Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
So the first part of finding the answer is which group had responsibility for the policy. I would suspect either high level engineering or high level product management. Anyone have any contacts ??
Cheers!
Bruce
Quoting Lothar baier <Lothar@...>:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I did a brief google search and both versions are floated on the internet but nothing official from the company , as I said before the only information that ever came from agilent was the information given to my by a agilent support rep back in 2001 when I was working at tucker which was that the prefix denoted the date of manufacturing which would align with the information in the DSO manual but I can not attest to whether this was a official statement or a assumption on the part of the employee !
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Matt Huszagh via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 4:54 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
I think we need to delineate between the practices of HP and its successors and not assume that one format applies to the others, as it's very possible the meaning of serial numbers changed when HP became Agilent and then Keysight.
When I posted my response earlier, I assumed we were discussing HP gear, not Agilent or Keysight who changed the serial number format. But, maybe I shouldn't have assumed this. In any event, current evidence (my quote from the HP 8663A manual and Lothar's quote from Keysight DSOX1204 manual) suggests that HP used the prefix to mean engineering change whereas Keysight uses it to mean manufacture date. In my opinion, engineering change makes a lot more sense (at least when the schematics are provided), but I guess it's not up to me.
I also think we should restrict our evidence to official publications (manuals, journals, etc.) rather than quotes of people saying various things on various blogs. All the latter tells us is that people are confused, or the companies didn't keep consistent practices. Better to go right to the source.
Matt
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 2:40 PM Lothar baier <Lothar@...<mailto:Lothar@...>> wrote:
This is a excerpt from the service manual for a Keysight DSOX1204 :
¡°
Derive the date code from the oscilloscope's serial number to calculate the
number of years since manufacture. Include any fractional portion of a year.
i First, get the 3rd to 6th digits of the serial number. For example, for the
serial number CN47470001, get "4747".
ii If the number is greater than 4000, subtract 4000 to get the Date Code.
For example, 4747-4000 is "0747" ¡°
From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of n8zmTWH via groups.io<>
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 3:49 PM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
It makes a lot of practical sense to me for the date code in the serial number of an instrument to be related to the change level rather than the manufacturing date, as the sequential number later in the S/N would certainly be an indicator to the factory of when in time it was actually made, as I am pretty sure they keep good records on that, for many reasons. The change level also makes more sense given that service manuals are tied to revision levels, not build dates.
As for internal parts, maybe not so much, as IC¡¯s tend to have the build date from the manufacturer on them, however, labels on EPROM¡¯s and other programmed devices could go either way, although I suspect that the HP part number would change on masked devices, while programmable devices might have the date it was programmed on the label as well as the firmware version. The IC itself is very likely to have its part number ( 27C256, for example, but could be an HP P/N) and the build date stamped on by the manufacturer.
Maybe that¡¯s too logical?
As for the translating the code itself, I¡¯ll leave that to others.
More recently, the S/N format is USxxxxxxxx, where US could be a two -letter abbreviation for the build country ( US, MY, etc.), and the following 8 digits are, I¡¯ve been told, a code similar to the 4-digit date code previously explained by others, and then 4 digits of a sequential number. What they do for products that exceed 9999 built, I have no idea.
Tom, N8ZM
From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of Ken Eckert
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 4:29 PM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
In the olden days, the letter did represent the country of manufacture and the prefix year and week of manufacture.
Although there are differing thoughts on that which may be due to a change in policy/procedure at HP at some point in time..............
A A Kent
Post subject: Re: HP serial number study
[Post]<>Posted: Jun Thu 08, 2017 3:45 pm
Silent Key
Joined: Feb Wed 25, 2009 4:06 pm
Posts: 1531
Location: Morristown, N.J.
In a three digit prefix the first number is the number of years after 1960, and the last two digits are the week. 143 would mean 1961, 43rd week.
With four digit prefixes its the same except that the first two digits are the years after 1960 and then the week. 1725 would be 1977, 25th week.
This doesn't apply to any digital products. Also this system was dropped as I recall in the 1990's but I could be wrong on that. I worked at HP for 30 years in instruments.
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 12:49 PM Matt Huszagh <huszaghmatt@...<mailto:huszaghmatt@...>> wrote:
the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense I think that Agilent rep was wrong. I agree with Dave that the prefix
specifies the last engineering change, not the date of manufacture.
Various HP manuals support this idea too. For example, from my HP
8663A operation manual:
"The prefix is the same for all identical instruments; it changes only
when a change is made to the instrument"
That's consistent with an engineering change and not with the manufacture date.
FWIW, most relevant postings on this list agree with this notion and
state the manufacturing date belief is a misconception.
Matt
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:19 AM Lothar baier <Lothar@...<mailto:Lothar@...>> wrote:
the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of Dave Wise via groups.io<>
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:12 PM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
Yes, the serial number prefix reflects not the instrument¡¯s build date, but the date of the last Engineering Change before the instrument was built. Until the next change, that date, and the serial prefix, will remain stationary while perhaps years worth of instruments are cranked out. So the prefix can give a lower (and sometimes upper) bound on an instrument but cannot fix it exactly.
Regards,
Dave Wise
From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of victor.silva via groups.io<>
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 9:33 AM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:50 PM, Labguy wrote:
yet the serial number starts with 2823A¡ indicating a build date of 1988.
I don't agree with your serial number assumption. The 2823A prefix was used for a large range of manufacture dates.
In fact it was used until almost the Agilent renaming.
I seem to remember this happening to me once and I believe it was one of the four fiber optic isolation cables was disconnected.
--Victor
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
I did a brief google search and both versions are floated on the internet but nothing official from the company , as I said before the only information that ever came from agilent was the information given to my by a agilent support rep
back in 2001 when I was working at tucker which was that the prefix denoted the date of manufacturing which would align with the information in the DSO manual but I can not attest to whether this was a official statement or a assumption on the part of the
employee !
?
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] < [email protected]>
On Behalf Of Matt Huszagh via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 4:54 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
?
I think we need to delineate between the practices of HP and its successors and not assume that one format applies to the others, as it's very possible the meaning of serial numbers changed when HP became Agilent and then Keysight.
When I posted my response earlier, I assumed we were discussing HP gear, not Agilent or Keysight who changed the serial number format. But, maybe I shouldn't have assumed this. In any event, current evidence (my quote from the HP 8663A
manual and Lothar's quote from Keysight DSOX1204 manual) suggests that HP used the prefix to mean engineering change whereas Keysight uses it to mean manufacture date. In my opinion, engineering change makes a lot more sense (at least when the schematics are
provided), but I guess it's not up to me.
I also think we should restrict our evidence to official publications (manuals, journals, etc.) rather than quotes of people saying various things on various blogs. All the latter tells us is that people are confused, or the companies didn't
keep consistent practices. Better to go right to the source.
?
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 2:40 PM Lothar baier <Lothar@...> wrote:
This is a excerpt from the service manual for a Keysight ?DSOX1204 :?
