|
I'm still looking for a sweeper to complete my 8510C. The 8510C datasheet suggest the 83631B, however, various people have suggested an 8340B. I've not been able to find anything on Keysight's website that gives me a clear idea of using an 8340B instead of an 83631B
Does one of these have advantages over the other? If so which and what are they?
Thanks,
Reg
|
Here is a brief history. The 8340A was designed in parallel with the 8510A and was intended for use with it. There was no 8360 series back then. With time, the 8510 A became the 8510B and at some point the 8340A? become a "B" too. The biggest difference between the A and B versions of the two instruments was the change from a HP proprietary processor to the 68000. Eventually, the 8510B was reworked into the 8510C. While this was going on, a new sweeping syntehsizerseries? was released, the 8360.
The 8360 series had some models which were stripped down, specifically for use with the 8510. Stripped down means they didn't have a standard front panel user interface. They were meant to interact with the 8510 via the system bus only. That kept the cost down for customers who didn't need a stand-alone sweeper or synthesizer.
In the meantime, a lower cost version of the 8340 was introduced, the 8341. It was a 20 GHz synthesizer. However, if you are willing to study the differences and do some work late at night, you can probably make the 8341 do much of what the 8340 does and get it to work to 26.5 GHz. The 8341 will work with the 8510 system, but I am not sure which firmware works with what.
The 8340/41 is very heavy, and it has a jet engine style cooling fan. Inside, the frequency synthesis circuits are pretty much the same as what was used in the 8566 spectrum analyzer, but there is also an output section with a multiplier, leveling circuits, modulation etc., in other words all the stuff that's needed to get the signal out. The upside is, many 8566 LO parts can be had for next to nothing, so spare parts are largely available for the synthesizer portion. Documentation is also available. Not so much for the 8360. As far as I know, the alignment and calibration software for the 8360 has not been released to the general public either.
Vladan
|
Hi,
I have the 8341B and am in the process of building a 8510C setup to use
it with. Not sure if I can test anything useful with it without a test
set as I don't have one yet. My firmware on the 8341B is dated '88 and
as far as I understand it should work with at least the older 8510C
firmware versions.
About the weight and noise: I can confirm both. After replacing the old
sqeaky fan with
I measured
15dB noise reduction but it is still the loudest of all my HP gear.
Best regards,
Job
PH4AS
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/28/20 9:47 PM, Reginald Beardsley via Groups.Io wrote: I'm still looking for a sweeper to complete my 8510C. The 8510C datasheet suggest the 83631B, however, various people have suggested an 8340B. I've not been able to find anything on Keysight's website that gives me a clear idea of using an 8340B instead of an 83631B
Does one of these have advantages over the other? If so which and what are they?
Thanks,
Reg
|
Vladan,
That's extremely helpful, many thanks. I think I shall shift to looking for an 8340B.
Reg
|
I can confirm both. After replacing the old
sqeaky fan with
I measured
15dB noise reduction but it is still the loudest of all my HP gear.
Good find. Was it an exact mechanical drop-in replacement? Which of the three rpm versions did you get? Vladan
|
On 2/29/20 12:17 AM, pianovt via Groups.Io wrote: I can confirm both. After replacing the old
sqeaky fan with
I measured
15dB noise reduction but it is still the loudest of all my HP gear.
Good find. Was it an exact mechanical drop-in replacement? Which of the
three rpm versions did you get? My documentation skills are a bit poor, but here I posted some info: Judging from my picture I got the 2400 RPM. But I do not recall if I selected this specifically or if I could just locate this one. I do remember I tried to stay as close to the original model as possible. Best regards, Job PH4AS
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, Reg.?
I have a .pdf covering upgrades to the 8510 system on my work computer.? ?It lists a bunch of appropriate synthesizers, as well as the different S-parameter test sets and a bunch of other useful info.? Of course since HP/Agilent was in the business of selling new test equipment, they don't mention the less expensive and lower performing options like the 8350.? It should be complementary to the excellent information Vladan has provided.?
Now I just have to figure out how to get a copy.? Not straightforward to forward it from my work email account.? Stand by.?
Jim Ford?
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original message -------- From: "Reginald Beardsley via Groups.Io" <pulaskite@...> Date: 2/28/20 12:47 PM (GMT-08:00) Subject: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B
I'm still looking for a sweeper to complete my 8510C.? The 8510C datasheet suggest the 83631B, however, various people have suggested an 8340B.? I've not been able to find anything on Keysight's website that gives me a clear idea of using an 8340B instead of an 83631B Does one of these have? advantages over the other?? If so which and what are they? Thanks, Reg
|
Sorry, but I can't see much there. Do you remember having to use a hacksaw, drill, file, oxy-acatelyne welder, pneumatic grinder, sawzall, jackhammer, etc?
Vladan
|
Here you go. Enjoy!
Jim
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
------ Original Message ------ From: "Reginald Beardsley via Groups.Io" <pulaskite@...> To: "Hp" < [email protected]> Sent: 2/28/2020 12:47:29 PM Subject: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B I'm still looking for a sweeper to complete my 8510C. The 8510C datasheet suggest the 83631B, however, various people have suggested an 8340B. I've not been able to find anything on Keysight's website that gives me a clear idea of using an 8340B instead of an 83631B
Does one of these have advantages over the other? If so which and what are they?
Thanks,
Reg
|
Re: noise from vintage HP gear, I just fired up my 8566A spectrum analyzer, 8350B sweep oscillator , and 5343A frequency counter simultaneously as a test.? Yeah, kind of noisy, but not unpleasant.
Funny smell, too, but I like it! ;)? A multi-sensory experience, using this great old stuff!
Jim Ford
------ Original Message ------
Sent: 2/28/2020 3:17:19 PM
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B
I can confirm both. After replacing the old
sqeaky fan with
I measured
15dB noise reduction but it is still the loudest of all my HP gear.
Good find. Was it an exact mechanical drop-in replacement? Which of the three rpm versions did you get?
Vladan
|
Interesting, Vladan, that the 8340/8341 synths share circuitry with the 8566 spec an.? I figured the bottom part of the 8566 was pretty much just a synthesized sweeper anyway.? I don't have an 8340 or 8341 (yet), but there are a few of the lower frequency versions in one of the labs at work, and they do look like the bottom of the 8566.? The sloped bottom part of the front panel gives them away.? I believe the standalone synths are 5 rack units, though, vs. 3 or 4 for the bottom of the 8566.
Jim
------ Original Message ------
Sent: 2/28/2020 1:20:20 PM
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B
Here is a brief history. The 8340A was designed in parallel with the 8510A and was intended for use with it. There was no 8360 series back then. With time, the 8510 A became the 8510B and at some point the 8340A? become a "B" too. The biggest difference between the A and B versions of the two instruments was the change from a HP proprietary processor to the 68000. Eventually, the 8510B was reworked into the 8510C. While this was going on, a new sweeping syntehsizerseries? was released, the 8360.
The 8360 series had some models which were stripped down, specifically for use with the 8510. Stripped down means they didn't have a standard front panel user interface. They were meant to interact with the 8510 via the system bus only. That kept the cost down for customers who didn't need a stand-alone sweeper or synthesizer.
In the meantime, a lower cost version of the 8340 was introduced, the 8341. It was a 20 GHz synthesizer. However, if you are willing to study the differences and do some work late at night, you can probably make the 8341 do much of what the 8340 does and get it to work to 26.5 GHz. The 8341 will work with the 8510 system, but I am not sure which firmware works with what.
