Products > Test Equipment
Rigol DS1000Z series buglist continued (latest: 00.04.04.04.03, 2019-05-30)
Karel:
--- Quote from: frozenfrogz on October 21, 2017, 02:52:40 pm ---
--- Quote from: Karel on October 21, 2017, 12:41:52 pm ---I want to add another bug. The DS1000Z series does not display the full vertical resolution, it clips it at 80%.
--- End quote ---
I think you are mistaken (or I do not fully understand).
--- End quote ---
The latter, you do not fully understand. I will try to explain better.
The scope and DSRemote use the same settings.
The waveform you see with DSRemote is downloaded from the scope at the very moment that scope was displaying
the clipped sinewave.
And yes, DSRemote shows more divisions in vertical direction because it can utilize the full 8-bit or 256 steps.
The scope's display instead, is using only 200 steps of the same waveform data.
Ofcourse, you can adjust the vertical scale of the scope to make the sinewave fit, but that's not my point.
My point is that the scope is not using the full dynamic range of the adc.
frozenfrogz:
So basically you are saying, that there is a mismatch between displayed divisions and actual ADC gain setting / range?
Namely:
8 div@2V: 16V/256 = 0.06V expected resolution
10 div@2V: 20V/256 = 0.08V true resolution *
*where true gain setting might have to be determined via experiments
Karel:
Yes. Also, it's kind of a "documented bug". If you take a look at the programming guide 2 - 223 (page 239)
there's written that the "Yincrement" steps are verticalscale / 25.
For example, the 4000 and 6000 series don't suffer from this limitation.
In their respective programming guides they specify that "Yincrement" steps are verticalscale / 32.
Which is weird because the 4000 series uses a display with the same number of pixels.
bitseeker:
Karel, this is interesting. I normally use the built-in screen and so never noticed the discrepancy. I wonder what they gained or saved by truncating the screen rather than scaling it to fit. Just a case of ease of implementation?
Fungus:
--- Quote from: bitseeker on October 21, 2017, 05:42:35 pm ---Karel, this is interesting. I normally use the built-in screen and so never noticed the discrepancy. I wonder what they gained or saved by truncating the screen rather than scaling it to fit. Just a case of ease of implementation?
--- End quote ---
Probably because "200" maps to a 400 pixel display very easily in hardware but "256" doesn't.
I would be interesting to know if any other 'scopes do this. It wouldn't be the first time somebody points a finger at the DS1054Z only to find out that many other 'scopes do it as well.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version