¡°
Derive the date code from the oscilloscope's serial number to calculate the
number of years since
manufacture. Include any fractional portion of a year.
i First, get the 3rd to 6th digits of the serial number. For example, for the
serial number CN47470001, get "4747".
ii If the number is greater than 4000, subtract 4000 to get the Date Code.
For example, 4747-4000 is "0747"? ¡°
?
?
It makes a lot of practical sense to me for the date code in the serial number of an instrument to be related to the
change level rather than the manufacturing date, as the sequential number later in the S/N would certainly be an indicator to the factory of when in time it was actually made, as I am pretty sure they keep good records on that, for many reasons. The change
level also makes more sense given that service manuals are tied to revision levels, not build dates.
?
As for internal parts, maybe not so much, as IC¡¯s tend to have the build date from the manufacturer on them, however,
labels on EPROM¡¯s and other programmed devices could go either way, although I suspect that the HP part number would change on masked devices, while programmable devices might have the date it was programmed on the label as well as the firmware version. The
IC itself is very likely to have its part number ( 27C256, for example, but could be an HP P/N) and the build date stamped on by the manufacturer.
?
Maybe that¡¯s too logical?
?
As for the translating the code itself, I¡¯ll leave that to others.
?
More recently, the S/N format is USxxxxxxxx, where US could be a two -letter abbreviation for the build country ( US,
MY, etc.), and the following 8 digits are, I¡¯ve been told, a code similar to the 4-digit date code previously explained by others, and then 4 digits of a sequential number. What they do for products that exceed 9999 built, I have no idea.
?
Tom, N8ZM
?
?
In the olden days, the letter did represent the country of manufacture and the prefix year and week of manufacture.
?Although there are differing thoughts on that which may be due to a?change in policy/procedure at HP at some point in time..............
|
?
|
|
A A Kent
|
?Post subject:?Re: HP serial number study
Posted:?Jun
Thu 08, 2017 3:45 pm?
|
|
|
Joined:?Feb Wed 25, 2009 4:06 pm
Posts:?1531
Location:?Morristown, N.J.
|
In a three digit prefix the first number is the number of years after 1960, and the last two digits are the week. 143 would mean 1961, 43rd week.
With four digit prefixes its the same except that the first two digits are the years after 1960 and then the week. 1725 would be 1977, 25th week.
This doesn't apply to any digital products. Also this system was dropped as I recall in the 1990's but I could be wrong on that. I worked at HP for 30 years in instruments.
|
|
|
?
> the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year
of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
I think that Agilent rep was wrong. I agree with Dave that the prefix
specifies the last engineering change, not the date of manufacture.
Various HP manuals support this idea too. For example, from my HP
8663A operation manual:
"The prefix is the same for all identical instruments; it changes only
when a change is made to the instrument"
That's consistent with an engineering change and not with the manufacture date.
FWIW, most relevant postings on this list agree with this notion and
state the manufacturing date belief is a misconception.
Matt
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:19 AM Lothar baier <Lothar@...> wrote:
>
> the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location
, the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
>
>
>
> From:
[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dave Wise via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:12 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> Yes, the serial number prefix reflects not the instrument¡¯s build date, but the date of the last Engineering Change before the instrument was built.? Until the next change, that date, and the serial prefix, will remain stationary while perhaps years worth
of instruments are cranked out.? So the prefix can give a lower (and sometimes upper) bound on an instrument but cannot fix it exactly.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave Wise
>
>
>
> From:
[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of victor.silva via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 9:33 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:50 PM, Labguy wrote:
>
> yet the serial number starts with 2823A¡ indicating a build date of 1988.
>
>
> I don't agree with your serial number assumption.? The 2823A prefix was used for a large range of manufacture dates.
> In fact it was used until almost the Agilent renaming.
>
> I seem to remember this happening to me once and I believe it was one of the four fiber optic isolation cables was disconnected.
>
> --Victor
>
>
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
All- So instead of speculating, do we have any higher level production managers in the group, or do amy of know how to get in touch with someone who can give a definitive answer ??
Cheers!
Bruce
Quoting Matt Huszagh <huszaghmatt@...>:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I think we need to delineate between the practices of HP and its successors
and not assume that one format applies to the others, as it's very possible
the meaning of serial numbers changed when HP became Agilent and then
Keysight.
When I posted my response earlier, I assumed we were discussing HP gear,
not Agilent or Keysight who changed the serial number format. But, maybe I
shouldn't have assumed this. In any event, current evidence (my quote from
the HP 8663A manual and Lothar's quote from Keysight DSOX1204 manual)
suggests that HP used the prefix to mean engineering change whereas
Keysight uses it to mean manufacture date. In my opinion, engineering
change makes a lot more sense (at least when the schematics are provided),
but I guess it's not up to me.
I also think we should restrict our evidence to official publications
(manuals, journals, etc.) rather than quotes of people saying various
things on various blogs. All the latter tells us is that people are
confused, or the companies didn't keep consistent practices. Better to go
right to the source.
Matt
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 2:40 PM Lothar baier <Lothar@...>
wrote:
This is a excerpt from the service manual for a Keysight DSOX1204 :
¡°
Derive the date code from the oscilloscope's serial number to calculate the
number of years since manufacture. Include any fractional portion of a
year.
i First, get the 3rd to 6th digits of the serial number. For example, for
the
serial number CN47470001, get "4747".
ii If the number is greater than 4000, subtract 4000 to get the Date Code.
For example, 4747-4000 is "0747" ¡°
*From:* [email protected] <
[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *n8zmTWH via
groups.io
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 23, 2022 3:49 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A
Troubleshooting
It makes a lot of practical sense to me for the date code in the serial
number of an instrument to be related to the change level rather than the
manufacturing date, as the sequential number later in the S/N would
certainly be an indicator to the factory of when in time it was actually
made, as I am pretty sure they keep good records on that, for many reasons.
The change level also makes more sense given that service manuals are tied
to revision levels, not build dates.
As for internal parts, maybe not so much, as IC¡¯s tend to have the build
date from the manufacturer on them, however, labels on EPROM¡¯s and other
programmed devices could go either way, although I suspect that the HP part
number would change on masked devices, while programmable devices might
have the date it was programmed on the label as well as the firmware
version. The IC itself is very likely to have its part number ( 27C256, for
example, but could be an HP P/N) and the build date stamped on by the
manufacturer.
Maybe that¡¯s too logical?
As for the translating the code itself, I¡¯ll leave that to others.
More recently, the S/N format is USxxxxxxxx, where US could be a two
-letter abbreviation for the build country ( US, MY, etc.), and the
following 8 digits are, I¡¯ve been told, a code similar to the 4-digit date
code previously explained by others, and then 4 digits of a sequential
number. What they do for products that exceed 9999 built, I have no idea.
Tom, N8ZM
*From:* [email protected] <
[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Ken Eckert
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 23, 2022 4:29 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A
Troubleshooting
In the olden days, the letter did represent the country of manufacture and
the prefix year and week of manufacture.
Although there are differing thoughts on that which may be due to
a change in policy/procedure at HP at some point in time..............
*A A Kent*
*Post subject:* Re: HP serial number study
[image: Post]
<>
*Posted:* Jun Thu 08, 2017 3:45 pm
Silent Key
*Joined:* Feb Wed 25, 2009 4:06 pm
*Posts:* 1531
*Location:* Morristown, N.J.
In a three digit prefix the first number is the number of years after
1960, and the last two digits are the week. 143 would mean 1961, 43rd week.
With four digit prefixes its the same except that the first two digits are
the years after 1960 and then the week. 1725 would be 1977, 25th week.
This doesn't apply to any digital products. Also this system was dropped
as I recall in the 1990's but I could be wrong on that. I worked at HP for
30 years in instruments.
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 12:49 PM Matt Huszagh <huszaghmatt@...>
wrote:
the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing
date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter
representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t
seem to make sense
I think that Agilent rep was wrong. I agree with Dave that the prefix
specifies the last engineering change, not the date of manufacture.
Various HP manuals support this idea too. For example, from my HP
8663A operation manual:
"The prefix is the same for all identical instruments; it changes only
when a change is made to the instrument"
That's consistent with an engineering change and not with the manufacture
date.
FWIW, most relevant postings on this list agree with this notion and
state the manufacturing date belief is a misconception.
Matt
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:19 AM Lothar baier <Lothar@...>
wrote:
the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I
worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing
date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter
representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t
seem to make sense
From: [email protected] <
[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dave Wise via
groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:12 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
Yes, the serial number prefix reflects not the instrument¡¯s build date,
but the date of the last Engineering Change before the instrument was
built. Until the next change, that date, and the serial prefix, will
remain stationary while perhaps years worth of instruments are cranked
out. So the prefix can give a lower (and sometimes upper) bound on an
instrument but cannot fix it exactly.
Regards,
Dave Wise
From: [email protected] <
[email protected]> On Behalf Of victor.silva via
groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 9:33 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:50 PM, Labguy wrote:
yet the serial number starts with 2823A¡ indicating a build date of 1988.
I don't agree with your serial number assumption. The 2823A prefix was
used for a large range of manufacture dates.
In fact it was used until almost the Agilent renaming.
I seem to remember this happening to me once and I believe it was one of the four fiber optic isolation cables was disconnected.
--Victor
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
I think we need to delineate between the practices of HP and its successors and not assume that one format applies to the others, as it's very possible the meaning of serial numbers changed when HP became Agilent and then Keysight.
When I posted my response earlier, I assumed we were discussing HP gear, not Agilent or Keysight who changed the serial number format. But, maybe I shouldn't have assumed this. In any event, current evidence (my quote from the HP 8663A manual and Lothar's quote from Keysight DSOX1204 manual) suggests that HP used the prefix to mean engineering change whereas Keysight uses it to mean manufacture date. In my opinion, engineering change makes a lot more sense (at least when the schematics are provided), but I guess it's not up to me.
I also think we should restrict our evidence to official publications (manuals, journals, etc.) rather than quotes of people saying various things on various blogs. All the latter tells us is that people are confused, or the companies didn't keep consistent practices. Better to go right to the source.
Matt
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 2:40 PM Lothar baier < Lothar@...> wrote:
This is a excerpt from the service manual for a Keysight ?DSOX1204 :?
¡°
Derive the date code from the oscilloscope's serial number to calculate the
number of years since
manufacture. Include any fractional portion of a year.
i First, get the 3rd to 6th digits of the serial number. For example, for the
serial number CN47470001, get "4747".
ii If the number is greater than 4000, subtract 4000 to get the Date Code.
For example, 4747-4000 is "0747"? ¡°
?
?
It makes a lot of practical sense to me for the date code in the serial number of an instrument to be related to the change level rather than the manufacturing date, as the sequential
number later in the S/N would certainly be an indicator to the factory of when in time it was actually made, as I am pretty sure they keep good records on that, for many reasons. The change level also makes more sense given that service manuals are tied to
revision levels, not build dates.
?
As for internal parts, maybe not so much, as IC¡¯s tend to have the build date from the manufacturer on them, however, labels on EPROM¡¯s and other programmed devices could go
either way, although I suspect that the HP part number would change on masked devices, while programmable devices might have the date it was programmed on the label as well as the firmware version. The IC itself is very likely to have its part number ( 27C256,
for example, but could be an HP P/N) and the build date stamped on by the manufacturer.
?
Maybe that¡¯s too logical?
?
As for the translating the code itself, I¡¯ll leave that to others.
?
More recently, the S/N format is USxxxxxxxx, where US could be a two -letter abbreviation for the build country ( US, MY, etc.), and the following 8 digits are, I¡¯ve been told,
a code similar to the 4-digit date code previously explained by others, and then 4 digits of a sequential number. What they do for products that exceed 9999 built, I have no idea.
?
Tom, N8ZM
?
?
In the olden days, the letter did represent the country of manufacture and the prefix year and week of manufacture.
?Although there are differing thoughts on that which may be due to a?change in policy/procedure at HP at some point in time..............
|
?
|
|
A A Kent
|
?Post subject:?Re: HP serial number study
Posted:?Jun
Thu 08, 2017 3:45 pm?
|
|
|
Joined:?Feb Wed 25, 2009 4:06 pm
Posts:?1531
Location:?Morristown, N.J.
|
In a three digit prefix the first number is the number of years after 1960, and the last two digits are the week. 143 would mean 1961, 43rd
week.
With four digit prefixes its the same except that the first two digits are the years after 1960 and then the week. 1725 would be 1977, 25th week.
This doesn't apply to any digital products. Also this system was dropped as I recall in the 1990's but I could be wrong on that. I worked at HP for 30 years in instruments.
|
|
|
?
> the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the
letter representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
I think that Agilent rep was wrong. I agree with Dave that the prefix
specifies the last engineering change, not the date of manufacture.
Various HP manuals support this idea too. For example, from my HP
8663A operation manual:
"The prefix is the same for all identical instruments; it changes only
when a change is made to the instrument"
That's consistent with an engineering change and not with the manufacture date.
FWIW, most relevant postings on this list agree with this notion and
state the manufacturing date belief is a misconception.
Matt
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:19 AM Lothar baier <Lothar@...> wrote:
>
> the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location
, the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
>
>
>
> From:
[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dave Wise via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:12 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> Yes, the serial number prefix reflects not the instrument¡¯s build date, but the date of the last Engineering Change before the instrument was built.? Until the next change, that date, and the serial prefix, will remain stationary while perhaps years worth
of instruments are cranked out.? So the prefix can give a lower (and sometimes upper) bound on an instrument but cannot fix it exactly.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave Wise
>
>
>
> From:
[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of victor.silva via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 9:33 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:50 PM, Labguy wrote:
>
> yet the serial number starts with 2823A¡ indicating a build date of 1988.
