Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in
  • Congratulations IDS on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Three different scope breeds. The "best" is sometimes a beast.. 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Skogsgurra

Skogsgurra

Electrical
Mar 31, 2003
11,815
I now also have a Rigol DS1102E (2 channels, 100 MHz, 1 GS/s). I bought it just to keep me informed and see what this lowly animal can do. It has been ridiculed by lots of "experts" and I need to know if it is as bad as those experts keep telling me.

The Scopemeter Series II, the 190-204 is gone. It drove me insane.

It has been replaced with a Metrix (Chauvin&Arnoux) OX7204 (4 channels, 200 MHz, 2.5 GS/s)

My very first impression is that the Rigol does a more than decent job. It has a limited internal flash memory but one can easily store waveforms on a USB stick and there's a National Instruments based PC software included in the very low price.

The OX7204 is already my mistress. But an expensive one - French mistresses tend to cost. I have already said a few positive things about her in thread "Happy again". The PC software is also National Instruments based.

The Fluke SW is an antique, not so well functioning "almost" Windows look-and-feel software. It has been with us for 15 - 20 years without much facelift or improvements.

One of the first things I wanted to know is if the saturation problem that existed in the old Fluke 199 (around 1990 or so) had been dealt with in the new 190-204. No, same problem, see . Fluke told me it couldn't be solved. I know that it is a rather easy thing to correct. But Fluke told me it was a natural consequence of putting a 10 V signal into a channel set at .1 V/div sensitivity - the amplifier was overdriven, according to Fluke experts ;-)

I have now tested the Rigol and the OX7204. None of them has this saturation problem. Not even at highest sensitivity. So, what isn't possible in the Netherlands or Everett, WA is very well possible in France and China. I wonder why?

I will add comments to this thread as I continue to compare features.

Next topic will be the math functions. Stand by!

Gunnar Englund
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.
 
...has a limited internal flash memory...
Click to expand...

These days there's no excuse for not having a multi-GB mass storage on-board complete with a modern file system.

I'm sensing a business opportunity for you to team up with a Chinese manufacturer to produce the "Skogs 1000" portable oscilloscope.

It's too bad that tablet computers aren't a stable / standardized enough of a target to design a probes-to-tablet interface box. ...

Hmmm... Maybe there could be a standardized Bluetooth or Wifi interface and the tablets would simply have the App (covering all the OS ecosystems). Imagine, a big ten inch touch screen and GB of storage. Linked to the Interweb. Copy and paste the data and graphs into a report during the flight home.
 
It's a lot of money for a toy scope!


----------------------------------
image.php

If we learn from our mistakes I'm getting a great education!
 
Yes, not what I consider a tool.

On the other hand, the Rigol scope that I bought together with the OX7204 is a really good tool for "toy money".

Working through the math manus now. Amazing what the French guys have done. You can write and edit functions freely like any math program. And, there are as many math channels as there are scope channels.

Rigol is more limited. OTOH, they have an impressive array of filters (LP,BP,HP) with adjustable upper and lower frequencies.

It will take some time to work through all tis. But there will be a pdf, eventually. In the meantime, review earlier findings:
Gunnar Englund
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.
 
Read "menus", not "manus".

Gunnar Englund
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.
 
I believe I mentioned this a few months back, but have you checked out the firmware hacks for the Rigol scopes? One turns their 50MHz scope into the 100MHz version, etc.


Dan - Owner
Footwell%20Animation%20Tiny.gif
 
Yes, but at that price - who cares? Hacks are for hobbyists.

Gunnar Englund
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.
 
Disagree.

If I buy an instrument that I depend on in my work. And get paid for using. Why should I try get get free donuts from the stand? Just because it is possible? An already dirt cheap scope with lots of things going for it. Isn't the worker/producer worth some pay?

That 190-204, OTOH. That IS already a hack. And look what that resulted in.

Gunnar Englund
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.
 
No.
A proper hack, actually works.
Fluke desperately needs a hacker, but they don't know it.
... or can't admit it.


Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA
 
OK, you are right. When in deep hack mode, you are the best. But I can not agree that one needs to hack just because it is possible. And, if a company delivers a decent product at a decent price, I gladly pay the little money they ask for and see no reason to do otherwise.

I agree fully that Fluke needs a hacker. And that they don't know it. But a better way of putting it is that they need a competent management and QA. Plus the programmers that they got rid of many years ago.

This thread was supposed to be about three scopes and comparisons between those scopes. Can we, please, keep that path?

Gunnar Englund
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.
 
We ought to start a new thread called "Four different scope breeds".

I didn't get started properly with this one thread. The specs can bee read from the data sheets. But the "handling" is something one needs to investigate and write about.

I have had quite a few PicoScopes, but don't have the 3000.

What about doing math first? Then triggering, followed by storage, automatic measurements, PC communication and, finally, special properties where each scope shines?

Gunnar Englund
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.
 
Scogs

Review needed !!!!

These things are cheap, if they are decent in quality there will be pain in tekland.

 
*bump*

First off, hats off to you for performing such a valuable service to us poor engineers that have to buy our own tools! I was literally just minutes away from pulling the trigger on a Fluke 190-204 when I made a last second dash over here to see if there was any trash-talking going on about it. I found this thread and, whew, I feel like I dodged a bullet. I almost exclusively design power electronics so you uncovering the 190-204's various faults really saved my bacon.

At any rate, the reason for finding this thread again and giving it a bump is to ask how you are liking the OX7204? Poking around the /pub directory on your site I see a picture exclaiming it as the new standard, which is encouraging after the withering exposè of the Fluke, but how about some more details on what it's like to use it on a daily basis? Thanks again!

 
First, I have been away for a few weeks (and still am, Southern France) so I haven't had much internet connection and I haven't followed up on the different scope tests I have done.
I will be away for another two weeks and when I get back home, I will have a huge backlog to deal with. So those review plans will have to wait a while.

But, I can safely say that the Rigol scopes are good. No cheap feeling (yes, if you compare to the Tek 545A and other dinosaurs - but then everything feels cheap). Decent specs. No exaggerated or hidden data. Honest and performing well. Nothing that indicates short life. Probes are like most other Chinese probes - good enough.

I really love my OX7204. Good battery life, good screen, good specs for general purpose power electronics and most other purposes. Connectivity and storage is on par with todays computers and needs (that is where Fluke fails seriously) and math functions are extremely versatile.

There is one thing that I do not quite like; the probe's ground (or reference) leads fall off very easily. No snap action. Same problem as with the Fluke probes. I think there is a common root.

Gunnar Englund
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.
 
I had to Google the Tek 545A. Truly an instrument from another time.

Possibly the Jurassic period! [tongue]


----------------------------------
image.php

If we learn from our mistakes I'm getting a great education!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

123MB
  • Locked
  • Question
Burst Firing for an AC Voltage Controller - What is the supply current rating?
Replies
8
Views
243
waross
waross
Islander1
  • Locked
  • Article
Why there is a negative current flowing into solar panels
Replies
6
Views
341
Islander1
Islander1
crshears
  • Locked
  • Question
"Three-Phase Power Explained"
Replies
10
Views
85
IRstuff
IRstuff
essamalbanna
Surge arrester on the earthed neutral point of HV transformer
Replies
1
Views
918
waross
waross
SA07
  • Locked
  • Question
Supplying 2 applications at 2 different pressures from one borehole pump
Replies
2
Views
107
SA07
SA07

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top Bottom