Home
Help
Search
Login
Register1
Recent Posts
2
Embedded Computing / Re: WINCE question
« Last post by discomike on Today at 10:21:52 am »Yes it's like you're assuming.
When building a .Net (C#/VB.net) executable for WinCe/Phone you target the .Net compact framework which is a subset of the normal desktop .Net framework. And the windows PE (.exe) format is platform agnostic so that is why you can have the same .exe and run it on x86 win10 as well as some MIPS WinCE 5.0 =) The IL get's compiled at runtime (or installation).
Some requirements for this to work properly is that the executable is flagged as re-targetable (some option during compilation, can maybe be patched afterwards) and you have to be aware to not use any feature that is not present in both versions of the .Net platform you target.
If you use any native code/dll, you can write your application to load different DLLs depending on what platform you're running on etc.
I used to do this as a quick solution when customers wanted to run some embedded applications we developed on the desktop, without having to provide support/deliveries/testing of a real desktop solution. One alternative here would be to use the mobile device emulator, but that used to be quite slow compared to this approach, but could help you if you need to run some native code.
You also had to be aware that some GUI controls etc behave slightly different depending on platforms and add a few workarounds/tweaks/etc.
Now it's been 10 years since I last touched this stuff, but I did save one customer from having to buy 300 new Android hand-scanners that would only be used for 6 months (during a system migration, of which later they would only need ~30 new units) using this trick (and writing a slim WinCE client for their old PDAs to connect to the new WEB/HTTP/REST back-end system).
When building a .Net (C#/VB.net) executable for WinCe/Phone you target the .Net compact framework which is a subset of the normal desktop .Net framework. And the windows PE (.exe) format is platform agnostic so that is why you can have the same .exe and run it on x86 win10 as well as some MIPS WinCE 5.0 =) The IL get's compiled at runtime (or installation).
Some requirements for this to work properly is that the executable is flagged as re-targetable (some option during compilation, can maybe be patched afterwards) and you have to be aware to not use any feature that is not present in both versions of the .Net platform you target.
If you use any native code/dll, you can write your application to load different DLLs depending on what platform you're running on etc.
I used to do this as a quick solution when customers wanted to run some embedded applications we developed on the desktop, without having to provide support/deliveries/testing of a real desktop solution. One alternative here would be to use the mobile device emulator, but that used to be quite slow compared to this approach, but could help you if you need to run some native code.
You also had to be aware that some GUI controls etc behave slightly different depending on platforms and add a few workarounds/tweaks/etc.
Now it's been 10 years since I last touched this stuff, but I did save one customer from having to buy 300 new Android hand-scanners that would only be used for 6 months (during a system migration, of which later they would only need ~30 new units) using this trick (and writing a slim WinCE client for their old PDAs to connect to the new WEB/HTTP/REST back-end system).
3
Test Equipment / Re: TinySA Ultra launched
« Last post by pdenisowski on Today at 10:20:59 am »The tinySA does not do a continuous sweep but sweeps in discrete steps with possible silence in between. Set the scan speed slow and you will see the step
PLL's locking after the step
I do not mute the output as this would slow down the maximum sweep speed and created larger gaps which you will hear as stronger clicks.
Any stepwise sweep will always have some form of artifacts
Can you explain why these may be a problem?
First, I think the TinySA is a fantastic project, so thanks very much for doing this!
I'm guessing that the "issue" here is people may not realize that the sweep is stepwise: as others have mentioned, a continuous (uninterrupted) frequency sweep is possible on higher end RF signal generators or spec an tracking generators, but these are obviously an entirely different class of instruments at a very different price point
I have to admit that I would have (naively) assumed the sweep was continuous if I hadn't seen this thread.
Thanks again!
4
Beginners / Re: Convert US standard 115V to International 230V
« Last post by soldar on Today at 10:20:54 am »The problem is 50Hz will increase the ripple on the smoothing capacitor, so the voltage will drop to a lower level during the troughs. This shouldn't be a problem with a properly designed power supply, as the capacitor should be adequately oversized, but it will be a problem, if it's marginal and perhaps the voltage is also on the lower end of the operating range.Thank you for explaining and illustrating my point so well.
5
Test Equipment / Re: Standardised Way To Test Oscilloscope Screen Update Rate
« Last post by nctnico on Today at 10:18:13 am »Ofcourse a 'smoother' fading may look nicer but you are not getting more or less visual information (assuming the visualisation of the signals isn't broken).This really is a non-issue which has been discussed before. Any form of high-waveform update rate will have a certain amount of persistence time to make sure the signal stays on the screen long enough to be noticed. Think in order of magnitude of 200ms. Anything below is likely to be missed. If you think about it and think back about the relative long fade times of phosphorus used in CROs, you'll come to the conclusion that the display update period can't be a parameter in the process which shows the signal.
Sure, but why does any scope update the display faster than 200ms then?
I for one prefer the apparent faster updating of the 2000 vs the 1000
6
Test Equipment / Re: SDS800X HD Wanted Features
« Last post by Mortymore on Today at 10:16:25 am »How about making the tabs a tiny bit smaller too?Not possible without sacrificing space needed for indication of channel settings.
BW limit, Hidden (but active) etc.
Based on your information, and what i found in the manual the statement "Not possible" is wrong. See picture.
It would loose readability in a 7" display that it's not that big. Cram the information in the display, just because it fits, it's not a good design interface.
That's one thing that I would have liked to see in the 800X-HD, with the same form factor as the 1000X-E, but that has lost the navigations buttons near the display, in favour of a touch-screen, that as release some space to fit an 8" screen. But one have to consider that with all those "small improvements", the cost would increase, hence the difference price for the 1000X-HD.
7
Test Equipment / Re: Standardised Way To Test Oscilloscope Screen Update Rate
« Last post by m k on Today at 10:13:24 am »Analog optical sensor?
Bright part of the screen has a brightness dent.
Light pistol used to be a thing.
Bright part of the screen has a brightness dent.
Light pistol used to be a thing.
8
Test Equipment / Re: Siglent SDS3000X HD and upgraded SDS1000X HD
« Last post by skander36 on Today at 10:12:44 am »As expected, the core architecture seems very similar to the 800X HD series. The front ends differ, of course, due to the 50 Ohm support in the 1000 series.
I am still puzzled by the dual ADCs. Why did Siglent splash out on those, given that the total sampling rate across all active channels is always 2 GSa/s maximum in the SDS1000X HD? Does this imply that the scope could technically run at 2*2 GSa/s (or 4*1 GSa/s) and is just throttled to keep the higher-end models differentiated?
It's the same for the 800X HD platform, of course. But I don't think we ever reached a conclusion there?
I see two reasons. One or both can be true:
One as you said, the configuration is chosen to create a gap between models.
Or the ADC is configured so, because the FPGA does not have enough resources to process data from 2X2 GSPS.
The double ADC indeed should be capable of a max. 2x2 GSPS in dual ADC config or 4 GSPS in interleaved mode.
9
Beginners / Re: How Current Limitation is happening in the circuit???
« Last post by Xena E on Today at 10:08:10 am »Is that stripboard?
Where's the rest of it?
(Transformer, load, volt amp meter, pass devices, as you have it connected).
I don't want to be rude, however I or anyone else here haven't got a frigging crystal ball! If a circuit is burning up components, there is either something fundamentally wrong, with the design or you have mis-connected the circuit.
Vague comments about things burning up and asking what's wrong as if we're at the bench with you is a waste of time.
OK, here's a stab in the dark. If I am to understand from your previous post that the meter you are using is connected to that 5.1V stabiliser and that is being powered from the same transformer winding/rectifier as the main circuit....
...if there is no form of galvanic isolation between the two there is a possible source of your burning up. The circuit as drawn does not support that though...
If you want something that just works buy one. If this is a project that demonstrates your skill level you have already achieved that.
REGARDS,
XENA.
Where's the rest of it?
(Transformer, load, volt amp meter, pass devices, as you have it connected).
I don't want to be rude, however I or anyone else here haven't got a frigging crystal ball! If a circuit is burning up components, there is either something fundamentally wrong, with the design or you have mis-connected the circuit.
Vague comments about things burning up and asking what's wrong as if we're at the bench with you is a waste of time.
OK, here's a stab in the dark. If I am to understand from your previous post that the meter you are using is connected to that 5.1V stabiliser and that is being powered from the same transformer winding/rectifier as the main circuit....
Quote
It is not an auxiliary coil that is used for deriving 5V for volt amp meter...
...From the main transformer after full wave rectification, I have used it.
...if there is no form of galvanic isolation between the two there is a possible source of your burning up. The circuit as drawn does not support that though...
If you want something that just works buy one. If this is a project that demonstrates your skill level you have already achieved that.
REGARDS,
XENA.
10
Test Equipment / Re: JunTek PSG9080 Programmable Signal Generator (80 MHz - 300 MSa/s - 14-bit)
« Last post by Kean on Today at 10:05:50 am »Allthough it does not answer my question, it is still a good suggestion.
Well, you didn't state any clear question and just asked how it looked.
I agree it looks like they weren't thinking as the screw could short the traces, and I'm surprised it didn't get improved after the first batch - or at a minimum adding an insulating washer.
I've seen a lot worse, and on significantly more expensive equipment.
I rarely use my PSG9080. If I did need it more often, I would certainly consider replacing it with a Rigol or Siglent. You made a good decision.