| Products > Test Equipment |
| Let’s Talk About LeCroy Scopes, AKA… the “Wuerstchenhund Holds Court” Thread |
| << < (17/28) > >> |
| Someone:
--- Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 15, 2016, 07:40:23 am --- --- Quote from: Someone on September 14, 2016, 11:43:44 pm ---Wavescan is the offline analysis built into most Lecroy scopes it takes the capture and then searches through it, if it finds events you can tell it what to do with them. Mask testing can be done offline like this, or it can be done much faster in hardware, but mask testing cannot do all the advanced analysis of wavescan so they can miss or capture different characteristics. --- End quote --- Not this again |O Why is it that you always show up to these threads and spread nonsense that shows that you've actually no idea what you're talking about? Someone clearly has a hidden agenda here. And No, WaveScan is *not* just an off-line tool (although it can be used post-acquisition), like mask testing it works real-time as well. --- End quote --- Its not running in the acquisition memory at sample rate, its run on the general purpose processor, offline, as you say it can be run on acquired data exactly the same way. It can be used in realtime at a diminished capture rate which is addressing the questions posed by other users although not your narrative. --- Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 15, 2016, 07:40:23 am --- --- Quote from: Someone on September 14, 2016, 11:43:44 pm ---Mr W is for some reason opposed to this method of working. The rest of us get on with life and use realtime modes to get a quick look at the signal before deciding what to do. Accumulating a large amount of captures in an eye diagram or even just free running you can gain some understanding of what needs a more detailed investigation. --- End quote --- That statement just confirms that you really have no idea what WaveScan is (aside from I guess you could find with a quick google search). Since you seem to be made of Teflon (nothing sticks), I'm not going to repeat all the info that is given here and in the old WaveRunner 8000 thread again. Just let me say this, that one sign of a good engineer is eagerness to learn, and that includes functions and capabilities that new tools can bring to the table and which could make life easier (and then make an informed choice wether it helps for his own tasks or not). The average engineer sticks to what he learnt in his youth and avoids change or spending time on learning new stuff wherever possible. Both categories are easily recognizable. Of course, there's nothing wrong with wanting to stick with what you know. Buy tools that support your way of working and live on happily. But don't come here and try to BS others that show more interest in what is available in modern tools and who want to see if they can use it for their benefit. --- End quote --- You could certainly reference that thread where you consistently claimed realtime use was stupid yet failed to suggest alternatives, and didnt come up with any examples at all, sure. Everyone would love to see some new tools and ways to use them but you wont share. |
| JPortici:
--- Quote from: AutomationGuy on September 14, 2016, 07:18:25 pm ---Another nice feature on the WS3000 would be a SENT decoder. --- End quote --- Agreed. only option i'd really "miss" over a MSO3000T (that i already have on a 200€ picoscope + whatever price pc though) --- Quote ---Direct replay from a trace to the build in function generator would be nice. --- End quote --- +1 on that too, much faster than capture, download, load on another AWG |
| Wuerstchenhund:
--- Quote from: Someone on September 15, 2016, 08:12:13 am --- --- Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 15, 2016, 07:40:23 am ---And No, WaveScan is *not* just an off-line tool (although it can be used post-acquisition), like mask testing it works real-time as well. --- End quote --- Its not running in the acquisition memory at sample rate, --- End quote --- *Nothing* runs in the acquisition memory in a scope, it's a store for sampled data :palm: --- Quote ---its run on the general purpose processor --- End quote --- On a LeCroy X-Stream scope (which the WS3000 is, X-Stream lite) *everything* runs on the main processor. Which is the main reason why these scopes are so fast. Which you should know by know as this has been excessively discussed in the past already. --- Quote ---offline, as you say it can be run on acquired data exactly the same way. It can be used in realtime at a diminished capture rate which is addressing the questions posed by other users although not your narrative. --- End quote --- WTF are you talking about? WaveScan directly uses life acquisition data, there's nothing inherently "offline" to it as you claim. The update rate goes down (naturally because of the processing required), by how much depends on the circumstances (i.e. what WaveScan settings, scope generation and CPU cache size and speed). Nevertheless it scans all acquired data. As to my "narrative", all I said was that the tool you clearly know jack shit about should be a sufficient replacement for situations where people tend to use Peak Detect. --- Quote ---You could certainly reference that thread where you consistently claimed realtime use was stupid yet failed to suggest alternatives, and didnt come up with any examples at all, sure. Everyone would love to see some new tools and ways to use them but you wont share. --- End quote --- I have no idea what you're talking about. But in any case, if you feel that something that has been discussed in another thread needs further discussion then this will happen there and not here, which seems to be your modus operandi to stir up trouble. |
| nctnico:
--- Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 15, 2016, 12:34:59 pm ---WTF are you talking about? WaveScan directly uses life acquisition data, there's nothing inherently "offline" to it as you claim. The update rate goes down (naturally because of the processing required), by how much depends on the circumstances (i.e. what WaveScan settings, scope generation and CPU cache size and speed). Nevertheless it scans all acquired data. As to my "narrative", all I said was that the tool you clearly know jack shit about should be a sufficient replacement for situations where people tend to use Peak Detect. --- End quote --- The thing is that peak-detect combined with roll mode will show all peaks. If Wavescan is an acquire-process-acquire-process- system then it will have a considerable blind time. IMHO you are too much focussed on finding glitches in known signals but you have to take a few steps back to a signal you know nothing about and want to get a feel for. Without peak detect this is nearly impossible and it sounds to me Wavescan isn't solving that. Compared to the Lecroy Wavesurfer 3000 it seems the R&S RTM2000 series is in the same price range and it does have peak detect. |
| Wuerstchenhund:
--- Quote from: nctnico on September 14, 2016, 06:07:09 pm ---Wavescan sounds like a perfect tool for letting the scope find 'errors' in a signal. However every now and then I find myself in a situation where I hook up a scope to a system and I have no idea what to expect so the first thing I want is a slow recording (seconds per divisions) of some signals which may be interesting. Roll-mode or long time/div with peak detect are really crucial because that way I have both an overview of what happens on a long timescale and an indication if there is or isn't something happening on shorter timespans. From your description I don't see how wavescan can do the same but then again I have never seen Wavescan in action. --- End quote --- I still believe WaveScan could help here, as it can find errors you don't know are in the signal. Obviously you have adapted your way of working to your tools, but if you ever have the chance just give it a try. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |