The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: "Phil Allison"
References: <3DBF0409.D2B34DBF@azglobal.com> <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: Matching oscilloscope probes
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:38:36 +1100
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:29:33 EST
Organization: Telstra BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.com)
"Tom Bruhns" wrote in message
> "Phil Allison" wrote in message
> > "Richard" wrote in message
> > news:3DBF0409.D2B34DBF@azglobal.com...
> > > When buying after-market probes for an analog scope (e.g., Tek
> > > are they fairly generic / interchangable (assuming BNC), or do you
> > > to buy for your specific scope model?
> > >
> > > From reading posts, I gather there's:
> > > * a 50 / 1M Ohm rating that needs to be matched to the scope
> > ** Scopes are virtually all 1 Mohm with 20 to 35 pF in parallel on
> > vertical inputs.
> Errrk! A whole lot of them are rather lower capacitance than that.
> The two I have handy here are nominally 13pF (100MHz bw) and 7pF
> (500MHz bw).
** 500 MHz scopes are scarce in my part of the world. I checked several
handbooks for scopes in the 20 to 60 Mhz range before I made the post.
> > > * a capacitance rating
> > ** 10:1 probes ALL have an adjustment for this.
> Yes, but the adjustment range is generally limited. Decent scope
> probes are rated for the range of scope input capacitances they will
> match properly.
** So what ? The range is enough to cope with nearly any scope
> > > * a bandwidth rating
> > ** Basically a scam - the rating is based on a 25 ohm source
> > > * (anything missing here?)
> > >
> > > Does the bandwidth rating just need to be greater than the signal
> > > probed, up to the rating of the scope? (i.e., a 100MHz probe would
> > > on a 200MHz scope for signals up to 100MHz, right?)
> Generally right, but if one probe is -3dB at 100MHz and another more
> conservatively rated one is -1dB at 100MHz, you might see rather
> different results from the two in your circuit. Also, the length of
> the probe lead and some other design factors matter, because they
> affect the capacitance at the probe tip, and that capacitance will
> load your circuit. Longer cables present more capacitance at the
> probe tip, other things being equal.
> There really is a difference in probes. I have some cheap
> after-market ones with nominally the same bandwidth rating as some
> good ones I also have, and there is a difference in the response, even
> the flatness in the lower passband when properly compensated. I can
> be a little hard on probes sometimes, so using cheap ones when I don't
> need especially accurate readings makes sense for me. When I _really_
> want to see what's going on, I use the good probes.
** Massive overstatement. All passive probes have severe limitations
when used on high frequency and fast rise time circuits.
A length of RF co-ax terminated in its characteristic impedance is
a predictable and true wide band probe with a known and consistant load from
DC to hundreds of MHz.
> A probe worth its salt will be rated for the range of scope input
> capacitances it will match, and it will be rated for the capacitance
> (and resistance) it presents to the circuit under test. One with a
> relative narrow range of scope input capacitances, but whose range
> matches your scope, may well be better than a wide-range one.
** Take this with a large lump of salt.
. . .............. Phil
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup