Products > Test Equipment

Test Equipment Anonymous (TEA) group therapy thread

<< < (2202/27436) > >>

mnementh:

--- Quote from: GerryBags on May 21, 2018, 02:42:45 am ---
--- Quote from: mnementh on May 20, 2018, 11:48:29 pm ---I don't hope for anything from Resident Chump except that he ignores the things I care about. He's like penis fingers from hell on crack; everything he touches turns to shit. If we're all lucky he will actually be struck dead by lightning, and his pet turds Pence and Gorsuch right alongside him to make the trifecta. And sooner rather than later; he's trying to start WWIII.

mnem
I am Diogenes.

--- End quote ---


--- End quote ---

That was a good hearty chuckle; really helped my perspective this morning. Thanks! :-+


mnem
Perspective: Have some with your morning cuppa.

mnementh:

--- Quote from: Berni on May 21, 2018, 07:40:18 am ---
--- Quote from: bd139 on May 21, 2018, 07:07:01 am ---Have something on topic instead. This is why I like analogue scopes. This is the output of a discrete product mixer running two signals close in phase and frequency. You can see the frequency relationships here as the mixing product drifts slightly. This sort of stuff looks ugly on a digital scope.

--- End quote ---

Nice fluid motion alright.

Tho you can get pretty close if you pay enough for your digital scope. That's the reason i'm sticking to my Agilent MSO6000, so far its the most analog like digital scope i have used. Quick few second boot time, all the controls respond instantly, fast update rate(100k waveforms/s) and a display with enough resolution to make it impossible to see the pixels.

--- End quote ---

Yeah, I know there are good DSOs out there, as long as you're willing to pay a lot. But a really good CRO can be had for a couple hundred almost any day of the week and less if you're an accomplished scrounge, and I'd wager it's a lot more useful tool in general than most of the other stuff we think nothing of plunking that kind of dosh down on. There is no good reason for this "either/or" mentality; DSOs are best for some things (mostly digital comms) while CROs are still better for other things most of the time.


Cheers,


mnem
Probe THIS!

bd139:
Interesting advantage of new DSOs. The shelf in my hall cupboard collapsed about an hour ago under the weight of both the D83's. Went with quite a bang. Scopes are fine but the shelf is knackered. Whoops. Fortunately it only had bin bags full of duvets under it so a nice soft landing although someone's going to get splinters in their arse when they dig that out this winter  :-DD

mnementh:

--- Quote from: bd139 on May 21, 2018, 08:53:15 am ---Yeah I have to agree. While the DS1054Z is crowed around here as the bee's knees for bottom end DSOs there are too many compromises not to make it frustrating to use. It's noisy, laggy, the UI is crap, the controls are soggy and the probes are just shit. You can get the job done but it's like living in a snake pit.

If I'm honest I'm finding it hard to need a DSO. For digital stuff a Saleae does the job. Really slow stuff, a logging DMM does a beter job as it has some proper measurement resolution (U1241C does 40 readings per second at 10,000 count resolution).

And for that twilight zone in the middle, where the DSO usually wins, the trick is to make your one shot event repetitive! Usually employing the function generator, a BJT and a couple of resistors to accomplish that.

--- End quote ---

I've said as much myself... I bought my 1054Z primarily for diagnostics regarding my RC modeling hobby, in particular my miniature quadcopter habit.

They are essentially a collection of 4 brushless motors, each one with a microprocessor generating PWM to drive FETs in a dual H-Gate motor driver controlled via bit-banged high-speed PWM or pseudo-serial by another micro with accel & gyro sensors (sometimes GPS and magnetometer as well), which is in turn directed by another processor running a software-defined radio transceiver, which is then in turn controlled in my transmitter by a software-defined radio transceiver, and finally by another micro running a hybrid OS/GUI for parameter control via analog signal from pots and/or ratiometric Hall-effect sensors through its built-in ADCs.

Fortunately (?), all of this is "hobbyist experimental" grade gear; none of it comes close to aero or even commercial/industrial controls in terms of precision or redundancy requirements.

For this, the 1054Z and my 2465 are all I should ever need for the foreseeable future. I put hands on the 1054z and the 1104Z before I bought; the difference is considerable, no doubt. The 1054 is a barely 50MHz DSO you can abuse to 100MHz BW; the 1104 is a 100MHz DSO you can abuse to 200MHz BW and the fundamental shortcomings of the 1054Z are quite visible next to the 1104Z, and those of both are glaringly visible to anyone who's used a good CRO.

But bottom line is I couldn't justify the difference in price to myself for my needs, and certainly couldn't to my wife who bought it for a present.

I have one of the early cheap Chinese clones of the Salae 16-CH LA; I bought it and installed the hacked software from the cloners' site long before I ever discovered it was all ripped off from them. It is actually a surprisingly capable bit of kit, which I used quite a bit when I started tinkering with Arduino due to my interest in ArduPilot. It was fun, but I got "math-defective programmer burnout" multiple times one on top of the other and had to get away before my brain exploded. Haven't been back to Arduino since.


Cheers,

mnem
All those bits keep byting me in the butt!

bd139:
Arduino is nasty shit anyway. You saved yourself.

Going to B&Q. I have been instructed to build a new shelf :(

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