🚀 go-pugleaf

nico@puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote:

>"Steve Sousa" <etsteve@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>>news:h8B0m.53620$FI5.3564@newsfe12.iad...
>>> Check out a rather unusual phenomenon you can see on your oscilloscope in 
>>> my latest blog (#14):
>>> http://www.alternatezone.com/eevblog/
>>> See if you can get it to happen on your scope!
>>>
>>
>>Hello:
>>
>>Since you're into it, why don't you compare the refresh rate of digital vs 
>>analog scopes?
>>Also known as the waveforms-per-second capability? It's something i'm very 
>>curious about in practice, and also, do the digitals behave as the analogs 
>
>The waveforms-per-second depends on the sample rate, the length of the
>acquisition memory and the throughput of the display system. Another
>thing that limits the refreshrate is the refreshrate of the display.
>The latter can be circumvented by adding several swaps into one
                                                  ^^^^^ sweeps
>signal.
>
>>(like a low-pass filter) when you increase the freq of a wave-form or 
>>suddenly start aliasing?
>
>That depends on the samplerate and the bandwidth. If the samplerate is
>lower then the maximum bandwidth expect aliasing effects unless it is
>a sampling oscilloscope.


-- 
Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply
indicates you are not using the right tools...
                     "If it doesn't fit, use a bigger hammer!"
--------------------------------------------------------------