>
>
> I don't agree with your serial number assumption.? The 2823A prefix was used for a large range of manufacture dates.
> In fact it was used until almost the Agilent renaming.
>
> I seem to remember this happening to me once and I believe it was one of the four fiber optic isolation cables was disconnected.
>
> --Victor
>
>
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
This is a excerpt from the service manual for a Keysight ?DSOX1204 :?
¡°
Derive the date code from the oscilloscope's serial number to calculate the
number of years since
manufacture. Include any fractional portion of a year.
i First, get the 3rd to 6th digits of the serial number. For example, for the
serial number CN47470001, get "4747".
ii If the number is greater than 4000, subtract 4000 to get the Date Code.
For example, 4747-4000 is "0747"? ¡°
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] < [email protected]>
On Behalf Of n8zmTWH via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 3:49 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
?
It makes a lot of practical sense to me for the date code in the serial number of an instrument to be related to the change level rather than the manufacturing date, as the sequential
number later in the S/N would certainly be an indicator to the factory of when in time it was actually made, as I am pretty sure they keep good records on that, for many reasons. The change level also makes more sense given that service manuals are tied to
revision levels, not build dates.
?
As for internal parts, maybe not so much, as IC¡¯s tend to have the build date from the manufacturer on them, however, labels on EPROM¡¯s and other programmed devices could go
either way, although I suspect that the HP part number would change on masked devices, while programmable devices might have the date it was programmed on the label as well as the firmware version. The IC itself is very likely to have its part number ( 27C256,
for example, but could be an HP P/N) and the build date stamped on by the manufacturer.
?
Maybe that¡¯s too logical?
?
As for the translating the code itself, I¡¯ll leave that to others.
?
More recently, the S/N format is USxxxxxxxx, where US could be a two -letter abbreviation for the build country ( US, MY, etc.), and the following 8 digits are, I¡¯ve been told,
a code similar to the 4-digit date code previously explained by others, and then 4 digits of a sequential number. What they do for products that exceed 9999 built, I have no idea.
?
Tom, N8ZM
?
?
In the olden days, the letter did represent the country of manufacture and the prefix year and week of manufacture.
?Although there are differing thoughts on that which may be due to a?change in policy/procedure at HP at some point in time..............
|
?
|
|
A A Kent
|
?Post subject:?Re: HP serial number study
Posted:?Jun
Thu 08, 2017 3:45 pm?
|
|
|
Joined:?Feb Wed 25, 2009 4:06 pm
Posts:?1531
Location:?Morristown, N.J.
|
In a three digit prefix the first number is the number of years after 1960, and the last two digits are the week. 143 would mean 1961, 43rd
week.
With four digit prefixes its the same except that the first two digits are the years after 1960 and then the week. 1725 would be 1977, 25th week.
This doesn't apply to any digital products. Also this system was dropped as I recall in the 1990's but I could be wrong on that. I worked at HP for 30 years in instruments.
|
|
|
?
> the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the
letter representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
I think that Agilent rep was wrong. I agree with Dave that the prefix
specifies the last engineering change, not the date of manufacture.
Various HP manuals support this idea too. For example, from my HP
8663A operation manual:
"The prefix is the same for all identical instruments; it changes only
when a change is made to the instrument"
That's consistent with an engineering change and not with the manufacture date.
FWIW, most relevant postings on this list agree with this notion and
state the manufacturing date belief is a misconception.
Matt
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:19 AM Lothar baier <Lothar@...> wrote:
>
> the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location
, the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
>
>
>
> From:
[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dave Wise via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:12 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> Yes, the serial number prefix reflects not the instrument¡¯s build date, but the date of the last Engineering Change before the instrument was built.? Until the next change, that date, and the serial prefix, will remain stationary while perhaps years worth
of instruments are cranked out.? So the prefix can give a lower (and sometimes upper) bound on an instrument but cannot fix it exactly.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave Wise
>
>
>
> From:
[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of victor.silva via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 9:33 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:50 PM, Labguy wrote:
>
> yet the serial number starts with 2823A¡ indicating a build date of 1988.
>
>
> I don't agree with your serial number assumption.? The 2823A prefix was used for a large range of manufacture dates.
> In fact it was used until almost the Agilent renaming.
>
> I seem to remember this happening to me once and I believe it was one of the four fiber optic isolation cables was disconnected.
>
> --Victor
>
>
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
Actually integrated circuits usually have a lot code which tracks the wafer(s) that were used, the lot code allows for the manufacturer to identify the wafer , foundry who diffused the wafer , date and some other additional info I don¡¯t
remember
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] < [email protected]>
On Behalf Of n8zmTWH via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 3:49 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
?
It makes a lot of practical sense to me for the date code in the serial number of an instrument to be related to the change level rather than the manufacturing date, as the sequential
number later in the S/N would certainly be an indicator to the factory of when in time it was actually made, as I am pretty sure they keep good records on that, for many reasons. The change level also makes more sense given that service manuals are tied to
revision levels, not build dates.
?
As for internal parts, maybe not so much, as IC¡¯s tend to have the build date from the manufacturer on them, however, labels on EPROM¡¯s and other programmed devices could go
either way, although I suspect that the HP part number would change on masked devices, while programmable devices might have the date it was programmed on the label as well as the firmware version. The IC itself is very likely to have its part number ( 27C256,
for example, but could be an HP P/N) and the build date stamped on by the manufacturer.
?
Maybe that¡¯s too logical?
?
As for the translating the code itself, I¡¯ll leave that to others.
?
More recently, the S/N format is USxxxxxxxx, where US could be a two -letter abbreviation for the build country ( US, MY, etc.), and the following 8 digits are, I¡¯ve been told,
a code similar to the 4-digit date code previously explained by others, and then 4 digits of a sequential number. What they do for products that exceed 9999 built, I have no idea.
?
Tom, N8ZM
?
?
In the olden days, the letter did represent the country of manufacture and the prefix year and week of manufacture.
?Although there are differing thoughts on that which may be due to a?change in policy/procedure at HP at some point in time..............
|
?
|
|
A A Kent
|
?Post subject:?Re: HP serial number study
Posted:?Jun
Thu 08, 2017 3:45 pm?
|
|
|
Joined:?Feb Wed 25, 2009 4:06 pm
Posts:?1531
Location:?Morristown, N.J.
|
In a three digit prefix the first number is the number of years after 1960, and the last two digits are the week. 143 would mean 1961, 43rd
week.
With four digit prefixes its the same except that the first two digits are the years after 1960 and then the week. 1725 would be 1977, 25th week.
This doesn't apply to any digital products. Also this system was dropped as I recall in the 1990's but I could be wrong on that. I worked at HP for 30 years in instruments.
|
|
|
?
> the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the
letter representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
I think that Agilent rep was wrong. I agree with Dave that the prefix
specifies the last engineering change, not the date of manufacture.
