Products > Test Equipment
Keysight New instruments
<< < (25/52) > >>
nctnico:

--- Quote from: SilverSolder on February 28, 2021, 02:57:45 pm ---
--- Quote from: exe on February 28, 2021, 02:51:34 pm ---My preferred style would be "short half-rack". Like, Siglent stuff. It nicely fits my table, stackable, and not too deep.

--- End quote ---

For power supply and signal generator yes, but a scope?

--- End quote ---
Yes. If a scope is deep enough I like to stack equipment on top.
Fungus:

--- Quote from: nctnico on February 28, 2021, 03:04:00 pm ---Yes. If a scope is deep enough I like to stack equipment on top.

--- End quote ---

If only somebody could invent "adjustable shelving".
Berni:
My MSO6000 scope is that sort of deep design. So i do like putting things on top of it. The only thing is that the width is a weird non rack size multiple (much like a lot of other scopes), so it makes it more difficult to fully utilize the top of it with other gear. In my case i found out that one half rack wide multimeter and one Weller soldering station is the same width as the scope.

The new skinny scopes are mostly useful for a more portable use case where you just grab its handle and plonk it down on any desk. Leaving plenty of room on the desk to work in front of it. While as soon as you have a large amount of test gear stacked up on a dedicated spot on the bench the skinny form factor doesn't really save much. It is very likely that you have at least one large deep piece of gear around, stuff like bench DMMs or PSUs. So you can stack those into one neat tower to have it conveniently in one place. Sure the first deep half rack wide unit takes up more space, but you can easily stack 3 such units on top of each other, at what point the amount of desk space taken up by a piece of equipment on average becomes the same or even less than one of those skinny scopes. If you don't have the desk space for a deep instrument, simply pull the desk away from the wall a bit and put shelves up. Giving you lots of desk space while having 10 different instruments at reach ready to go is not a problem.
wizard69:
[quote author=NANDBlog
You dont really need or want high CAT rating in a bench instrument. You will only ever meet fused connections. With a handheld DMM, you might check the fusebox in your house, but a desk DMM is on your desk. I dont think they should spend money to fulfill very specialty needs.
[/quote]

Actually I do want better CAT ratings on bench meters.   I may be 60 but I still remember the stupid things students do in tech classes.   The idea that they are marketing this as a solution for education is what prompted my post.

However in industry, at least the one i work in, "bench" meters do go out onto the plant floor very regularly.   In this case they are either used for calibration+validation or in some cases diagnostics.   Generally they should never get close to high energy circuits but it does happen.   Recent enforcement of regulations for arc flash safety has equipment coming in such that the process control stuff is separated from the heavy 3 phase stuff, usually in separate cabinets.  That makes the meter use "safer" but a better CAT rating would be very welcomed. 

Further if you are at the bench you may have three phase hardware you are working on.   This honestly doesn't happen much today due to the lack of time which leads to a lot of "stuff" going into the recycle bin.   I'm not real thrilled about this but there is little I can do about staffing because personnel says they can't find candidates.

As for safety I'm not sure how it became a specialty need.   Also fused connections are not a guarantee of safety.   I've seen some strange things over the years when it comes to what appeared to be properly installed hardware.
wizard69:

--- Quote from: Fungus on February 28, 2021, 03:12:32 pm ---
--- Quote from: nctnico on February 28, 2021, 03:04:00 pm ---Yes. If a scope is deep enough I like to stack equipment on top.

--- End quote ---

If only somebody could invent "adjustable shelving".

--- End quote ---

Better patent that idea quick.

As for stacking I never really liked it because the minute you need to pull an instrument or just move it around you run into a lot of frustration.   A shelf per layer might not work in every case but it is simple to implement.   I can imagine though people not wanting to spend $100 on shelving to place their $20 000 of equipment on.

Call me old fashion but I really liked the old Tektronix approach with the TM500/5000 series.   I could see a similar approach these days with a much smaller card format.   Select a suitable vertical height and then allocate horizontal on a settled upon module width increment.   That would allow for very high instrument density on the bench.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod