Products > Test Equipment

New Scope Demoboard from Batronix

<< < (58/65) > >>

pdenisowski:

--- Quote from: ebastler on April 04, 2024, 07:28:04 pm ---Where is parallel ASCII transmission still being used? Sounds very Centronics to me. :)

--- End quote ---

GPIB :)

Electro Fan:

--- Quote from: 2N3055 on March 22, 2024, 09:03:20 am ---
--- Quote from: pdenisowski on March 22, 2024, 02:30:17 am ---
--- Quote from: Njk on March 21, 2024, 11:45:05 pm ---My point was that no matter how many triggers are implemented, a waveform will come sooner or later that can't be captured as desired using any available trigger. And it's quite an accomplishment for average user to memorize hundreds of different triggers. So I wonder if any scope allows for user to define his own trigger through some kind of scripting. There must be something like that because it seems too obvious. Adjustable zone boundaries and loadable masks are nice features but that's not what I'm asking about.

--- End quote ---

Modern oscilloscopes are pretty flexible when it comes to triggering (although I'm not aware of any scope that has "hundreds" of trigger types :)), so it might be helpful if you could provide an example of a waveform that you think would be difficult or impossible to trigger on. 

I'm not aware of any "scripting" for triggers, but on some of our scopes we do allow the user to trigger on a sequence of events:

https://www.rohde-schwarz.com/webhelp/MXO4_HTML_UserManual_en/Content/66d463be244c466b.htm

--- End quote ---

Agree.

Siglent also have logic triggers, qualified triggers, zone triggering (where we take any trigger and enhance it with go/no go zones).
All of these advanced trigger types (except zone that starts with SDS2000X+/XHD  series) are present even in cheapest SDS800.
And add on protocol triggers on top of that.
And all of it is maybe 10 pages to read... Hardly more work than learning scripting language.

I have no problems triggering on something specific with scopes I have (Keysight, several 12 bit Siglents and several Picos) provided I know what to look for.
On Picoscopes I miss protocol triggers though.

As I said, if you are trying to verify clock for instance, you can simply use mask mode (because signal is very simple and repetitive) and just let it run. If you have no violation in some time (you decide what certainty you need, so it might be few hours or few days..) you are good.

But if scope has good measurements and statistics, even without Jitter/Eye packages, you can gather statistics on  timing parameters, overshoot, risetimes, Cycle to Cycle jitter...  And have a look at histograms to see how it behaves... And today you have that even with SDS800xHD ...

--- End quote ---

2N3055, can you tell us more about what keeps Jitter/Eye capabilities from being offered on lower/'midrange model scopes?  Is it a fundamental assumption that lower bandwidth scopes don't need/justify Jitter/Eye capabilities, or is it the cost to implement, or something else?  Thx

2N3055:

--- Quote from: Electro Fan on April 05, 2024, 01:28:58 am ---
--- Quote from: 2N3055 on March 22, 2024, 09:03:20 am ---
--- Quote from: pdenisowski on March 22, 2024, 02:30:17 am ---
--- Quote from: Njk on March 21, 2024, 11:45:05 pm ---My point was that no matter how many triggers are implemented, a waveform will come sooner or later that can't be captured as desired using any available trigger. And it's quite an accomplishment for average user to memorize hundreds of different triggers. So I wonder if any scope allows for user to define his own trigger through some kind of scripting. There must be something like that because it seems too obvious. Adjustable zone boundaries and loadable masks are nice features but that's not what I'm asking about.

--- End quote ---

Modern oscilloscopes are pretty flexible when it comes to triggering (although I'm not aware of any scope that has "hundreds" of trigger types :)), so it might be helpful if you could provide an example of a waveform that you think would be difficult or impossible to trigger on. 

I'm not aware of any "scripting" for triggers, but on some of our scopes we do allow the user to trigger on a sequence of events:

https://www.rohde-schwarz.com/webhelp/MXO4_HTML_UserManual_en/Content/66d463be244c466b.htm

--- End quote ---

Agree.

