I appreciate the help.
Here are some more test results. Comments, questions, suggestions all welcome.
I set the scope for ASCII decoding at 2400 baud. From a computer serial port I sent a long text file (12 pages, 40,344 character Bytes including spaces).
For this test I used analog Channel 1. Acquire was set to 140k points. TimeDiv was set for 100ms. Trigger was far to the left.
The scope recorded until reaching frame 120. Turns out that was enough frames to record the entire text file.
When reviewing the recording I set the scope to 10ms per Div – this enabled each ASCII character to display nicely by itself in one green decoder box.
Frame 1 showed the beginning of the text, Frame 120 showed the end of the text. Each frame has about 330 characters (120 x 330 = 39,600 vs. 40,344 so my frame counts are approximate; I only examined a few of the frames for specific Byte counts.) Each frame lasted about 1.35 seconds. 1.35 x 120 frames = 162 seconds. 40,344 Bytes x 9 bits (including a start bit) = 363,096 / 2400 baud (bps) = 151 seconds which is in the ball park of 162 seconds.
Every frame reviewed retained the waveforms and the decoded data even though 9/10ths of each frame resided off the screen. At 10ms per Div and 14 Divs you of course can see 140ms on the display which means 10 screens worth of scrolling with the small knob for 1.4 seconds worth of data - there is no doubt that a few changes to the hardware and software could make navigation more enjoyable. And if Rigol added search features this scope could be extra nice.
In summary, it looks like the memory has the capacity to handle a data set of this size and is simply breaking (segmenting?) the data into pieces that fit within the scope’s file structure.
I will try the digital channels next with the same text file; my guess is that it might behave different, but we’ll see….. In the meantime, these results are giving me some added understanding of how the scope works and how it is operated. Thanks for walking and talking me through this stuff.
EF
Update: I tried the same text file on a digital channel: Good news and better news
![ThumbsUp :-+](https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/icon_smile_thumbsup.gif.pagespeed.ce._JElyJQqdB.gif)
The good news is that while I expected (given my earlier tests with I2C on a digital channel) that this test would not work as well as the analog channel test - this test had good results. In fact, it gave the same results in terms of recording capacity as the analog channel test above - the entire ~40k Bytes file recorded within the same 120 frames.
The better news is that the decodes on the digital channel appeared to have less errors than the decodes on the analog channel (fewer decode boxes that were unable to display the ASCII Byte). This is not too surprising given the nature of digital vs. analog, but it's nice to see.
I am now starting to think that the limited decoder recording capacity I saw earlier was due either to something in my probing setup, or possibly it was some limitation of the Arduino Uno or the IDE sketch, or maybe I2C is tougher to record/decode than RS232. Not sure which yet, but I think it's all a step in the right direction for the Rigol MSO2072A.
EF