Various HP manuals support this idea too. For example, from my HP
8663A operation manual:
"The prefix is the same for all identical instruments; it changes only
when a change is made to the instrument"
That's consistent with an engineering change and not with the manufacture date.
FWIW, most relevant postings on this list agree with this notion and
state the manufacturing date belief is a misconception.
Matt
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:19 AM Lothar baier <Lothar@...> wrote:
>
> the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location
, the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
>
>
>
> From:
[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dave Wise via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:12 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> Yes, the serial number prefix reflects not the instrument¡¯s build date, but the date of the last Engineering Change before the instrument was built.? Until the next change, that date, and the serial prefix, will remain stationary while perhaps years worth
of instruments are cranked out.? So the prefix can give a lower (and sometimes upper) bound on an instrument but cannot fix it exactly.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave Wise
>
>
>
> From:
[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of victor.silva via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 9:33 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:50 PM, Labguy wrote:
>
> yet the serial number starts with 2823A¡ indicating a build date of 1988.
>
>
> I don't agree with your serial number assumption.? The 2823A prefix was used for a large range of manufacture dates.
> In fact it was used until almost the Agilent renaming.
>
> I seem to remember this happening to me once and I believe it was one of the four fiber optic isolation cables was disconnected.
>
> --Victor
>
>
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
It makes a lot of practical sense to me for the date code in the serial number of an instrument to be related to the change level rather than the manufacturing date, as the sequential number later in the S/N would certainly be an indicator to the factory of when in time it was actually made, as I am pretty sure they keep good records on that, for many reasons. The change level also makes more sense given that service manuals are tied to revision levels, not build dates. ? As for internal parts, maybe not so much, as IC¡¯s tend to have the build date from the manufacturer on them, however, labels on EPROM¡¯s and other programmed devices could go either way, although I suspect that the HP part number would change on masked devices, while programmable devices might have the date it was programmed on the label as well as the firmware version. The IC itself is very likely to have its part number ( 27C256, for example, but could be an HP P/N) and the build date stamped on by the manufacturer. ? Maybe that¡¯s too logical? ? As for the translating the code itself, I¡¯ll leave that to others. ? More recently, the S/N format is USxxxxxxxx, where US could be a two -letter abbreviation for the build country ( US, MY, etc.), and the following 8 digits are, I¡¯ve been told, a code similar to the 4-digit date code previously explained by others, and then 4 digits of a sequential number. What they do for products that exceed 9999 built, I have no idea. ? Tom, N8ZM ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ken Eckert
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 4:29 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting? In the olden days, the letter did represent the country of manufacture and the prefix year and week of manufacture. ?Although there are differing thoughts on that which may be due to a?change in policy/procedure at HP at some point in time.............. | ? | A A Kent | ?Post subject:?Re: HP serial number study Posted:?Jun Thu 08, 2017 3:45 pm? |
|
Joined:?Feb Wed 25, 2009 4:06 pm
Posts:?1531
Location:?Morristown, N.J.
| In a three digit prefix the first number is the number of years after 1960, and the last two digits are the week. 143 would mean 1961, 43rd week.
With four digit prefixes its the same except that the first two digits are the years after 1960 and then the week. 1725 would be 1977, 25th week.
This doesn't apply to any digital products. Also this system was dropped as I recall in the 1990's but I could be wrong on that. I worked at HP for 30 years in instruments. |
|
|
? > the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
I think that Agilent rep was wrong. I agree with Dave that the prefix
specifies the last engineering change, not the date of manufacture.
Various HP manuals support this idea too. For example, from my HP
8663A operation manual:
"The prefix is the same for all identical instruments; it changes only
when a change is made to the instrument"
That's consistent with an engineering change and not with the manufacture date.
FWIW, most relevant postings on this list agree with this notion and
state the manufacturing date belief is a misconception.
Matt
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:19 AM Lothar baier <Lothar@...> wrote:
>
> the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
>
>
>
> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dave Wise via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:12 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> Yes, the serial number prefix reflects not the instrument¡¯s build date, but the date of the last Engineering Change before the instrument was built.? Until the next change, that date, and the serial prefix, will remain stationary while perhaps years worth of instruments are cranked out.? So the prefix can give a lower (and sometimes upper) bound on an instrument but cannot fix it exactly.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave Wise
>
>
>
> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of victor.silva via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 9:33 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:50 PM, Labguy wrote:
>
> yet the serial number starts with 2823A¡ indicating a build date of 1988.
>
>
> I don't agree with your serial number assumption.? The 2823A prefix was used for a large range of manufacture dates.
> In fact it was used until almost the Agilent renaming.
>
> I seem to remember this happening to me once and I believe it was one of the four fiber optic isolation cables was disconnected.
>
> --Victor
>
>
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
Thank you so much Frank for all the good advice! This is exactly what I have been looking for. ? I will now proceed step by step with what you have suggested and post the results as I go. ? Cheers, George G ? ?
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
I believe A A Kent¡¯s statement refers to encoded date of engineering change, not build.
?
Dave Wise
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] < [email protected]>
On Behalf Of Ken Eckert via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 1:29 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
?
In the olden days, the letter did represent the country of manufacture and the prefix year and week of manufacture.
?Although there are differing thoughts on that which may be due to a?change in policy/procedure at HP at some point in time..............
|
?
|
|
A A Kent
|
?Post subject:?Re: HP serial number study
Posted:?Jun
Thu 08, 2017 3:45 pm?
|
|
|
Joined:?Feb Wed 25, 2009 4:06 pm
Posts:?1531
Location:?Morristown, N.J.
|
In a three digit prefix the first number is the number of years after 1960, and the last two digits are the week. 143 would mean 1961, 43rd
week.
With four digit prefixes its the same except that the first two digits are the years after 1960 and then the week. 1725 would be 1977, 25th week.
This doesn't apply to any digital products. Also this system was dropped as I recall in the 1990's but I could be wrong on that. I worked at HP for 30 years in instruments.
|
|
|
?
> the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the
letter representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
I think that Agilent rep was wrong. I agree with Dave that the prefix
specifies the last engineering change, not the date of manufacture.
Various HP manuals support this idea too. For example, from my HP
8663A operation manual:
"The prefix is the same for all identical instruments; it changes only
when a change is made to the instrument"
That's consistent with an engineering change and not with the manufacture date.
FWIW, most relevant postings on this list agree with this notion and
state the manufacturing date belief is a misconception.
Matt
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:19 AM Lothar baier <Lothar@...> wrote:
>
> the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location
, the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
>
>
>
> From:
[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dave Wise via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:12 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> Yes, the serial number prefix reflects not the instrument¡¯s build date, but the date of the last Engineering Change before the instrument was built.? Until the next change, that date, and the serial prefix, will remain stationary while perhaps years worth
of instruments are cranked out.? So the prefix can give a lower (and sometimes upper) bound on an instrument but cannot fix it exactly.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave Wise
>
>
>
> From:
[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of victor.silva via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 9:33 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:50 PM, Labguy wrote:
>
> yet the serial number starts with 2823A¡ indicating a build date of 1988.
>
>
> I don't agree with your serial number assumption.? The 2823A prefix was used for a large range of manufacture dates.
> In fact it was used until almost the Agilent renaming.
>
> I seem to remember this happening to me once and I believe it was one of the four fiber optic isolation cables was disconnected.
>
> --Victor
>
>
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
In the olden days, the letter did represent the country of manufacture and the prefix year and week of manufacture. ?Although there are differing thoughts on that which may be due to a?change in policy/procedure at HP at some point in time..............
| | A A Kent | ?Post subject:?Re: HP serial number study Posted:?Jun Thu 08, 2017 3:45 pm? |
|
Joined:?Feb Wed 25, 2009 4:06 pm
Posts:?1531
Location:?Morristown, N.J. | In a three digit prefix the first number is the number of years after 1960, and the last two digits are the week. 143 would mean 1961, 43rd week.
With four digit prefixes its the same except that the first two digits are the years after 1960 and then the week. 1725 would be 1977, 25th week.
This doesn't apply to any digital products. Also this system was dropped as I recall in the 1990's but I could be wrong on that. I worked at HP for 30 years in instruments. |
|
|
> the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
I think that Agilent rep was wrong. I agree with Dave that the prefix
specifies the last engineering change, not the date of manufacture.
Various HP manuals support this idea too. For example, from my HP
8663A operation manual:
"The prefix is the same for all identical instruments; it changes only
when a change is made to the instrument"
That's consistent with an engineering change and not with the manufacture date.
FWIW, most relevant postings on this list agree with this notion and
state the manufacturing date belief is a misconception.
Matt
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:19 AM Lothar baier <Lothar@...> wrote:
>
> the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
>
>
>
> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dave Wise via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:12 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> Yes, the serial number prefix reflects not the instrument¡¯s build date, but the date of the last Engineering Change before the instrument was built.? Until the next change, that date, and the serial prefix, will remain stationary while perhaps years worth of instruments are cranked out.? So the prefix can give a lower (and sometimes upper) bound on an instrument but cannot fix it exactly.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave Wise
>
>
>
> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of victor.silva via
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 9:33 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:50 PM, Labguy wrote:
>
> yet the serial number starts with 2823A¡ indicating a build date of 1988.
>
>
> I don't agree with your serial number assumption.? The 2823A prefix was used for a large range of manufacture dates.
> In fact it was used until almost the Agilent renaming.
>
> I seem to remember this happening to me once and I believe it was one of the four fiber optic isolation cables was disconnected.
>
> --Victor
>
>
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense I think that Agilent rep was wrong. I agree with Dave that the prefix specifies the last engineering change, not the date of manufacture. Various HP manuals support this idea too. For example, from my HP 8663A operation manual: "The prefix is the same for all identical instruments; it changes only when a change is made to the instrument" That's consistent with an engineering change and not with the manufacture date. FWIW, most relevant postings on this list agree with this notion and state the manufacturing date belief is a misconception. Matt On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:19 AM Lothar baier <Lothar@...> wrote:
the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dave Wise via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:12 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
Yes, the serial number prefix reflects not the instrument¡¯s build date, but the date of the last Engineering Change before the instrument was built. Until the next change, that date, and the serial prefix, will remain stationary while perhaps years worth of instruments are cranked out. So the prefix can give a lower (and sometimes upper) bound on an instrument but cannot fix it exactly.
Regards,
Dave Wise
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of victor.silva via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 9:33 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:50 PM, Labguy wrote:
yet the serial number starts with 2823A¡ indicating a build date of 1988.
I don't agree with your serial number assumption. The 2823A prefix was used for a large range of manufacture dates.
In fact it was used until almost the Agilent renaming.
I seem to remember this happening to me once and I believe it was one of the four fiber optic isolation cables was disconnected.
--Victor
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
Just for reference:
My 3458A is also series 2823A with a serial# of just above 500, and it arrived with firmware "2,1".
EPROM labels have datecode 8839 and 8840 (three each).
Couple of PAL chips also have 8840
NOVRAM 8835
The fiberoptic tranceivers are 8838.
A couple of metal-can op-amps next to the ASIC (8808) have datecode 8841.
The rest of the date codes seems to fall in two bulges, one around 8810 and one around 8825.
The "Made in USA" stickers on the various boards have with "09-2844" and "09-2839" date codes, with matrix-print labels (PCB date) having 2821.
My tentative conclusion is therefore that my 3458A was built/completed in 1988/Q4.
I have no idea when, how or why it arrived at its german customer, where it remained until 2009 when I bought it on eBay with a defect GPIB port.
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
the way it was explained to me by a agilent support rep back when I worked at tucker was that the first 4 digits represent the manufacturing date with the first 2 representing the year of manufacture and the letter representing the manufacturing
location , the systematic you state doesn¡¯t seem to make sense
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] < [email protected]>
On Behalf Of Dave Wise via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:12 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
?
Yes, the serial number prefix reflects not the instrument¡¯s build date, but the date of the last Engineering Change before the instrument was built.? Until the next change, that date, and the serial prefix, will remain stationary while
perhaps years worth of instruments are cranked out.? So the prefix can give a lower (and sometimes upper) bound on an instrument but cannot fix it exactly.
?
Regards,
Dave Wise
?
?
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:50 PM, Labguy wrote:
yet the serial number starts with 2823A¡ indicating a build date of 1988.
I don't agree with your serial number assumption.? The 2823A prefix was used for a large range of manufacture dates.
In fact it was used until almost the Agilent renaming.
I seem to remember this happening to me once and I believe it was one of the four fiber optic isolation cables was disconnected.
--Victor
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
Yes, the serial number prefix reflects not the instrument¡¯s build date, but the date of the last Engineering Change before the instrument was built.? Until the next change, that date, and the serial prefix, will remain stationary while
perhaps years worth of instruments are cranked out.? So the prefix can give a lower (and sometimes upper) bound on an instrument but cannot fix it exactly.
?
Regards,
Dave Wise
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] < [email protected]>
On Behalf Of victor.silva via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 9:33 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
?
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:50 PM, Labguy wrote:
yet the serial number starts with 2823A¡ indicating a build date of 1988.
I don't agree with your serial number assumption.? The 2823A prefix was used for a large range of manufacture dates.
In fact it was used until almost the Agilent renaming.
I seem to remember this happening to me once and I believe it was one of the four fiber optic isolation cables was disconnected.
--Victor
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:50 PM, Labguy wrote:
yet the serial number starts with 2823A¡ indicating a build date of 1988.
I don't agree with your serial number assumption.? The 2823A prefix was used for a large range of manufacture dates. In fact it was used until almost the Agilent renaming. I seem to remember this happening to me once and I believe it was one of the four fiber optic isolation cables was disconnected. --Victor
|
Re: HP YIG replacement 3-7GHz
There are different kinds of parts brokers , some as you pointed out already are fake and only after money and personal information , others are legitimate businesses but as they are brokers they do not stock anything but wait until a prospective
buyer comes along and then search for the parts but its not guaranteed they will be able to fill the order ,? lastly there are a few distributors who actually specialize in obsolete parts , they usually buy inventories of obsolete or EOL parts from semiconductor
companies or distributors stock them in their inventory and sell them at a premium there also is a handful who buy the original mask sets from the manufacturer and then find a foundry to produce devices.
Problem is that its really hard to tell them apart but I be careful with companies in HK or china
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] < [email protected]>
On Behalf Of Peter Hansen via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 6:06 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] HP YIG replacement 3-7GHz
?
problem is most of those brokers do actually not have them they Scam you in sending money
just for infomation : it looks like Micro-Semiconductor.com from HK have a stock of 5621 of Avago AT-42000-GP4 available
Might be the device we are talking about in a different packaging (?)
----- Messaggio originale -----
Inviato: 22/03/2022 19:11:42
Oggetto: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] HP YIG replacement 3-7GHz
Hello Lothar the device is AT41000 or AT42000 of course obsolete. I am sure if we could find a reliable source it maybe would get CT1DMK to use his bonder for repairs again. I know he is out of
parts but has repaired them in the past.
I love impossible challenges. People always told me the Rythm tower from HP8563E would be impossible to adjust. But none of the less I can do that on daily basis if needed. It was a long road but
now possible. In this case a Scalar netwoek analyzers 26.5Ghz comes in handy as the detektor is broadband so i look at the downconverted IF signal. I use that for adjustments at all frequencies
The first challenge is to figure out the transistor they used , HP had their own foundry and not all parts they made were sold as products on the open market.
Given the frequency range of the yig it was likely to be a HBT rather than a GaAs Fet but HP semiconductor became Avago and then broadcom and to my knowledge they don¡¯t sell die level parts!
The next challenge then is to remove the old transistor and mount a new one, usually devices are mounted using eutectic solder preforms , the stage is heated until the solder melts and the part is then ¡°scrubbed ¡° in as gold from the back
metalization diffuses into the solder the melting point increases and the solder solidifies , in order to remove the part you would have to heat up the solder past the new melting point without imposing thermal stress on the other parts used or dislocating
them !
To mount a new part you need a die attach as well as preforms, you could of course use conductive epoxy but the heat transfer generally is not as good as with eutectic die attach so you might run into issues with reliability!
As far as wirebonders concerns there are plenty on ebay , expect to pay between $5000 and $16000 for a refurbished one , for this type of work you need a wedge/wire bonder , if you plan on rebuilding modules plan on getting a deep access
bonder or a convertible machine that can be used for different processes .
The biggest challenge with bonding is to figure out the right settings though, usually in a production environment the supplier of the semiconductor devices used provides bond samples which in essence are parts that are not working ok those
samples are then bonded in a dummy circuit and a pull tester is used to check the strength of the bond?
Also make sure you have someone with a steady hand and young eyes to threat the bonder
? and also invest in a vibration isolation table or platform to set your bonder on?
?
On Mar 22, 2022, at 02:28, Peter Hansen via groups.io <oz1lpr@...> wrote:
?
I have succeded to integrate a YO84 YIG faily simple and you can use +/-15 for 30V for heater it is ok and shunting the Sense resistors in the Maincoil driver means it can span the 3-7Ghz. I have
made changes to the Loop so it is yield low Phase noise. Output from the YIG it self is good also. Mechanical implementation is done by using the original mechanic shell and make a hole for the YIG. It can be jammed in there when I mount the YIG in the unit.
A PCB "still prototype" is mounted with a 10pin pinheader so the orignal cable can be used. BUT BUT now the challenge. The original YIG does not get hot due to the sensitve coils meaning less drift. If the Loop is opened by placing the jumper in the TEST position
I observe a drift of the YIG of around 5Mhz from cold to warm. The Avantek YIG drift around 30-40Mhz. The Loop is build to compensate for 10Mhz drift. This means you can either have a unlock condition ERR301 during warm up or you will get it during use.
Playing around in the Loop is not a things for the average guy to do. The Frequency Lock? circuit is quite hard to work with. Changes to the loop will also challenge your phasenoise performance.
I am sure this is why HP deviated from the standard sensitivity on the maincoil to keep drift down. The avantek YIG gets hot the HP ones do not.
More fruitfull would be to find a replacement for the Bonded Transistor and get someone with a Wirebonder to service them.
I do currently not have a wirebonder but as I am repairing alot of advanced HP equipment I am considering it. But where to source components for tryouts.
best regards Peter OZ1LPR
Hi Peter, Et al,
Sorry for the delayed response to all the positive comments. I have been away camping, soaking up what is left of the good weather in autumn, trying my new HF radio set up.
No doubt, there will be many challenges ahead, but I am determined to find a solution. I am waiting on a mail from Micro Lambda to see if they have ever made a replacement, the chap is going to ask the question for me, they have been so helpful to date. There
are other Micro Lambda models to suit Tek and R&S, so they have made replacement models for branded SA and Sign Gens. No harm asking.?
Peter, I think the original HP data sheet is right, this does represent a challenge at? or around 40MHz/mA, the hardware and software is tightly integrated, thus a YIG with similar spec or the development of an interface driver is needed. I haven't thought
that far ahead yet.
Like yourself, and I am sure others on the forum have purchased a YIG in the past to adapt, I purchased a Avantek Y084-1215 about 10 years ago, I recently tried to adapt via a crude interface driver, but this did not work out to well. Although the Avantek YIG
works extremely well for it's vintage, it's main coil spec is way out at ~22.4 MHZ/mA. In addition, getting the juice to run the heater from an internal supply is a challenge.
I am prepared to lay out the cash up to a point to develop a solution.
I hope I do not have to eat my words in time.
Stay tuned.
Regards
Gerald
VK3GM
?
|
Re: N5230A Network analyzer power supply
Glad I could help...but the real credit goes to Matt McGee who provided the original information.? I have never met Matt as he is 3000 miles away, but I hope to meet him in May when I go visit my son.? I will thank him for you.
|
Re: Agilent 3458A Troubleshooting
Hello,
most probably there's a problem with these EPROMs.
I've recently burnt V9 with some cal constant modifications into the single EPROM type, but did not correctly sort Hi and Lo byte in first place .
That directly led to that blinking display, as the ?P did not run the program properly.
Therefore, if you reseat the EPROMs, please check first if their contents (U110 .. U115) are identical with the images on TiNs / xdevs site.
The position of the EPROMs are correct, but maybe the seller programmed them just before sending the instrument and the programming was not persistent, or he simply mixed the stickers.
Maybe during transport the EPROMs or the solder joints were shaken too much, so have a look on these, too.
If GP-IB is not working, (read its model ID) then there's definitely a program error.
You also may check the optical data bus connectors, they might get loose during transport.
2012 for the DALLAS RAMs is fine, as they last much longer, usually. But anyhow, first read the content of the CAL RAM over the bus first, not to loose the content. Download programs can be found on xdevs also.
