David,
Thanks for the clarification -- that makes more sense than what I "remembered". And 2230 sounds right.
Happy New Year!
Erich
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In hp_agilent_equipment@..., David <davidwhess@...> wrote:
It was almost certainly a 2230 (100 MHz and 20 MS/sec) or 2220 (60 MHz
and 20 MS/sec) which came out in 1986 or at least first showed up in
that year's catalog.
The sample clock is not dithered but instead the difference between
the trigger and sample clock is measured to within about 500ps which
allows the acquired samples to be positioned within the waveform
record. In order to gain anything from that process, the signal being
measured and the sample clock have to be asynchronous.
It is my most used oscilloscope although the updated version in the
form of the 2232 is superior in almost every way.
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 17:40:05 -0000, "erich_schlecht"
<schlechtca@...> wrote:
Speaking of old scopes, the first digital scope I got circa 1986 was a Tek with a sample rate around 20 or 50 Msps, bandwidth 100 or 200 MHz. For repetitive signals it dithered the sample clock to reconstruct signals well above the Nyquist frequency over many cycles. It couldn't see fast single event signals, of course.
It also had a pure analog mode. For the time, it was a pretty decent instrument.Unfortunately, I've long forgotten the model number, but it looked like a 24xx series.
Erich
--- In hp_agilent_equipment@..., Chuck Harris <cfharris@> wrote:
Hi Peter,
As I said, "any competently designed DSO". An analog scope gives
you the full vertical bandwidth regardless of the timebase setting.
A competently designed DSO should also.
You can be a bit flexible about that requirement, though. If the
aliasing effects are too fast to see at a particular timebase
setting, it would be ok to slow the sample rate until they are
only marginally too fast to see.
-Chuck Harris
Peter Gottlieb wrote:
But it's not just filtering above the Nyquist. There are other ways a sampling
digital scope can give you a wrong picture of reality. If all of these scopes
ran their digitizers constantly at full rate, watched for envelope effects and
so forth they would go a long way towards eliminating these unwanted erroneous
displays.
Peter
On 12/31/2012 10:56 AM, Chuck Harris wrote:
If by "trust" you mean see things faster than the Nyquist
limit, I fully agree.
