed two different frequency sources into each of the two channels, you can get the second type of measurement on both channels, but the "accurate" frequency counter can only be based on the trigger input.
-
That makes sense. Thanks.
-
Here's a recent shot of my workbench. It's a mix of test equipment from the 1950s till now. I mostly use it for restoring old test equipment for my collection.
(http://www.stevenjohnson.com/web-pics/workbench-2013-09.jpg)
Now if you want to see some of my really old test equipment check here:
http://www.stevenjohnson.com/testers-misc.htm (http://www.stevenjohnson.com/testers-misc.htm)
What are the devices with the gigantic meters next to your monitor? I love a giant meter :)
-
what model rigol is that ? Ive got it in my head that I want one but even watching some of the review videos I just dont know. I rarely deal with stuff that would require a 100mhz scope but the head room would come in handy in an event where its required, if you know what I mean?
I was looking at the DS1052E as a potential candidate for a first digital storage scope.
As for the link to the vintage test equipment, just wow most of that stuff is beautiful, if only it could tell stories :)
The only tube based piece of test equipment ive got in a signal generator. Tech TE-20D
(http://i541.photobucket.com/albums/gg387/84GKSIG/toolsnstuff/IMG_0594.jpg)
(http://i541.photobucket.com/albums/gg387/84GKSIG/toolsnstuff/IMG_0595.jpg)
not sure what the deal was with the cord but it now has an earth and works beautifully, it never gets used though, its only for looking at and admiring
lol and giant meters are cool ;D
-
The frequency display in the upper right is very accurate on it. Not sure why the freq. readout below is a little off. They really should match but as long as I know which one to use it's not a problem.
The vintage Tek gets used for all the waveform stuff.
You'll find that all those measurements are calculated from only the digital waveform visible on the display, so they can suffer pretty bad quantization error if the waveform isn't scaled properly. The counter in the upper right is from the hardware trigger so it'll be accurate as long as it's triggering correctly. Because the display is only about 300px wide, if there are 5 periods on screen the software frequency counter can only be accurate to about (5/300)*100%=1.67%. If you adjust the timebase so barely one period fits on the screen you get (1/300)*100%=0.33%, much better. Same goes for vertical resolution (around 200px), so try to use the vernier adjustment to scale it as large as possible.
Measurements like Vrms can be affected if you don't have an exact number of cycles on the screen - if there are more zero crossings than peaks shown on the display it'll read low, and if there are more peaks than zero crossings it'll read high. It's really only accurate at frequencies that fit an exact number of periods across the screen.
-
What are the devices with the gigantic meters next to your monitor? I love a giant meter :)
Not sure which meters you are referring to but here is a picture from earlier this year. Gear has moved around a little but I think most are listed except for the two new Power Designs supplies I've added:
(http://www.stevenjohnson.com/pics/whatswhat2013.jpg)
-
curious, what are you running on the 2 networked machines ?