The 8340/41 is very heavy, and it has a jet engine style cooling fan. Inside, the frequency synthesis circuits are pretty much the same as what was used in the 8566 spectrum analyzer, but there is also an output section with a multiplier, leveling circuits, modulation etc., in other words all the stuff that's needed to get the signal out. The upside is, many 8566 LO parts can be had for next to nothing, so spare parts are largely available for the synthesizer portion. Documentation is also available. Not so much for the 8360. As far as I know, the alignment and calibration software for the 8360 has not been released to the general public either.
Vladan
|
Actually VERY easy (but probably no more difficult than the 83631 - but less expensive). Connect the GPIB cables, assign the addresses, connect the sweeper to the test set and go.
The attached PDF shows the required interconnections.
There is component level service data available on the 8340 series, I don't think so about the 83631 - tell me if I am wrong.
uoting Jim Ford <james.ford@...>:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Here you go. Enjoy!
Jim
------ Original Message ------
From: "Reginald Beardsley via Groups.Io" <pulaskite@...>
To: "Hp" <[email protected]>
Sent: 2/28/2020 12:47:29 PM
Subject: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B
I'm still looking for a sweeper to complete my 8510C. The 8510C datasheet suggest the 83631B, however, various people have suggested an 8340B. I've not been able to find anything on Keysight's website that gives me a clear idea of using an 8340B instead of an 83631B
Does one of these have advantages over the other? If so which and what are they?
Thanks,
Reg
|
Some of the 8340 series that were used with the 8510C have more phase noise than the "normal" unit - I think this is the Opt 5 version - be careful and try to avoid Opt 5 if you can - check the documentation to be sure my mmemory is correct.
Quoting Jim Ford <james.ford@...>:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Interesting, Vladan, that the 8340/8341 synths share circuitry with the 8566 spec an. I figured the bottom part of the 8566 was pretty much just a synthesized sweeper anyway. I don't have an 8340 or 8341 (yet), but there are a few of the lower frequency versions in one of the labs at work, and they do look like the bottom of the 8566. The sloped bottom part of the front panel gives them away. I believe the standalone synths are 5 rack units, though, vs. 3 or 4 for the bottom of the 8566.
Jim
------ Original Message ------
From: "pianovt via Groups.Io" <pianovt@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: 2/28/2020 1:20:20 PM
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B
Here is a brief history. The 8340A was designed in parallel with the 8510A and was intended for use with it. There was no 8360 series back then. With time, the 8510 A became the 8510B and at some point the 8340A become a "B" too. The biggest difference between the A and B versions of the two instruments was the change from a HP proprietary processor to the 68000. Eventually, the 8510B was reworked into the 8510C. While this was going on, a new sweeping syntehsizerseries was released, the 8360.
The 8360 series had some models which were stripped down, specifically for use with the 8510. Stripped down means they didn't have a standard front panel user interface. They were meant to interact with the 8510 via the system bus only. That kept the cost down for customers who didn't need a stand-alone sweeper or synthesizer.
In the meantime, a lower cost version of the 8340 was introduced, the 8341. It was a 20 GHz synthesizer. However, if you are willing to study the differences and do some work late at night, you can probably make the 8341 do much of what the 8340 does and get it to work to 26.5 GHz. The 8341 will work with the 8510 system, but I am not sure which firmware works with what.
The 8340/41 is very heavy, and it has a jet engine style cooling fan. Inside, the frequency synthesis circuits are pretty much the same as what was used in the 8566 spectrum analyzer, but there is also an output section with a multiplier, leveling circuits, modulation etc., in other words all the stuff that's needed to get the signal out. The upside is, many 8566 LO parts can be had for next to nothing, so spare parts are largely available for the synthesizer portion. Documentation is also available. Not so much for the 8360. As far as I know, the alignment and calibration software for the 8360 has not been released to the general public either.
Vladan
|
Option 007 is relaxed phase noise, page 1-10.? I guess James Bond wasn't concerned about phase noise!? 3 dB worse across the board except is the same at 100 kHz offset (not surprising as that's probably the PN floor), and 30 Hz offset not specified.?
Thanks, Bruce.?
Jim
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original message -------- From: Bruce <bruce@...> Date: 2/28/20 4:43 PM (GMT-08:00) Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B
Some of the 8340 series that were used with the 8510C have more phase? noise than the "normal" unit - I think this is the Opt 5 version - be? careful and try to avoid Opt 5 if you can - check the documentation to? be sure my mmemory is correct. Quoting Jim Ford <james.ford@...>: > Interesting, Vladan, that the 8340/8341 synths share circuitry with? > the 8566 spec an.? I figured the bottom part of the 8566 was pretty? > much just a synthesized sweeper anyway.? I don't have an 8340 or? > 8341 (yet), but there are a few of the lower frequency versions in? > one of the labs at work, and they do look like the bottom of the? > 8566.? The sloped bottom part of the front panel gives them away.? I? > believe the standalone synths are 5 rack units, though, vs. 3 or 4? > for the bottom of the 8566. > > Jim > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "pianovt via Groups.Io" <pianovt@...> > To: [email protected]> Sent: 2/28/2020 1:20:20 PM > Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B > >> Here is a brief history. The 8340A was designed in parallel with? >> the 8510A and was intended for use with it. There was no 8360? >> series back then. With time, the 8510 A became the 8510B and at? >> some point the 8340A? become a "B" too. The biggest difference? >> between the A and B versions of the two instruments was the change? >> from a HP proprietary processor to the 68000. Eventually, the 8510B? >> was reworked into the 8510C. While this was going on, a new? >> sweeping syntehsizerseries? was released, the 8360. >> >> The 8360 series had some models which were stripped down,? >> specifically for use with the 8510. Stripped down means they didn't? >> have a standard front panel user interface. They were meant to? >> interact with the 8510 via the system bus only. That kept the cost? >> down for customers who didn't need a stand-alone sweeper or? >> synthesizer. >> >> In the meantime, a lower cost version of the 8340 was introduced,? >> the 8341. It was a 20 GHz synthesizer. However, if you are willing? >> to study the differences and do some work late at night, you can? >> probably make the 8341 do much of what the 8340 does and get it to? >> work to 26.5 GHz. The 8341 will work with the 8510 system, but I am? >> not sure which firmware works with what. >> >> The 8340/41 is very heavy, and it has a jet engine style cooling? >> fan. Inside, the frequency synthesis circuits are pretty much the? >> same as what was used in the 8566 spectrum analyzer, but there is? >> also an output section with a multiplier, leveling circuits,? >> modulation etc., in other words all the stuff that's needed to get? >> the signal out. The upside is, many 8566 LO parts can be had for? >> next to nothing, so spare parts are largely available for the? >> synthesizer portion. Documentation is also available. Not so much? >> for the 8360. As far as I know, the alignment and calibration? >> software for the 8360 has not been released to the general public? >> either. >> >> Vladan >> > >
|
On Fri, 28 Feb 2020, Jim Ford wrote: I don't know who had all that message thread screwed up (guys, _PLEASE_ setup proper quoting -- it is impossible to read) but as of 8340B I can tell that the best one is instrument without _ANY_ options. Unlike 99.9999% of other measurement equipment _EVERY_ option in 8340B is "Remove something" or "Make it worse" (moving connectors to the rear falls in the latter category.) There is no options in 8340B that would've added something or made it better than basic instrument without options. Option 007 is relaxed phase noise, page 1-10.? I guess James Bond wasn't concerned about phase noise!? 3 dB worse across the board except is the same at 100 kHz offset (not surprising as that's probably the PN floor), and 30 Hz offset not specified.?Thanks, Bruce.?JimSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: Bruce <bruce@...> Date: 2/28/20 4:43 PM (GMT-08:00) To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B Some of the 8340 series that were used with the 8510C have more phase? noise than the "normal" unit - I think this is the Opt 5 version - be? careful and try to avoid Opt 5 if you can - check the documentation to? be sure my mmemory is correct.Quoting Jim Ford <james.ford@...>:> Interesting, Vladan, that the 8340/8341 synths share circuitry with? > the 8566 spec an.? I figured the bottom part of the 8566 was pretty? > much just a synthesized sweeper anyway.? I don't have an 8340 or? > 8341 (yet), but there are a few of the lower frequency versions in? > one of the labs at work, and they do look like the bottom of the? > 8566.? The sloped bottom part of the front panel gives them away.? I? > believe the standalone synths are 5 rack units, though, vs. 3 or 4? > for the bottom of the 8566.>> Jim>> ------ Original Message ------> From: "pianovt via Groups.Io" <pianovt@...>> To: [email protected]> Sent: 2/28/2020 1:20:20 PM> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B>>> Here is a brief history. The 8340A was designed in parallel with? >> the 8510A and was intended for use with it. There was no 8360? >> series back then. With time, the 8510 A became the 8510B and at? >> some point the 8340A? become a "B" too. The biggest difference? >> between the A and B versions of the two instruments was the change? >> from a HP proprietary processor to the 68000. Eventually, the 8510B? >> was reworked into the 8510C. While this was going on, a new? >> sweeping syntehsizerseries? was released, the 8360.>>>> The 8360 series had some models which were stripped down,? >> specifically for use with the 8510. Stripped down means they didn't? >> have a standard front panel user interface. They were meant to? >> interact with the 8510 via the system bus only. That kept the cost? >> down for customers who didn't need a stand-alone sweeper or? >> synthesizer.>>>> In the meantime, a lower cost version of the 8340 was introduced,? >> the 8341. It was a 20 GHz synthesizer. However, if you are willing? >> to study the differences and do some work late at night, you can? >> probably make the 8341 do much of what the 8340 does and get it to? >> work to 26.5 GHz. The 8341 will work with the 8510 system, but I am? >> not sure which firmware works with what.>>>> The 8340/41 is very heavy, and it has a jet engine style cooling? >> fan. Inside, the frequency synthesis circuits are pretty much the? >> same as what was used in the 8566 spectrum analyzer, but there is? >> also an output section with a multiplier, leveling circuits,? >> modulation etc., in other words all the stuff that's needed to get? >> the signal out. The upside is, many 8566 LO parts can be had for? >> next to nothing, so spare parts are largely available for the? >> synthesizer portion. Documentation is also available. Not so much? >> for the 8360. As far as I know, the alignment and calibration? >> software for the 8360 has not been released to the general public? >> either.>>>> Vladan>>>> --- * * KSI@home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. * * Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. * *
|
Thanks, Sergey. I have updated my "wishlist" HP 8340 entry to add "best with no options".
BTW, do you see your own text below? When I reply, I see the previous text on my screen, and when I receive my own reply as posted to the group, it contains the other text as well. Therefore, I haven't made any effort to copy text from previous posts. But I've often wondered if others see the previous text. It bugs the crap out of me to see somebody else's "Yeah, I agree" post, for example, with no context.
Jim
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
------ Original Message ------ From: "Sergey Kubushyn" <ksi@...> To: [email protected]Sent: 2/28/2020 10:13:42 PM Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B On Fri, 28 Feb 2020, Jim Ford wrote:
I don't know who had all that message thread screwed up (guys, _PLEASE_
setup proper quoting -- it is impossible to read) but as of 8340B I can tell
that the best one is instrument without _ANY_ options.
Unlike 99.9999% of other measurement equipment _EVERY_ option in 8340B is
"Remove something" or "Make it worse" (moving connectors to the rear falls
in the latter category.)
There is no options in 8340B that would've added something or made it better
than basic instrument without options.
