Keyboard Shortcuts
ctrl + shift + ? :
Show all keyboard shortcuts
ctrl + g :
Navigate to a group
ctrl + shift + f :
Find
ctrl + / :
Quick actions
esc to dismiss
Likes
- TekScopes
- Messages
Search
|
Re: 11801 calibrator rise time
Reg,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
If you display the two channels simultaneously then they share the same time base speed and position. I don't see how you tried to align the rising edges. On my CSA's I do this: display both channels CH1 and CH2, then Store CH1 en turn CH1 off, then Recall the stored trace of CH1. Now the displayed stored trace is "frozen" and remains in position regardless how you change the time base of the CH2 trace. (Note you can select one of the displayed traces by touching the trace somewhere.) Albert On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 11:10 PM, Reginald Beardsley wrote:
|
|
Re: Switching power supplies
On 27/03/19 06:05, Kevin Oconnor wrote:
My 1978 Tek 485 has had spot repairs, but it¡¯s still working fine. I¡¯d never replace caps in it without good reason.Personally I'd replace C911: 22uF 15V tant bead on a 13V PSU rail, diagram 17 (not the PSU diagram!), and IIRC there are a couple of others on that rail, hidden on the other diagrams 7, 9, 11, 16. When C911 shorted, it toasted R965. |
|
Re: Switching power supplies
Chuck Harris
In switcher parlence, the "start up" capacitor is called the
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
bootstrap capacitor because the supply picks itself up by its bootstraps. It is often charged by using a high wattage resistor connected to the power line, with a diode, capacitor, and zener to limit its DC voltage. It supplies power to the control PWM circuitry. When the supply starts, the bootstrap will be taken over by voltage from a winding on the switcher transformer. Half wave rectifying creates a lot of ripple current in these capacitors, and they very often... and I mean VERY often go open circuit, preventing the supply from starting. I have fixed many tens of thousands of dollars of equipment ranging from sewing machines to TV sets by replacing the bootstrap capacitor and sometimes the bootstrap resistor.... Even HP supplies ;-) Competently designed switching power supplies are a delight to behold. They seem to protect themselves from everything, including stupid technician mistakes. -Chuck Harris David Kuhn wrote: Switching supplies can be a problem when they fail. I recently had a |
|
Re: Switching power supplies
Switching supplies can be a problem when they fail. I recently had a
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Agilent VXI E4808A chassis that the main power supply failed, at least its 12 volts out did. That power supply is huge with a logic board mounted about it ( I think it's a power supply monitor board). It's a lot of physical work just to get it apart to check caps. Anyway, I doubt HP/Agilent made that power supply themselves. I really don't know, as to get information out of them is like pulling hen's teeth. They no longer sell, or support, those 4 slot VXI chassis's, so it would be nice of them to release the schematics, or service information. I think you can only hope to buy a used chassis somewhere. I would love to have the schematics for them. In other switches that fail to start, I often find what I call the "start-up" capacitor in the primary is open or leaking or has a high ESR. I call it the "start-up cap" as I do not fully understand switching supplies, and often if there are schematics, there is not a theory of operation with them, but there is often a capacitor in the primary circuit that looks to be a short to ground and then charge-up to create the initial switch swing to get it going and then afterwards, the power supply self sustains. So a lot of times with a dead switcher, I have been able to fix them by replacing the small electrolytic in the primary side of the circuit. It is usually a 4.7uf or 10uf. Other than that, if the rest are not physically leaking or swelled and the supply is working I don't touch it. One instrument that I work on has an on-board +5volt switching regulator circuit. It is very reliable. Two times (since 1999) I have seen the switch regulator fail where the output drive to the FET shorts to ground allowing the supply voltage (~+12volts) go through to the output with no over-voltage protection, not even a +5.6volt zener to short. It blows every TTL chip on the +5volt rail, and some some regulators that follow it. Stupid, stupid German design. You have to be very urber careful probing that +5volt switching regulator circuit. One slip of the scope probe and you can simulate the switching regulator IC output shorting to ground turning on the pass FET full time. So, I've learned "If it aint broke, don't fix it"! Sorry it that was slightly off topic. Dave On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 8:29 AM Chuck Harris <cfharris@...> wrote:
SMD electrolytic capacitors are a tricky problem in several ways: |
|
Re: Switching power supplies
Chuck Harris
SMD electrolytic capacitors are a tricky problem in several ways:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
First, they are easily damaged by the heat of the reflow oven, and solvents that may be used in cleaning flux,... though cleaning flux isn't done much if at all, on consumer grade equipment. Second, it is almost impossible to find out what was originally installed. There are no standardized markings to identify the manufacturer, or what grade capacitor was installed. Third, it is hard for a re-worker to find a complete spectrum of ESR values from which to select replacement capacitors. When you grab an assortment of SMD electrolytic capacitors off of ebay, you are unlikely to be able to match more than just the capacitance and voltage of the original. Never the ESR or lifetime rating. When you buy from Mouser, or DigiKey, you will find that cute little 20uf, 16V cap you need to replace, (because its ESR is 3 ohms while its cohorts are all 0.5 ohm), can only be had with ESR's of 0.7 ohm, 3 ohms, and 12 ohms! Replace the 0.5 ohm ESR caps with a 0.7 ohm cap, and you have taken the expected life of the cap and cut it in half (or more). Put in a 3 or 12 ohm version, and you will have improved nothing. Tricky indeed! -Chuck Harris Kevin Oconnor wrote: I have to agree with Chuck. Most test equipment with imbedded/integrated switchers are going to be very difficult to qualify parts if working. Their functionality can be extremely subtle. Blanket replacement of components will more likely cause additional reliability issues. |
|
SD-26 disassembly, how to separate sampling gate block from pcb
Does anyone know how to remove the complete sampler block from the printed circuit board? I ask since I'd like to replace the channel select switches. The solder lips are hidden between sampler block and pcb. I removed the 6 block attachment screws but still I can't remove the block with reasonable force. Maybe more force is needed because there are several contact pins between this block and the pcb. The nice close-up repair photos by Leo Bodnar show the internals of the sampler block but not how to remove the block (the block perhaps was still in situ during repair).
It seems that the tiny plastic push pins of the switches have been cut away deliberately. I guess this has been done to prevent any accidental touches by an operator. I can still activate the switches using a small screw driver, so I don't want to take the risk of damaging the otherwise functioning head. Albert |
|
Re: Switching power supplies
I have to agree with Chuck. Most test equipment with imbedded/integrated switchers are going to be very difficult to qualify parts if working. Their functionality can be extremely subtle. Blanket replacement of components will more likely cause additional reliability issues.
My 1978 Tek 485 has had spot repairs, but it¡¯s still working fine. I¡¯d never replace caps in it without good reason. I have an HP 500MHz digital scope with one of this 3rd party modular switchers. (I forget the HP model but 5digits). Switcher went bad. No docs, no schematics. Really hopeless to diagnose. Best option was an eBay replacement switcher. $50 and never looked back. Now if you are talkin about bad caps in an LCD monitor or TV, that¡¯s where ¡°replace em all¡± will serve u well! Lots of crap used in those devices. K Sent from kjo iPhone |
|
Re: Repairability of SD-24, SD-30 & SD-32 sampling heads
Hmmm...? Did he die-bond, wire-bond, and package the FPGA or just solder it onto the board?? Not so impressive if it's the latter.? Still, the link to the website shows microwave devices being bonded in hybrid packages to repair mixers in spectrum analyzers - now that's impressive!Jim FordSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original message --------From: Craig Sawyers <c.sawyers@...> Date: 3/25/19 5:07 PM (GMT-08:00) To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Repairability of SD-24, SD-30 & SD-32 sampling heads He clearly knows what he is doing. You don't knock up something with an Altera FPGA unless you have a major development lab at your disposal > -----Original Message-----> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jose Luu> Sent: 25 March 2019 23:29> To: [email protected]> Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Repairability of SD-24, SD-30 & SD-32 sampling heads>> >> This guy seem to have made a home hybrid lab and repairs. Could former professionals comment ?>> Best> Jose>>> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 9:30 PM Bob Koller via Groups.Io <testtech= [email protected]> wrote:>> > How well I know. My last job in the hybrid business was at Teledyne> > Microelectronics. Space Qual parts had reams of paperwork, x-rays,> > PIND test,photographs, etc...> > Tek, Keysight, and many other still , out of necessity, use hybrid> > technology with custom parts, in the front ends, and other places, of> > very high frequency instruments. But, commercial hybrid production> > has, I think, largely been supplanted by ASIC, FPGA, and more modern,> > more reliable, less expensive technology.> >> >> >> >>>
|
|
Re: Switching power supplies
My take on this after replacing thousands of surface mount electrolytic capacitors is replace them all when you get a new to you device that is more than ten or so years old.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Switchers are harder on electrolytics because they run at a higher frequency than a linear supply and the bean counters usually required the least expensive part to be installed to get the instrument out of warranty. My take on surface mounted electrolytics is that the fail for two reasons. The seal where the positive lead exits the case was violated during the reflow process. Or the capacitors was not properly selected for the task at hand. When I replace power supply capacitors in switchers, I select the highest temperature capacitors available with the highest ripple current rating that will fit into the available space. I do not use 85 degree C capacitors unless they are all that is made in that value and voltage. When doing repair work on cameras and tape decks in TV stations, I never saw a failure of a capacitor that I replaced with the above guidelines. I may have not waited long enough or may have been lucky. Large computer grade electrolytics are the exception. Do not replace unless needed. These do not usually cause board damage that cannot be repaired. See: Hope this helps. Glenn On 3/26/2019 4:37 PM, Brendan via Groups.Io wrote:
I have a few questions about power supplies and would like some opinions. Are switching powers supplies inherently harder on components than linear power supplies? If you picked up a 70's-80's vintage scope with a SMPS would you replace power supply components before using it as a daily driver? Or do you treat all power supplies the same and visually inspect, check for ripple and call it good? From my reading it seems that when a SMPS melts down the chain reaction damage has the possibility of being bad. --
----------------------------------------------------------------------- Glenn Little ARRL Technical Specialist QCWA LM 28417 Amateur Callsign: WB4UIV wb4uiv@... AMSAT LM 2178 QTH: Goose Creek, SC USA (EM92xx) USSVI LM NRA LM SBE ARRL TAPR "It is not the class of license that the Amateur holds but the class of the Amateur that holds the license" |
|
11801 calibrator rise time
I think I figured out why the calibrator rise time measurement doesn't read to spec. I warmed up the 11810 for about 40 minutes to do the Enhanced Accuracy adjustments. That seemed to go fine except afterwards when I measured the rise time I was getting >400 ps. The 11801 will remember the incorrect settings through a power cycle.
If you do the Loop Gain adjustment in the Enhanced Accuracy menu it resets something which results in incorrect values. If you go to the Utility menu and press Initialize you should now be able to set the Trigger to Internal, press Autoset, adjust the time base, turn on Hardware measurement and get <35 ps rise time. Unfortunately, it does not appear to be possible to measure the rise time on more than one one channel. I think a bunch of the Chinese DSO designers must have spent a lot of time using an 11801 and thought that was what a scope UI should look like. Even after reading all the way through the User manual the UI is still confusing because of the strange locations of various settings. The tip off came from this line on p 82 of the User manual: "Whenever you begin a new task using the 11801. you should initialize the system so that all the settings are at "factory default" . That way you do not get unexpected results because of settings remaining from the last use of the 11801." BTW I have a 2 port divider feeding the upper channel of my SD-22s and the waveforms look to be exactly the same. The pieces of hardline from the divider to the heads are different lengths and I have not been able to shift one relative to the other to see how closely they overlay as there is a 340 ps delay between the two. The divider increases the rise time to 42 ps. It's an MBC Technology unit. No frequency rating specified. I just discovered that it reset the time base readings when I removed the splitter and turned off one channel to take a look at how much of the 7% overshoot was the splitter which it turns out is about 5% of the total. There's a little bit of ringing on the calibrator step at 12.2 GHz which is probably the result of reflections where the semi-rigid SMA cable connects to the 3.5 mm calibrator and sampling head connectors. I am quite agog at how precise this thing is. Getting the full performance out of it will take some serious skill. |
|
Re: Switching power supplies
On 26/03/19 20:37, Brendan via Groups.Io wrote:
I have a few questions about power supplies and would like some opinions. Are switching powers supplies inherently harder on components than linear power supplies? If you picked up a 70's-80's vintage scope with a SMPS would you replace power supply components before using it as a daily driver? Or do you treat all power supplies the same and visually inspect, check for ripple and call it good? From my reading it seems that when a SMPS melts down the chain reaction damage has the possibility of being bad.Replace Rifa mains interference suppression delayed action smoke generators on sight; if there is any sign of cracking in the transparent case, don't even turn it on. Where there are tantalum beads that are operating near their rated voltage (e.g. a 15V tant on a 13V rail), replace those with a higher voltage. Visually inspect, measure, replace if there's a problem. Otherwise, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. |
|
Re: Switching power supplies
Chuck Harris
Tough question.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Yes, switching supplies are inherently harder on components than linear, but they also use much better parts. And they are more likely to be designed using math, rather than rules of thumb. And they are more likely to have extensive protection devices to prevent catastrophic failures from occurring. Linear supplies are heavy, are more likely to break your toes, and make copious amounts of heat. That heat soaks into everything around them, and causes component failure. Tektronix used some really uber parts in their 70's vintage supplies. In some cases, I cannot find modern parts that were as good as what they used. I would take it through calibration, testing the ripple and voltages, and just use it. If it fails, fix the failure. Odds are very, very, good that in prophylactically replacing parts you are going to introduce failures, now and in the future. Replacing a 10,000 hour rated part with a 1000 hour part, isn't going to improve reliability. -Chuck Harris Brendan via Groups.Io wrote: I have a few questions about power supplies and would like some opinions. Are switching powers supplies inherently harder on components than linear power supplies? If you picked up a 70's-80's vintage scope with a SMPS would you replace power supply components before using it as a daily driver? Or do you treat all power supplies the same and visually inspect, check for ripple and call it good? From my reading it seems that when a SMPS melts down the chain reaction damage has the possibility of being bad. |
|
Switching power supplies
I have a few questions about power supplies and would like some opinions. Are switching powers supplies inherently harder on components than linear power supplies? If you picked up a 70's-80's vintage scope with a SMPS would you replace power supply components before using it as a daily driver? Or do you treat all power supplies the same and visually inspect, check for ripple and call it good? From my reading it seems that when a SMPS melts down the chain reaction damage has the possibility of being bad.
Brendan |
|
Re: Impedance matching question
Craig Sawyers
1. why is an impedance match between output tubes and the output transformer primary soBecause there is a mismatch between the high plate resistance of the output pentodes or tetrodes (about 4.5k-ohms in push pull) and the loudspeaker. The impedance transformation goes as the square root of the turns ratio. So to match 4.5kk to 8 ohms needs a turns ratio of root(4500/8) = 24:1 turns ratio. To deliver 30W into 8 ohms (typical for 6550's in push pull) needs 21V peak, times 24 = 500V. The anode/plate voltage will be 560V - which is consistent with a 500V signal peak. The details are of course more complicated than that - so you'll just have to read around. 2. Why is a Low-Z to Hi-Z ratio desired in audio applications vs. an impedance match?Because if you do an impedance match at audio you lose half the signal. So your signal to noise ratio goes down by 6dB. Which is why no-one does it - there is absolutely no upside. We're kind of off-topic here. If you want to discuss audio, try or . There are lots more out there. Craig |
|
Re: 11801 is reassembled, up and running :-)
Gentlemen... have a look here:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
/g/TekScopes/message/155394?p=,,,20,0,0,0::Created,,egge+siert,20,2,0,30465052 Albert On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 03:28 PM, Reginald Beardsley wrote:
|
|
Re: Impedance matching question
At 09:58 AM 3/26/2019, Craig Sawyers wrote:
Going way back long distance telegraph and telephone lines were significant fractions of an audio wavelength in the cables, and they needed to impedance match.Through the tube era and the discrete solid state era professional balanced audio lines in radio and recording studios were also impedance matched at 600 ohms (earlier 500 ohms) because they were transformer coupled and power sourced. The constant impedance was implemented for maximum power transfer. It was not until the advent of high quality op amps that voltage sourced balanced audio lines became the norm in studios. Dale H. Cook, Radio Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA |
|
Re: 11801 is reassembled, up and running :-)
The user manual I quoted has a revision date of May 1989. The August 1988 service manual states the calibrator is < 35 ps. The February 1989 revision page states the same rise time.
As I noted previously. I also got a 300 ps rise time from the calibrator due to something not being set properly. This persisted when I used autoset, but eventually went away after I power cycled it a couple of times and used the autoset again. The behavior suggested an off by 10x error in the timebase generator strobe line. But I have far too little experience with the instrument to be sure of anything. |
|
Re: Impedance matching question
Thanks Craig... so, if I were to summarize what you wrote, at such short
distances, there's really no opportunity for a reflected signal to go out of phase with the incident signal? In watching the EEVblog videos, he's clearly using pretty high frequencies (well out of the audio spectrum). So, your explanation is consistent with that. So, two questions remain. 1. why is an impedance match between output tubes and the output transformer primary so important given the short physical differences. Or, maybe the tube specs are not showing the actual impedance, but rather the recommend Hi-Z on the load end to offer the optimal Low-Z to Hi-Z ratio? 2. Why is a Low-Z to Hi-Z ratio desired in audio applications vs. an impedance match? I understand your point that it doesn't matter at low distances, but Low-Z to Hi-Z appears to be an objective (iow, the objective is to avoid a match, by orders of magnitude). Does the higher resultant voltage (amplitude) at the load spread the signal out in a way that give the amp more to work with from a fidelity POV? On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 9:59 AM Craig Sawyers <c.sawyers@...> wrote: That was a decent video, thank you. It doesn't seem like he had problemswith the terminatorsthemselves. In fact, he uses them to address mismatches. I'd be curiousto know (from anyone whoknows) why maximum power (matched impedance) is ideal in somesituations, but a low-Z to high-Zarrangement is the ideal in other situations (ie: guitar to amplifier ormicrophone to PA). Irealize theBut need some schooling on |
Dale H. Cook
to navigate to use esc to dismiss