Then you can sit and wait until you really get errors, in maybe 5 years, or so.??
For calibration, you need 10V and 10kOhm references with low uncertainty, maybe there are some volt-nuts arounds, who maintain their home references from the recent Cal club U.S.A. (TiN is also part and source of that).
All other DMM check references are toys only. The RF calibration is not urgently required, btw.
I also recommend not to use the 3458A as a reference instrument, better acquire a few external LTZ1000, 10kOhm references.
The LTZ reference inside your 3458A will probably be very stable after all these years, so no need to go for a 4ppm or even 2ppm reference from KS.
That's especially true, if you do not run your instrument on 24/7, but only when needed. Well, check SN18, and the dsicussion on eevblog, of course.?
Have a look on the 40k reference resistor, if it's already a VHP101T type (from about 1995 onwards), then you also have a very stable Ohm reference in place.
?
TiN has some typical PCB versions on his site, in the different repair blogs, so you can easily detect from the color of the PCBs, which vintage your instrument is..you definitely have a ?P board from the 1990ties
Frank
|
Re: N5230A Network analyzer power supply
What a helpful message, dear Caesar; thank you so much!
I only replaced the 33uF/25V with a 33uF/50V. The 47uF/50V is OK. It's not necessary to solder out the small vertical board. I only removed the two large rectifier caps to have enough space for repair.
Best regards
Hansjoerg HB9EWH
|
Re: HP YIG replacement 3-7GHz
may be some forum ?member lives in HK and could check (?)
adri
?
?
?
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
----- Messaggio originale -----
Inviato: 23/03/2022 12:05:48
Oggetto: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] HP YIG replacement 3-7GHz
problem is most of those brokers do actually not have them they Scam you in sending money
best regards Peter
just for infomation : it looks like Micro-Semiconductor.com from HK have a stock of 5621 of Avago AT-42000-GP4 available
Might be the device we are talking about in a different packaging (?)
adri
?
?
?
----- Messaggio originale -----
Inviato: 22/03/2022 19:11:42
Oggetto: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] HP YIG replacement 3-7GHz
Hello Lothar the device is AT41000 or AT42000 of course obsolete. I am sure if we could find a reliable source it maybe would get CT1DMK to use his bonder for repairs again. I know he is out of parts but has repaired them in the past.
I love impossible challenges. People always told me the Rythm tower from HP8563E would be impossible to adjust. But none of the less I can do that on daily basis if needed. It was a long road but now possible. In this case a Scalar netwoek analyzers 26.5Ghz comes in handy as the detektor is broadband so i look at the downconverted IF signal. I use that for adjustments at all frequencies
73 Peter OZ1LPR
The first challenge is to figure out the transistor they used , HP had their own foundry and not all parts they made were sold as products on the open market.
Given the frequency range of the yig it was likely to be a HBT rather than a GaAs Fet but HP semiconductor became Avago and then broadcom and to my knowledge they don¡¯t sell die level parts!
The next challenge then is to remove the old transistor and mount a new one, usually devices are mounted using eutectic solder preforms , the stage is heated until the solder melts and the part is then ¡°scrubbed ¡° in as gold from the back metalization diffuses into the solder the melting point increases and the solder solidifies , in order to remove the part you would have to heat up the solder past the new melting point without imposing thermal stress on the other parts used or dislocating them !
To mount a new part you need a die attach as well as preforms, you could of course use conductive epoxy but the heat transfer generally is not as good as with eutectic die attach so you might run into issues with reliability!
As far as wirebonders concerns there are plenty on ebay , expect to pay between $5000 and $16000 for a refurbished one , for this type of work you need a wedge/wire bonder , if you plan on rebuilding modules plan on getting a deep access bonder or a convertible machine that can be used for different processes .
The biggest challenge with bonding is to figure out the right settings though, usually in a production environment the supplier of the semiconductor devices used provides bond samples which in essence are parts that are not working ok those samples are then bonded in a dummy circuit and a pull tester is used to check the strength of the bond?
Also make sure you have someone with a steady hand and young eyes to threat the bonder ? and also invest in a vibration isolation table or platform to set your bonder on?
On Mar 22, 2022, at 02:28, Peter Hansen via groups.io <oz1lpr@...> wrote:
?
I have succeded to integrate a YO84 YIG faily simple and you can use +/-15 for 30V for heater it is ok and shunting the Sense resistors in the Maincoil driver means it can span the 3-7Ghz. I have made changes to the Loop so it is yield low Phase noise. Output from the YIG it self is good also. Mechanical implementation is done by using the original mechanic shell and make a hole for the YIG. It can be jammed in there when I mount the YIG in the unit. A PCB "still prototype" is mounted with a 10pin pinheader so the orignal cable can be used. BUT BUT now the challenge. The original YIG does not get hot due to the sensitve coils meaning less drift. If the Loop is opened by placing the jumper in the TEST position I observe a drift of the YIG of around 5Mhz from cold to warm. The Avantek YIG drift around 30-40Mhz. The Loop is build to compensate for 10Mhz drift. This means you can either have a unlock condition ERR301 during warm up or you will get it during use.
Playing around in the Loop is not a things for the average guy to do. The Frequency Lock? circuit is quite hard to work with. Changes to the loop will also challenge your phasenoise performance. I am sure this is why HP deviated from the standard sensitivity on the maincoil to keep drift down. The avantek YIG gets hot the HP ones do not.
More fruitfull would be to find a replacement for the Bonded Transistor and get someone with a Wirebonder to service them.
I do currently not have a wirebonder but as I am repairing alot of advanced HP equipment I am considering it. But where to source components for tryouts.
best regards Peter OZ1LPR
Hi Peter, Et al,
Sorry for the delayed response to all the positive comments. I have been away camping, soaking up what is left of the good weather in autumn, trying my new HF radio set up.
No doubt, there will be many challenges ahead, but I am determined to find a solution. I am waiting on a mail from Micro Lambda to see if they have ever made a replacement, the chap is going to ask the question for me, they have been so helpful to date. There are other Micro Lambda models to suit Tek and R&S, so they have made replacement models for branded SA and Sign Gens. No harm asking.?
Peter, I think the original HP data sheet is right, this does represent a challenge at? or around 40MHz/mA, the hardware and software is tightly integrated, thus a YIG with similar spec or the development of an interface driver is needed. I haven't thought that far ahead yet.
Like yourself, and I am sure others on the forum have purchased a YIG in the past to adapt, I purchased a Avantek Y084-1215 about 10 years ago, I recently tried to adapt via a crude interface driver, but this did not work out to well. Although the Avantek YIG works extremely well for it's vintage, it's main coil spec is way out at ~22.4 MHZ/mA. In addition, getting the juice to run the heater from an internal supply is a challenge.
I am prepared to lay out the cash up to a point to develop a solution.
I hope I do not have to eat my words in time.
Stay tuned.
Regards
Gerald
VK3GM
?
|