Siglent also have logic triggers, qualified triggers, zone triggering (where we take any trigger and enhance it with go/no go zones).
All of these advanced trigger types (except zone that starts with SDS2000X+/XHD  series) are present even in cheapest SDS800.
And add on protocol triggers on top of that.
And all of it is maybe 10 pages to read... Hardly more work than learning scripting language.

I have no problems triggering on something specific with scopes I have (Keysight, several 12 bit Siglents and several Picos) provided I know what to look for.
On Picoscopes I miss protocol triggers though.

As I said, if you are trying to verify clock for instance, you can simply use mask mode (because signal is very simple and repetitive) and just let it run. If you have no violation in some time (you decide what certainty you need, so it might be few hours or few days..) you are good.

But if scope has good measurements and statistics, even without Jitter/Eye packages, you can gather statistics on  timing parameters, overshoot, risetimes, Cycle to Cycle jitter...  And have a look at histograms to see how it behaves... And today you have that even with SDS800xHD ...

--- End quote ---

2N3055, can you tell us more about what keeps Jitter/Eye capabilities from being offered on lower/'midrange model scopes?  Is it a fundamental assumption that lower bandwidth scopes don't need/justify Jitter/Eye capabilities, or is it the cost to implement, or something else?  Thx

--- End quote ---

Well, I can't speak officially as to what Siglent decisions are.

But I know that on SDS6000A eye/jitter is hardware accelerated, which is how you want it to keep it fast. Jitter/eye/bathtub diagrams are statistical analysis and they need lots of data and you need to be able to get enough data in relatively short time, so you don't have to let it sit there for weeks.
I know there is domestic Chinese SDS6000 version that cannot have jitter/eye because of difference in FPGA architecture, for instance. It is a 1GHz scope.

As for BW, I agree that low BW scopes with eye/jitter would apply to very limited market.
Most of the usage is for faster protocols..
And you need a healthy reserve in BW/risetime spec of the scope over signal you are measuring to get good data.
Also you probably will need some kind of active probing solution, meaning scope with active probe interface.
All of that stuff gets expensive fast, even with Siglent's good prices.
So it is available on 6000A/L and 7000A series.

But, new analysis options are being developed that are applicable for lower/mid range scopes. For instance, new SPI/I2C compliance test/report. That is something very interesting for embedded work, and that option alone on some A brands scope is so expensive, you can buy whole  SDS2000x+ for that purpose alone.

And for embedded work on SPI/I2C that is what is very useful.

blurpy:

--- Quote from: ebastler on April 04, 2024, 07:28:04 pm ---Where is parallel ASCII transmission still being used? Sounds very Centronics to me. :)

--- End quote ---
Not sure where it's still being used (other than GPIB), but some people find repairing, restoring or exploring old stuff fun, as well as building new stuff with older technology, like following Ben Eaters videos :)

It didn't cross my mind that the feature would be missing when buying the probes and licenses for using the digital channels.


--- Quote from: Martin72 on April 04, 2024, 07:33:21 pm ---@Elekctro Fan:
Perhaps post with reference to this thread in a thread that siglent is more likely to know.
(I think we did that back then too, I'd have to look.)

--- End quote ---

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000x-hd-missing-features-and-bugs/msg5175306/#msg5175306

And

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000x-plus-bugs-missing-features-feature-requests/msg5175312/#msg5175312

ebastler:

--- Quote from: blurpy on April 05, 2024, 06:18:20 pm ---Not sure where it's still being used (other than GPIB), but some people find repairing, restoring or exploring old stuff fun, as well as building new stuff with older technology, like following Ben Eaters videos :)

It didn't cross my mind that the feature would be missing when buying the probes and licenses for using the digital channels.

--- End quote ---

If you are into that generation of technology (I am too!), you are fully expected to know all ASCII hex codes by heart.  :P

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod