The problem with sampling 'scopes is that you cannot get a continuos
samples stream. I think that the TimePod correlates continuously in
time.
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Stefan Heinzmann
stefan_heinzm...@gmx.de wrote:
Marek Peca wrote:
My point was, that DSO is basically an ADC.
Azelio Boriani wrote:
The problem with sampling 'scopes is that you cannot get a continuos
samples stream. I think that the TimePod correlates continuously in
time.
Does that matter for phase noise measurements? Doesn't that just make
the measurement take correspondingly more time?
Cheers
Ah, well, now I'm not able to compute what impact can have this
windowing of the samples... maybe that just concatenating the
buffers' content is perfectly equivalent to have a continuous stream
of samples (for noise measurement only, of course). If the desired
noise band can fit into one buffer
On 06/13/2013 04:26 PM, Stefan Heinzmann wrote:
Azelio Boriani wrote:
The problem with sampling 'scopes is that you cannot get a continuos
samples stream. I think that the TimePod correlates continuously in
time.
Does that matter for phase noise measurements? Doesn't that just make
the
Magnus Danielson wrote:
On 06/13/2013 04:26 PM, Stefan Heinzmann wrote:
Azelio Boriani wrote:
The problem with sampling 'scopes is that you cannot get a continuos
samples stream. I think that the TimePod correlates continuously in
time.
Does that matter for phase noise measurements? Doesn't
On 06/13/2013 11:02 PM, Stefan Heinzmann wrote:
Magnus Danielson wrote:
On 06/13/2013 04:26 PM, Stefan Heinzmann wrote:
Azelio Boriani wrote:
The problem with sampling 'scopes is that you cannot get a continuos
samples stream. I think that the TimePod correlates continuously in
time.
Does
Hi all,
given that digital scopes have a multichannel ADC for acquisition, which
is similar to what a cross-correlating phase noise measurement
instrument has, it occurred to me that phase noise measurement might
also be possible with a standard digital scope and some post-processing
Hello,
given that digital scopes have a multichannel ADC for acquisition, which is
similar to what a cross-correlating phase noise measurement instrument has,
it occurred to me that phase noise measurement might also be possible with a
standard digital scope and some post-processing software.
I would think that considering the amount of time it takes to get the data out
of the scope (particularly on the cheap scopes) would be a major impediment to
that method regardless of the cleanliness of whatever data you eventually get,
since you will only be able to analyze a small fraction of
Marek Peca wrote:
Hello,
given that digital scopes have a multichannel ADC for acquisition,
which is similar to what a cross-correlating phase noise measurement
instrument has, it occurred to me that phase noise measurement might
also be possible with a standard digital scope and some
(..)
I have tried it with a very cheap one, Rigol 2-channel, originally 50MHz,
reflashed to 100MHz. 2 signals, refmeasured, into Ch1, Ch2. Waveforms
(2x500Msps) acquired, sinc() interpolated. Results: short-term single-shot
jitter around 100ps RMS. Long-term was of no interest for my purpose
Marek Peca wrote:
(..) I have tried it with a very cheap one, Rigol 2-channel,
originally 50MHz, reflashed to 100MHz. 2 signals, refmeasured, into
Ch1, Ch2. Waveforms (2x500Msps) acquired, sinc() interpolated.
Results: short-term single-shot jitter around 100ps RMS. Long-term
was of no
My point was, that DSO is basically an ADC. Therefore, there is some amount
of noise, nonlinearity and drift, limiting the jitter measurement. Do you
think any method can dig more information from given data than sinc()
interpolation and zero-crossing computation?
The cross-spectrum averaging
My dim memory says there is some analog way to multiply the phase noise.
What does that? Then it might be easier to measure.
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Marek Peca ma...@duch.cz wrote:
My point was, that DSO is basically an ADC. Therefore, there is some
amount of noise, nonlinearity
14 matches
Mail list logo
