| General > General Technical Chat |
| The Rigol DS1052E |
| << < (9/166) > >> |
| TrentO:
Simon, After spending five hours troubleshooting an RS-232/UART issue (it turns out it was a software error in Lucio Di Jasio's Programming 32-bit Microcontrollers in C" book,) I must say that the Tektronix is much more friendly to those used to analog scopes. I validated my hardware concerns using the Tektronix immediately; trying to figure out the triggering modes on the Rigol took a bit more time. However, having done so, I have a greater appreciation for the capabilities of the Rigol. Still, it just isn't as intuitive to use as the TDS-220. As the even the newer Tektronix scopes seem maintain the same function keys, I think I'm beginning to really SEE what is meant by the expression-- "Tektronix really knows how to make a good scope." The business-oriented side of me says that Rigol had to make their scopes act and feel sufficiently different from Tektronix, so that they wouldn't get sued. The frosted side of me says that the Rigol dev team went features-crazy and stuffed this baby beyond the limit of what's practical in a 12" x 6" x 5" device. I hate to think what I (might) miss in future troubleshooting episodes, simply by fact of not being familiar with my gear. My new tagline for Tektronix: "Tektronix-- for EE's that don't wanna F*ck around!" Either way-- I'm soooo happy with my decision to forsake the analog-scope world! If you're getting into the logic-based stuff, there's just no other way. |
| EEVblog:
With regards to the Rigol fan, I recon it can probably be disconnected or dropped in speed, my unit doesn't even get warm. With regards to the "cheap" construction of the Rigol, I have to disagree. My unit has a top class soldering job, and the component quality is top class also, no cheap asian substitutes. And the design and layout is excellent. Although it appears the soldering quality does vary between units as people are saying. Even factoring in questionable soldering the quality on some units, the Rigol is far from being a "cheap" design. There is no doubting the excellent usability of the TDS-210 series, that is why it's been the industries most popular digital scope from day one. It just shits me that more than decade later, and after several model improvements, the base model unit (TDS-1000B/2000B) STILL has a shitty 2.5KB memory! They are clearly protecting the market for their mid range units. Rigol on the other have no such hang-up's so you get 15K/1MB even on the bottom of the range unit. Dave. |
| TrentO:
I only wish that they used chrome-plated steel, or steel that was galvanized after the stamping process, NOT shaved the IC's (or at least cleaned up after themselves) and limited the fingerprints during manufacturing. To me, its a shame that they degraded their product so late in the process by cutting-corners like this-- I think they're only saving about $5.00 per unit by doing so. It works well for me so far, although the fan may take a little getting used to. -Trent |
| EEVblog:
For those interested: http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.30573 $412 with Free shipping worldwide. That's the cheapest you can get it in Oz at least I believe. Dave. |
| TrentO:
I have been called "bank of dumb-shit" before, so someone PLEASE help me with this!!! But first, a short preface-- I figured that by essentially 'screwing around,' and trying to measure everything in sight, would help me to learn the intricacies of using my new Rigol and, to a lesser extent my (new to me) Tektronix TDS-220. I had a piece of really high-end networking equipment-- a layer 3-7 intrusion prevention appliance with GigE capability that I took the cover off today, to see what was inside-- a large number of FPGA's, network processors and what not-- and about half-a-dozen SMT oscillator devices. Cool. Something I can measure, and if I only measured the OSC outputs, with little fear of screwing up my $20,000 network device! Now, what I DON'T understand is how my 50-Mhz-rated Rigol 1052E could easily measure the clock on 25Mhz and 50Mhz as expected, but could also measure the clock on 66.6Mhz, 100Mhz, and 125Mhz! See pic of the 125Mhz displayed, auto-triggered and measured by my 1052E-- --- End quote --- It had a little trouble measuring the 100Mhz oscillator output-- the level was lower and there was some jitter apparent-- but the the Rigol 1052 did display, auto-trigger and measure (steadily) see pic-- --- End quote --- Now what is MOST interesting to me is that my Tektronix TDS 220, kept pace with the Rigol 1052E, EXCEPT for trying to measure the 100Mhz-- It simply could not do it!!! It did fine with the 125Mhz, but it could not find an adequate input on the 100Mhz to trigger! Note-- I didn't photograph the screens from the Tektronix during these tests-- the monochrome is much harder to capture, but the output levels were pretty much the same-- I didn't see any attenuation or v-div differences (between the Rigol versus the Tektronix) across the 25-125Mhz range. What the hell? This is the kind of shit that makes me want to give all this up and take up duck hunting instead. It just doesn't make any sense (TO ME.) For those of you who have been reading this thread-- I did say earlier that the mainboard in my 1052E looked more like the mainboard in a 1102E-- could it be possible that my 1052E has a 1102E board in it, repaired and downgraded with lower software? Or, more plausible-- I don't know what I'm doing, and getting am getting excited for no reason? Someone please answer-- otherwise I wouldn't be able to sleep tonight. Thanks, -Trent |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |