Products > Test Equipment
Pocket-Sized 6 GHz 1 TS/s ET Scope
Kean:
I have no need for such a scope, but it is certainly interesting to read about it and see the great interaction here. As usual, Joe dives right in.
In the above example of processing the chunks of data titled "4.3.2 Example", the commentary mentions 0.476 mV - but I am pretty sure that is meant to be 0.476 V or 476 mV?
SJL-Instruments:
--- Quote from: Kean on January 17, 2024, 12:10:22 pm ---In the above example of processing the chunks of data titled "4.3.2 Example", the commentary mentions 0.476 mV - but I am pretty sure that is meant to be 0.476 V or 476 mV?
--- End quote ---
You're right, keen eye! Thanks for catching that.
joeqsmith:
I suspect there is still some critical component I am missing. If I power up the GigaWave and attempt to control it with my software, it appears like it does not run. All the commands seem to return a valid response and the it sends back data but there its a flat line. Almost like it is not running. If I run your software first, then I can run my software and everything works. I can disconnect, restart and it works just fine. It acts like there is a command you are sending that I am not that sets the data collection into motion. Or, perhaps there is an order to commands that are sent to kick it off.
***
I'm sure all these problems are on my side of things. Not being a programmer by any stretch of the word...
Another thing I noticed as I increase the resolution of the delay something happens with the DSO and it starts to complain about no triggers. If I increase the trigger holdoff time, it appears to correct it. I have been testing with a 1GHz source, and I need to push this this number out to 1us for example to use a resolution of 20ps, for example. The first several reads are always correct. How soon it fails depends on the combination of the holdoff and resolution (how much I increment the post trigger delay by.
SJL-Instruments:
--- Quote from: joeqsmith on January 17, 2024, 01:38:50 pm ---I suspect there is still some critical component I am missing. If I power up the GigaWave and attempt to control it with my software, it appears like it does not run. All the commands seem to return a valid response and the it sends back data but there its a flat line. Almost like it is not running. If I run your software first, then I can run my software and everything works. I can disconnect, restart and it works just fine. It acts like there is a command you are sending that I am not that sets the data collection into motion. Or, perhaps there is an order to commands that are sent to kick it off.
--- End quote ---
Thanks, we are able to reproduce this problem. This is due to some parameters in the R command that we forgot to document (and are only needed once). :palm:
Updated documentation is attached, and will be added to the next revision of the manual. We also caught another minor mistake - the returned value is actually 1 - F(V; ∆t).
We have now tested the example program with a just-plugged-in scope and were able to see a 1 GHz sine wave. Let us know if you still run into issues.
***
--- Quote from: joeqsmith on January 17, 2024, 01:38:50 pm ---Another thing I noticed as I increase the resolution of the delay something happens with the DSO and it starts to complain about no triggers. If I increase the trigger holdoff time, it appears to correct it. I have been testing with a 1GHz source, and I need to push this this number out to 1us for example to use a resolution of 20ps, for example. The first several reads are always correct. How soon it fails depends on the combination of the holdoff and resolution (how much I increment the post trigger delay by.
--- End quote ---
Unfortunately, we can't reproduce this problem - modifying the example program to take 101 samples between 15 ns and 15.1 ns (i.e. 1 ps resolution) works as intended with a just-plugged-in scope. Could you report if the read failure is persistent (i.e. if you retry the command a few times, does it fail every time after the first)?
Kean:
--- Quote from: SJL-Instruments on January 17, 2024, 02:14:36 pm ---Updated documentation is attached, and will be added to the next revision of the manual. We also caught another minor mistake - the returned value is actually 1 - F(V; ∆t).
--- End quote ---
Rather than s8 & e8, should those be s0...s7 and e0...e7? (for an 8 channel model).
Also having "Rx s0 s1 s2 s3 e0 e1 e2 e3" as the example command format was confusing to me, as that assumes a 4 or 8 channel model with a specific bitmask with 4 enabled channels.
Maybe "Rx s0 ... e0 ..."?
Or I may have misunderstood the syntax completely.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version