Products > Test Equipment
Siglent SDG1032 high level limited to low ...
nctnico:
--- Quote from: 2N3055 on May 25, 2024, 04:59:40 pm ---
--- Quote from: nctnico on May 25, 2024, 04:41:31 pm ---
--- Quote from: ebastler on May 25, 2024, 04:29:38 pm ---Thanks for the detailed explanation, @rf-loop. But I think the functionality was understood before -- Fgrir had stated the key principle in reply #2, and I had followed up in #5.
While the internal workings are certainly consistent, I still don't think they are the clearest way to present "output level limiter" functionality to the user. I would consider it much more straightforward, from a user perspective, if the output limit I set is always the one the generator aims to adhere to -- i.e. when I set 50 Ohm outputs, the limiter should internally double its value, such that the voltage fed into 50 Ohms remains the nominal one set in the limiter UI. Also, I still don't see how Siglent's implementation is more fail-safe -- see my reply #7.
--- End quote ---
Agreed. More likely it is a bug or oversight in Siglent's firmware. I just tried on my Tektronix AFG31000. The limits scale along with the load setting which is much more consistent as the limits are always 1 on 1 related to the amplitude and offset settings (which are scaled for the configured load impedance). It is up to the user to make sure a load with the correct impedance is connected. As Tektronix is a company with a very long history of designing high end AWGs, I trust they got it right based on decades of experience.
--- End quote ---
You keep forgetting to note to beginners and those that don't know that you are comparing a 300 € AWG to a 19000 € one..
Smooth..
--- End quote ---
It is not 19000. It is much cheaper than that and you know it. But still the truth remains that a company with a decades worth of experience (pedigree) in the field can be trusted to implement things the right way so this is a good point of reference instead of making all kinds of wild assumptions or trying to tell people bananas are always straight.
2N3055:
--- Quote from: nctnico on May 25, 2024, 05:11:18 pm ---
--- Quote from: 2N3055 on May 25, 2024, 04:59:40 pm ---
--- Quote from: nctnico on May 25, 2024, 04:41:31 pm ---
--- Quote from: ebastler on May 25, 2024, 04:29:38 pm ---Thanks for the detailed explanation, @rf-loop. But I think the functionality was understood before -- Fgrir had stated the key principle in reply #2, and I had followed up in #5.
While the internal workings are certainly consistent, I still don't think they are the clearest way to present "output level limiter" functionality to the user. I would consider it much more straightforward, from a user perspective, if the output limit I set is always the one the generator aims to adhere to -- i.e. when I set 50 Ohm outputs, the limiter should internally double its value, such that the voltage fed into 50 Ohms remains the nominal one set in the limiter UI. Also, I still don't see how Siglent's implementation is more fail-safe -- see my reply #7.
--- End quote ---
Agreed. More likely it is a bug or oversight in Siglent's firmware. I just tried on my Tektronix AFG31000. The limits scale along with the load setting which is much more consistent as the limits are always 1 on 1 related to the amplitude and offset settings (which are scaled for the configured load impedance). It is up to the user to make sure a load with the correct impedance is connected. As Tektronix is a company with a very long history of designing high end AWGs, I trust they got it right based on decades of experience.
--- End quote ---
You keep forgetting to note to beginners and those that don't know that you are comparing a 300 € AWG to a 19000 € one..
Smooth..
--- End quote ---
It is not 19000. It is much cheaper than that and you know it. But still the truth remains that a company with a decades worth of experience (pedigree) in the field can be trusted to implement things the right way so this is a good point of reference instead of making all kinds of wild assumptions or trying to tell people bananas are always straight.
--- End quote ---
Really?
2ch 25MHz version is 5000 USD..
And there is nothing wrongly implemented. Different is not wrong.
Just a beginner that blames lack of understanding to problem with device.
If he had that Tektronix AFG31000 of yours he would still have as many topics open just for different things.
What Siglent needs to improve is better documentation.
KungFuJosh:
It's a silly argument to pretend that one brand's pedigree is superior to any others. All the major A brands have many areas of workflow that are unique to their brand. That's been true for decades.
mawyatt:
Was going to post something wrt to what a "Waveform" actually represents, but then realized what Josh just mentioned, this is just a Silly Argument/Discussion anyway!!
Best,
nctnico:
--- Quote from: KungFuJosh on May 25, 2024, 07:37:17 pm ---It's a silly argument to pretend that one brand's pedigree is superior to any others. All the major A brands have many areas of workflow that are unique to their brand. That's been true for decades.
--- End quote ---
It is not a silly argument. Pedigree means having incorporated decades of customer feedback in a design. It is utterly foolish to ignore that and go ahead re-inventing a square wheel. If you want to try something in a different / new way, you really need to be sure to understand your customers expectations and/or manage them. Making the documentation match the device's functionality is the first step. The existence of this thread is proof that inexperienced engineers get tripped up by these little things and can waste massive amounts of time. I've experienced far worse situations with misbehaving 'cheap' equipment ended up costing thousands of euros, so yes, I'm nitpicking at the seemingly little issues.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version