I'm missing the possibility to trigger on the waveform generator. Also, is the waveform generator clock derived from the external reference clock input? And what is the frequency setting accuracy of the waveform generator?
Edit: another thing that doesn't make sense to me is the deskew resolution. It is limited to the sample time interval which is 800ps minimum. That makes no sense to me; deskew should be adjustable in picoseconds given the 100ps channel-to-channel skew, minimum of 200ps/div and the trigger jitter.
Will it be possible to change the sampling rate manually or is just set automatically according to the number of channels used and the horizontal time scale?
I'm wondering why there is no picture from the backside. I would like to see which connectors are available and how the optional AWG will be mounted.
I don't understand the thing with the 320 Mpts and the 12 divs. When do you have 80 Mpts with 4 channels?
@Andre77
Is that a RTC battery? If it is, compliments for designing in easy accessibility !!
According to the published specifications, the input stages are very well designed. It seems that noise floor and ENOB are comparable or slightly better than SDS3000X HD.
For the education market, I don't see the advantage of buying an rtb2004 when you can have this instead for the same price.
but as an educator I would want my students using instruments that are similar to the ones they might be using after graduation.
...
It should be compared in this regard to SDS2000xHD which would be correct equivalent...
but as an educator I would want my students using instruments that are similar to the ones they might be using after graduation.
I think that at school they should learn not an instrument, but what the purpose of that instrument is and the principle of operation, so that after graduation they can use any similar instrument.
So after graduation they will be able to use any oscilloscope, spectrum analyzer, power source from R&S, Keithley, Lecroy, Tektronix, Siglent, Rigol, etc.
I'm missing the possibility to trigger on the waveform generator. Also, is the waveform generator clock derived from the external reference clock input? And what is the frequency setting accuracy of the waveform generator?
We plan to support triggering on the built-in waveform generator with an upcoming update. The datasheet will be updated with new features as soon as they are implemented and tested.
The sampling as well as the waveform generator are based on the same reference clock. You can choose between an internal or external reference ref-clock source, which then applies to both the sampling and the generator.
The frequency setting accuracy of the waveform generator is 1 µHz.
A bit of background: Some of the tests I do deal with very high precission time (picosecond level) and frequency distribution which typically revolves around 10MHz + 1PPS (1Hz) signals and sometimes with a slow drift modulated on top for test purposes. Where the lower end (<1000 euro) waveform generators fall short is the inability to generate a precise 10MHz and/or 1PPS from the outputs. In many cases the 1PPS is slightly off and/or modulation starts to accumulate rounding errors. These errors are easy to check by using an oscilloscope and trigger on the output signal on one channel and look at the reference clock on another channel. Normal (y/t) or X/Y mode can be used to easely spot phase shift / drift.
I'm not saying to shoot for the moon but to give an idea on how to setup / define realistic expectations.
but as an educator I would want my students using instruments that are similar to the ones they might be using after graduation.
As an employer, that is the last thing I would want. Even if I used the same tool, what will happen in 3-5 years when it is superseded? I want employees that are familiar with fundamental principles that can (1) be applied to any tool (2) can enable them to select the right class of tool.
As a student, university is the ideal (and possibly last) place to learn concepts that will last my entire career. Employers will (at best) teach employees how to mung their flagets using this year's tool.
Example: last month I went back to one of my university textbooks to understand a subtle point I had come across in a circuit. Why does the amplitude of the "fuzz" on the 1kHz triangle wave vary?I think that at school they should learn not an instrument, but what the purpose of that instrument is and the principle of operation, so that after graduation they can use any similar instrument.
So after graduation they will be able to use any oscilloscope, spectrum analyzer, power source from R&S, Keithley, Lecroy, Tektronix, Siglent, Rigol, etc.
Precisely.
Isaac Asimov wrote a novella https://www.abelard.org/asimov.php back in 1957. It significantly influenced my career and is as true today as it was then. That "geocities style" hurts my eyeballs, but there's nothing I can do about it!
A bit of background: Some of the tests I do deal with very high precission time (picosecond level) and frequency distribution which typically revolves around 10MHz + 1PPS (1Hz) signals and sometimes with a slow drift modulated on top for test purposes. Where the lower end (<1000 euro) waveform generators fall short is the inability to generate a precise 10MHz and/or 1PPS from the outputs. In many cases the 1PPS is slightly off and/or modulation starts to accumulate rounding errors. These errors are easy to check by using an oscilloscope and trigger on the output signal on one channel and look at the reference clock on another channel. Normal (y/t) or X/Y mode can be used to easely spot phase shift / drift.
I'm not saying to shoot for the moon but to give an idea on how to setup / define realistic expectations.
As it turns out, the bosun's whistle which was included in Cap'n Crunch packages for a while will miserably fail this test as well.
You stated yourself that the level of performance required by your specific use case is found in > 1000€ generators. Why would you expect to find it in an oscilloscope add-on which is integrated in the scope for convenience and for automated Bode plots?
Clearly you overlooked the last line you even quoted: all I'm saying is to have a good set of specifications so people know what to expect.
I doubt that resolution is going to be 14 digits...
I doubt that resolution is going to be 14 digits...
There are off-the shelf DDS chip solutions that have 48bit tuning word. That is 281,474976710656e12 to you ...
A 35,5271367880050092936E-9 Hz resolution on 10MHz signal.
There is no technical reason why tuning word cannot 64 bit..
I received the data sheet today. ...
I doubt that resolution is going to be 14 digits...
There are off-the shelf DDS chip solutions that have 48bit tuning word. That is 281,474976710656e12 to you ...
A 35,5271367880050092936E-9 Hz resolution on 10MHz signal.
There is no technical reason why tuning word cannot 64 bit..If it actually was that easy, then the low cost AWGs would be way more accurate than they are (and I have tested a whole bunch of these). Creating a single sine wave is relatively easy but when you throw different (arbitrary) waveforms, modulation and low jitter into the mix, things become way more complex. But that is beside the point I wanted to make about having proper function generator specifications.
Or "The Signal Path" for in-depth analysis, including software implementation.