Products > Test Equipment
Is Rigol DS1054Z still a good option in 2019?
<< < (34/34)
ebastler:

--- Quote from: Fungus on January 23, 2024, 11:27:07 pm ---
--- Quote from: ebastler on January 23, 2024, 04:34:35 pm ---Acquisition rates in Recording mode were painfully slow; less than one shot every 5 ms.

--- End quote ---

That's going to depend totally on your configuration and memory size. There are slow cases and fast cases, just like on every other oscilloscope.

--- End quote ---

Believe it or not, I realize that. So when I came across the slow recording mode, I tried it with very favorable conditions: just channel 1 enabled, 2 µs/div, 1 kpts memory, simple edge trigger. Recording 1000 frames, the average time step between stored records was 5.8 ms according to the scope's timestamps.

And even those timestamps are apparently wrong: Acquiring a series of 1000 frames took 14 seconds on a stopwatch, while the progress bar and frame counter moved forward in a linear manner. But the scope claimed that the last record has a timestamp of 5.8 seconds?!

I am not ruling out a user error, since the recording is so absurdly slow. But egonotto observed the same "performance", we both published our findings here, and nobody reported different results. Does the DHO800 fare better?
thinkfat:

--- Quote from: artur0089 on January 23, 2024, 05:01:00 am ---[...]

--- End quote ---

3% error doesn't mean that the higher vertical resolution is useless. Accuracy is not noise. If the noise was drowning out the 8 lower bits - yes, that'd be problematic.

You still get a more truthful waveform reproduction, less vertical aliasing noise and that is interesting for signal analysis. OK, your measurements have 3% maximum error. But a DSO is not about measurement accuracy anyway. There's a reason why some DSOs have built-in multimeters.
Navigation
Message Index
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod