Products > Test Equipment
Keysight 3000T scope 1 GHz(or more) hardware upgrade mod
G0HZU:
Impressive stuff... :)
Some equipment can be upgraded simply by creating a valid licence file. A couple of years ago I reverse engineered Agilent/Keysights option licencing system so I could upgrade my E5071 VNA to add time domain analysis. It just requires a text based licence file with a key code to unlock the option.
They appear to use a similar system on a lot of test gear, I tried upgrading a DSO 80000 series scope just by creating a valid licence file for its serial number. It took me about 10 minutes to hack the 80000 scope system and I managed to write a licence that unlocked loads of options and upgraded the BW from 4GHz to 12GHz (proved/measured with a 20GHz sig gen).
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/agilent-infiniium-dso8000a-hacking-anyone-done-this/
G0HZU:
I'm not a scope guru and I know nothing about the 3000 series but I wonder if there is another way to do your mod without needing to change hardware?
From my limited time spent with Agilent scopes I think they sometimes have switchable front end LPF sections in them. I think Agilent prefer to limit the bandwidth in hardware if you select user settings with a low sample rate and this minimises alias issues on certain timebase settings. So maybe your scope could be upgraded in code to manage the LPF as well as doing your BW upgrade. It might not be necessary to change any components? The higher BW LPF may already be in the scope waiting to be selected? But this is just a guess.
TheSteve:
Parts have to be changed, absolutely no question. There are three hardware versions. 100/200, 350/500 and 1000 MHz. The 100 can be software updated to 200 and the 350 can be updated to 500. Each has unique hardware filters that the laws of physics dictate.
bson:
Isn't it likely that minor channel level variation and possibly zero variance is handled through calibration? That looks like the ideal method if the response is otherwise reasonably flat.
TheSteve:
--- Quote from: bson on July 01, 2017, 02:04:47 am ---Isn't it likely that minor channel level variation and possibly zero variance is handled through calibration? That looks like the ideal method if the response is otherwise reasonably flat.
--- End quote ---
This is totally possible. But so far I have never found any information detailing any calibration info beyond the UserCal built into the scope.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version