REVIEW - Rigol DS2072 - First Impressions of the DS2000 series from Rigol

[marmad]

Is a changelog available for the latest DS2000 firmware (00.02.01.00.03)?

I haven't gotten my hands on one yet (and Rigol doesn't usually publicly release them), but I'm stilll hoping to find out more info about changes.


And thanks to Teneyes and EV for the Trigger Out tests.

Would someone with HW v.2 / model A like to try it as well - to see if Rigol tightened the specs up in the newer hardware?

You just need to send a > 100k sine/square wave into CH1 (edge trigger) and Trigger Out to CH2 - then use a long persistence (e.g. 2s) to get an idea of jitter. The distance between the trigger point and the (averaged) rising edge of the Trigger Out signal is the delay (plus or minus the farthest distance of other edges).

Then just switch the sine wave input (and edge trigger) to External Trigger and check again.

[EV]

Here are pictures from pulse generator traces:
- CH1 pulse from generator
- CH2 pretrigger pulse from generator

In picture 2 the cable (RG174) to CH2 is 65 cm longer than in picture 1. Delay from the longer cable is about 2.8 ns. This gives 2.8 / 0.65 = 4.3 ns delay per one meter when RG174 cable is used.

[JDubU]

Would someone with HW v.2 / model A like to try it as well - to see if Rigol tightened the specs up in the newer hardware?

You just need to send a > 100k sine/square wave into CH1 (edge trigger) and Trigger Out to CH2 - then use a long persistence (e.g. 2s) to get an idea of jitter. The distance between the trigger point and the (averaged) rising edge of the Trigger Out signal is the delay (plus or minus the farthest distance of other edges).

Then just switch the sine wave input (and edge trigger) to External Trigger and check again.

This is from HW2 (non A), Firmware 00.02.01.00.03:

[Carrington]

With respect to the 300MHz BW option and firmware 00.02.01.00.03.

- Oscilloscope: DS2072, HW v.1.0.1.0.0.
- Signal source: Altera Cyclone II FPGA.

1K Probe:


Agilent 1073D (500MHz) Probe:


Rigol RP3300 (350MHz) Probe:

[marmad]

This is from HW2 (non A), Firmware 00.02.01.00.03:

Thanks, JDubU. It looks more or less identical with HW v.1. I'm guessing, given their general design, they couldn't make it any better without some major changes. 160 - 230ns is certainly usable; if they would allow External Trigger to be a source to the other trigger types (for cross-triggering purposes), the slightly longer-than-normal delay would matter even less.

[Carrington]

Thanks, JDubU. It looks more or less identical with HW v.1. I'm guessing, given their general design, they couldn't make it any better without some major changes. 160 - 230ns is certainly usable; if they would allow External Trigger to be a source to the other trigger types (for cross-triggering purposes), the slightly longer-than-normal delay would matter even less.

In conjunction with a LA that allows post/pre trigger this delay isn't a problem.

[EV]

I installed BW 300M option to my DS2202. Here are rise time tests with Tek type 284 pulse generator.

In pic 1 I have used BNC cable with 50 ohm feed through terminator. Rise time has changed from 1.4 ns to 1.2 ns and over shoot from 8 % to 10 %. It is not a big change.

In pic 2 I have used 10X probe with 50 ohm feed through terminator between probe tip and generator output connector. Rise time is about 1 ns and over shoot 17 %.

[AndersAnd]

I installed BW 300M option to my DS2202. Here are rise time tests with Tek type 284 pulse generator.

In pic 1 I have used BNC cable with 50 ohm feed through terminator. Rise time has changed from 1.4 ns to 1.2 ns and over shoot from 8 % to 10 %. It is not a big change.

In pic 2 I have used 10X probe with 50 ohm feed through terminator between probe tip and generator output connector. Rise time is about 1 ns and over shoot 17 %.

What HW version does your DS2202 have?

[EV]

It is HW1, picture is before updates.

What HW version does your DS2202 have?

[dschnell]

Hi,

watch out, first post 

After reading (almost) completely the 2 main threads about 2072 I finally bought a 2072 used. I upgraded all options with the already installed latest 1.X fw, then upgraded to newest 2.X firmware via bootloader method but _without_ uninstalling upgraded options (but with FRAM reset), then installed all 2.X available options and now have "non-standard " 200M + 300M options installed.
Otherwise just minor hassles: first reboot after fw upgrade: no go, installed again newest fw, again FRAM reset: it finally booted up, installation of newest options via riglol codes then went without any glitch.

Do I have to expect unusual behavior because of the activated 200M+300M options ? I played around and haven't seen any strangeness because of that. Then again: this is my first scope and I am just an embedded SW engineer interested in hw, so probably I could not recognize .

Anything special I should examine a used scope for ?

Next question: I am on a MAC. Is there any tool I could use on that platform to remote control the scope or do I have to run some Windows VM?

[tlu]

When you said 200M+300M do you mean you are able to set the bandwidth limit for this? I thought the latest code dshh will give you 300Mhz but the bandwidth limit selectable were only 20Mhz and 100Mhz. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Teneyes]

Anything special I should examine a used scope for ?

Hi Dschnell, welcome to this group
check out new posting:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds2000-failures-and-rma-reports/msg347926/#msg347926

[PA0PBZ]

When you said 200M+300M do you mean you are able to set the bandwidth limit for this?

No, if you go from DS2072 to DS2202 the options screen shows the 200 Mhz bandwidth. If you then update to the newest fw and apply the DS2302 code you end up with both 200 Mhz and 300 Mhz in the options screen. I don't think it is a problem though.

[nack]

I have had the same issue with both the 200MHz and 300MHz option available in the options menu. Didn't like it, so I uninstalled the options altogether and entered the 300MHz (+CAN options) to be sure.

[dschnell]

When you said 200M+300M do you mean you are able to set the bandwidth limit for this?

No, if you go from DS2072 to DS2202 the options screen shows the 200 Mhz bandwidth. If you then update to the newest fw and apply the DS2302 code you end up with both 200 Mhz and 300 Mhz in the options screen. I don't think it is a problem though.

That is exactly what I meant. I have both options installed at the same time: the 200MHz and the 300MHz option. The channel bandwidth limit shows 20M and 100M as for all others.

[neilhao]

Fix the print screen problem:
The Ultra Sigma will not take a screenshot with the DS2302 if we upgraded. The reason is that the Ultra Sigma could not recognize the DS2302 during the hand shaking process.

I found out a way to fix this, there is an Init file(file name "Init") under \RIGOL Technologies, Inc\Ultra Sigma, Open it and locate to
[PrintScreenSCPI]
......
DS4012D = ":DISPlay:DATA?"
DS2072 = ":DISPlay:DATA?"
DS2102 = ":DISPlay:DATA?"
DS2202 = ":DISPlay:DATA?"

Add following line below the DS2202
DS2302 = ":DISPlay:DATA?"

Save the file

That is all.

[marmad]

Ok - after these latest tests, I'm happier with the newest firmware from Rigol. 

Rigol has improved the waveform update rates at many of the lower time base settings, with the following results:

The DSO is now able to achieve close to 50k wfrm/s (Dots mode) @ 3 different time base settings: 1ns, 5ns, & 20ns - and @ 2 of those (1ns & 5ns) using vectors.
At the other 3 lowest time base settings (2ns, 10ns, & 50ns), the DSO is faster with both channels ON (Dots mode).
With any setting (1 or 2 channels, dots or vectors) @ <= 10ns/div, the wfrm/s rate is >= ~24k.

The one detrimental (and rather oddball) change is single channel, vectors @ 20ns/div (and yes, I checked it several times): it has dropped considerably from it's previous rate (making 5ns the fastest rate for a single channel using vectors). But considering the improvements in the other rates, I can accept it.



The old wfrm/s charts in the first post will have to be updated, so I've removed the old ones for now.

[Bugware]

I love it! That are good news and impressive improvements! Thank you for your work!

[NikWing]

and that's not a new bug?
dropping from 47k to 17k while nearly all other values got better?

[Carrington]

This is strange:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/first-impressions-and-review-of-the-rigol-ds2072-ds2000-series-dso/msg260539/#msg260539
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/first-impressions-and-review-of-the-rigol-ds2072-ds2000-series-dso/msg263480/#msg263480

Well, this is my third wish:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sniffing-the-rigol%27s-internal-i2c-bus/msg347044/#msg347044

 

[marmad]

and that's not a new bug?
dropping from 47k to 17k while nearly all other values got better?

A bug? You can't really classify a slower or faster waveform update rate as a bug - since almost ANYTHING (input levels, frequency, measurements on/off, etc) can affect the rate. Rigol has clearly done some tweaking in this FW version to provide better-balanced rates across the smaller time base settings than the DSO used to have. If the cost of getting > 10k wfrm/s @ 20ns/div for two channels means that setting needs to drop, it's fine by me.

[Bugware]

and that's not a new bug?
dropping from 47k to 17k while nearly all other values got better?

It is quite likely that is a new bug. But they release a new Firmware again since a long time. After many new devices offers maybe they have more time to release new fixes.... 

[marmad]

and that's not a new bug?
dropping from 47k to 17k while nearly all other values got better?

It is quite likely that is a new bug. But they release a new Firmware again since a long time. After many new devices offers maybe they have more time to release new fixes.... 

Read my message above. It's not realistic to classify slower or faster wfrm/s rates as bugs. Is it a bug when you turn on High Res and the rate drops? They've added a new working time base to the new firmware (1ns/div) and the rates have shifted. Nope - not a bug.

[christos]

sorry, but im new here and i dont know how to post a topic..can anyone help me?

[marmad]

New chart: full comparison of v.1 and v.2 waveform update rates in AUTO mode / vectors: