Products > Test Equipment

Rigol DS1000Z series buglist continued (latest: 00.04.04.04.03, 2019-05-30)

<< < (54/74) > >>

Porcine Porcupine:

--- Quote from: Fungus on March 06, 2018, 06:59:53 pm ---
--- Quote from: ebastler on March 06, 2018, 10:57:34 am ---Anyway, this is just guessing. But I think it likely that, within the limitations of the existing DS1000Z hardware, there would be a better way to down-sample and display the signals at slow time bases.

--- End quote ---

Just don't use dot mode, problem solved!   :-+

(why would you use dots to look at a signal like that?)

Or ... use dots but turn on averaging - also solved!

--- End quote ---

I just think it would be desirable for Rigol to include a fix in their next firmware update if this issue is fixable in firmware without any compromises. That might not be possible, as you've pointed out, but I don't think any of us knows for sure what's causing this effect. It would be nice to at least hear something from Rigol since they know exactly how the oscilloscope processes data.

Either way, I'm still satisfied overall with my DS1054Z. It's a fantastic oscilloscope for the price.

2N3055:

--- Quote from: ebastler on March 06, 2018, 07:52:04 pm ---
--- Quote from: 2N3055 on March 06, 2018, 07:39:45 pm ---I would like to know what you guys think an analog CRT scope would show in these circumstances...
Namely, a slow time sweep and fast pulses... For instance, 10 ms/div and feed it 1 MHz signal....
Tadaaaa...

--- End quote ---

Read again, please, and go one page further back. The real discussion of the artefacts starts around post #237 or so. The demo signal is simply the 1 kHz square wave from the calibration output. And the problem is that the parts of the trace where the signal is stable appear either split in two (dot mode) or artificially widened, with inflated apparent noise (line mode).

The short pulses at large intervals, shown further down in the thread, only serve to show that peak mode actually works (and only works when enabled).

--- End quote ---


I am specifically commenting Reply #254.....

As for what you are saying, I made my comment on that before... 
He needs to self cal scope first, and than not use software magnified input ranges..
Also, DS1000Z IS sensitive to external RF fields... It might as well be that he REALLY HAS high frequency interference injected... In that case noise is not artificially inflated....
Or his scope might really have some issue....

2N3055:

--- Quote from: Porcine Porcupine on March 06, 2018, 07:56:45 pm ---
--- Quote from: Fungus on March 06, 2018, 06:59:53 pm ---
--- Quote from: ebastler on March 06, 2018, 10:57:34 am ---Anyway, this is just guessing. But I think it likely that, within the limitations of the existing DS1000Z hardware, there would be a better way to down-sample and display the signals at slow time bases.

--- End quote ---

Just don't use dot mode, problem solved!   :-+

(why would you use dots to look at a signal like that?)

Or ... use dots but turn on averaging - also solved!

--- End quote ---

I just think it would be desirable for Rigol to include a fix in their next firmware update if this issue is fixable in firmware without any compromises. That might not be possible, as you've pointed out, but I don't think any of us knows for sure what's causing this effect. It would be nice to at least hear something from Rigol since they know exactly how the oscilloscope processes data.

Either way, I'm still satisfied overall with my DS1054Z. It's a fantastic oscilloscope for the price.

--- End quote ---

Put it in vector mode and it looks exactly as it should....

On the other hand I do agree that I would like for Rigol (and everybody else) would exactly explain how they massage data before handing it to us...
I'm all for it...

Regards,
 Sinisa

Fungus:

--- Quote from: 2N3055 on March 06, 2018, 07:59:25 pm ---As for what you are saying, I made my comment on that before... 
He needs to self cal scope first, and than not use software magnified input ranges..
Also, DS1000Z IS sensitive to external RF fields... It might as well be that he REALLY HAS high frequency interference injected... In that case noise is not artificially inflated....
Or his scope might really have some issue....

--- End quote ---

Nah, they all do it (I think).

It's not noise, it's a high frequency sine wave. See my post in the other thread, the signal is very clear at maximum zoom:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/help-my-new-rigol-ds1054z-shows-a-weird-double-trace/msg1363145/#msg1363145

ebastler:

--- Quote from: 2N3055 on March 06, 2018, 07:59:25 pm ---I am specifically commenting Reply #254.....

--- End quote ---

Me too, and specifically on the first two screenshots in that post.  ;)

As to the third image in #254, I agree that it is not a meaningful measurement setting. But it can serve as another test case for the assumed "unwanted peak detection": I would indeed expect to see the occasional dot inbetween those two extreme lines. (While the sine signal spends most of its time near the extrema, the transition time between them is certainly not negligible, and hence the probability to "catch" a sample inbetween should not be negligible either.)

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