Option 007 is relaxed phase noise, page 1-10. I guess James Bond wasn't concerned about phase noise! 3 dB worse across the board except is the same at 100 kHz offset (not surprising as that's probably the PN floor), and 30 Hz offset not specified. Thanks, Bruce. JimSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: Bruce <bruce@...> Date: 2/28/20 4:43 PM (GMT-08:00) To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B Some of the 8340 series that were used with the 8510C have more phase noise than the "normal" unit - I think this is the Opt 5 version - be careful and try to avoid Opt 5 if you can - check the documentation to be sure my mmemory is correct.Quoting Jim Ford <james.ford@...>:> Interesting, Vladan, that the 8340/8341 synths share circuitry with > the 8566 spec an. I figured the bottom part of the 8566 was pretty > much just a synthesized sweeper anyway. I don't have an 8340 or > 8341 (yet), but there are a few of the lower frequency versions in > one of the labs at work, and they do look like the bottom of the > 8566. The sloped bottom part of the front panel gives them away. I > believe the standalone synths are 5 rack units, though, vs. 3 or 4 > for the bottom of the 8566.>> Jim>> ------ Original Message ------> From: "pianovt via Groups.Io" <pianovt@...>> To: [email protected]> Sent: 2/28/2020 1:20:20 PM> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B>>> Here is a brief history. The 8340A was designed in parallel with >> the 8510A and was intended for use with it. There was no 8360 >> series back then. With time, the 8510 A became the 8510B and at >> some point the 8340A become a "B" too. The biggest difference >> between the A and B versions of the two instruments was the change >> from a HP proprietary processor to the 68000. Eventually, the 8510B >> was reworked into the 8510C. While this was going on, a new >> sweeping syntehsizerseries was released, the 8360.>>>> The 8360 series had some models which were stripped down, >> specifically for use with the 8510. Stripped down means they didn't >> have a standard front panel user interface. They were meant to >> interact with the 8510 via the system bus only. That kept the cost >> down for customers who didn't need a stand-alone sweeper or >> synthesizer.>>>> In the meantime, a lower cost version of the 8340 was introduced, >> the 8341. It was a 20 GHz synthesizer. However, if you are willing >> to study the differences and do some work late at night, you can >> probably make the 8341 do much of what the 8340 does and get it to >> work to 26.5 GHz. The 8341 will work with the 8510 system, but I am >> not sure which firmware works with what.>>>> The 8340/41 is very heavy, and it has a jet engine style cooling >> fan. Inside, the frequency synthesis circuits are pretty much the >> same as what was used in the 8566 spectrum analyzer, but there is >> also an output section with a multiplier, leveling circuits, >> modulation etc., in other words all the stuff that's needed to get >> the signal out. The upside is, many 8566 LO parts can be had for >> next to nothing, so spare parts are largely available for the >> synthesizer portion. Documentation is also available. Not so much >> for the 8360. As far as I know, the alignment and calibration >> software for the 8360 has not been released to the general public >> either.>>>> Vladan>>>> ---
*
* KSI@home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. *
* Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. *
*
|
On Sat, 29 Feb 2020, Jim Ford wrote: Thanks, Sergey. I have updated my "wishlist" HP 8340 entry to add "best with no options".
BTW, do you see your own text below? When I reply, I see the previous text on my screen, and when I receive my own reply as posted to the group, it contains the other text as well. Therefore, I haven't made any effort to copy text from previous posts. But I've often wondered if others see the previous text. It bugs the crap out of me to see somebody else's "Yeah, I agree" post, for example, with no context. Those people who post a single "Me too!" letters are mentally ill and it is a sin to insult them. Thou shalt forgive them; for they know not what they do... Your quoting is fine; it is somebody else that screwed up earlier message text making it all one long line without breaks.
Jim
------ Original Message ------
From: "Sergey Kubushyn" <ksi@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: 2/28/2020 10:13:42 PM
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B
On Fri, 28 Feb 2020, Jim Ford wrote:
I don't know who had all that message thread screwed up (guys, _PLEASE_
setup proper quoting -- it is impossible to read) but as of 8340B I can tell
that the best one is instrument without _ANY_ options.
Unlike 99.9999% of other measurement equipment _EVERY_ option in 8340B is
"Remove something" or "Make it worse" (moving connectors to the rear falls
in the latter category.)
There is no options in 8340B that would've added something or made it better
than basic instrument without options.
Option 007 is relaxed phase noise, page 1-10. I guess James Bond wasn't concerned about phase noise! 3 dB worse across the board except is the same at 100 kHz offset (not surprising as that's probably the PN floor), and 30 Hz offset not specified. Thanks, Bruce. JimSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: Bruce <bruce@...> Date: 2/28/20 4:43 PM (GMT-08:00) To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B Some of the 8340 series that were used with the 8510C have more phase noise than the "normal" unit - I think this is the Opt 5 version - be careful and try to avoid Opt 5 if you can - check the documentation to be sure my mmemory is correct.Quoting Jim Ford <james.ford@...>:> Interesting, Vladan, that the 8340/8341 synths share circuitry with > the 8566 spec an. I figured the bottom part of the 8566 was pretty > much just a synthesized sweeper anyway. I don't have an 8340 or > 8341 (yet), but there are a few of the lower frequency versions in > one of the labs at work, and they do look like the bottom of the > 8566. The sloped bottom part of the front panel gives them away. I > believe the standalone synths are 5 rack units, though, vs. 3 or 4 > for the bottom of the 8566.>> Jim>> ------ Original Message ------> From: "pianovt via Groups.Io" <pianovt@...>> To: [email protected]> Sent: 2/28/2020 1:20:20 PM> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B>>> Here is a brief history. The 8340A was designed in parallel with >> the 8510A and was intended for use with it. There was no 8360 >> series back then. With time, the 8510 A became the 8510B and at >> some point the 8340A become a "B" too. The biggest difference >> between the A and B versions of the two instruments was the change >> from a HP proprietary processor to the 68000. Eventually, the 8510B >> was reworked into the 8510C. While this was going on, a new >> sweeping syntehsizerseries was released, the 8360.>>>> The 8360 series had some models which were stripped down, >> specifically for use with the 8510. Stripped down means they didn't >> have a standard front panel user interface. They were meant to >> interact with the 8510 via the system bus only. That kept the cost >> down for customers who didn't need a stand-alone sweeper or >> synthesizer.>>>> In the meantime, a lower cost version of the 8340 was introduced, >> the 8341. It was a 20 GHz synthesizer. However, if you are willing >> to study the differences and do some work late at night, you can >> probably make the 8341 do much of what the 8340 does and get it to
work to 26.5 GHz. The 8341 will work with the 8510 system, but I am >>
not sure which firmware works with what.>>>> The 8340/41 is very heavy, and it has a jet engine style cooling >> fan. Inside, the frequency synthesis circuits are pretty much the >> same as what was used in the 8566 spectrum analyzer, but there is >> also an output section with a multiplier, leveling circuits, >> modulation etc., in other words all the stuff that's needed to get >> the signal out. The upside is, many 8566 LO parts can be had for >> next to nothing, so spare parts are largely available for the >> synthesizer portion. Documentation is also available. Not so much >> for the 8360. As far as I know, the alignment and calibration >> software for the 8360 has not been released to the general public >> either.>>>> Vladan>>>> ---
*
* KSI@home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. *
* Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. *
*
--- * * KSI@home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. * * Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. * *
|
Hi Vladan,
None of these were necessary :-) a screwdriver and some patience is all
I can remember.
This shows the difference in depth of the fans:
I remember there were some rubbers which caused it to sag a bit and it
started touching the outer cover, but it doesnt matter AFAIK. No extra
vibration or so.
Best regards,
Job
PH4AS
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2/29/20 1:11 AM, pianovt via Groups.Io wrote: Sorry, but I can't see much there. Do you remember having to use a
hacksaw, drill, file, oxy-acatelyne welder, pneumatic grinder, sawzall,
jackhammer, etc?
Vladan
_._,_._,_
|
Sergey Kubushyn