Reply by rickman April 6, 20132013-04-06
On 4/5/2013 10:12 PM, josephkk wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Apr 2013 20:22:49 -0400, rickman<gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 4/5/2013 2:07 AM, josephkk wrote: >>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 13:52:24 -0700 (PDT), Francesco Poderico >>>> >>>> I'm starting thinking at the next prototype now... >>>> shall I go for a 200 MHz + 64 KRAM ( which I can put on the market for less that 200 pounds cheap oscilloscope but does what it says...) or shall I prototype a 1GSPS? and have a larger margin? >>>> Any suggestions is welcome. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Francesco >>> >>> Maybe 500Ms/s and 1 Ms ram. Really long record lengths have some specific >>> usefulness. >> >> Can you even buy 64 kword RAMs these days? A 32 MB SDRAM chip will do >> all that is needed I believe. Either run it at 100 MHz with twice the >> width of the storage needed or I expect it won't be hard to find SDRAM >> that can be clocked at 200 MHz. This wouldn't add much to the cost of >> the device, but would greatly improve functionality. > > The 64k is a ram block inside the FPGA. Completely different situation.
Of course... I'm used to using the poor stepchild end of the FPGA families with only a few kB of RAM. Still, I think a RAM chip should be on the board. It seems silly to hobble what seems to be a good design. I know the extra storage would help the work I do. I think I've offered my help before, but I'll make the same offer. I have some experience with memory interfaces. -- Rick
Reply by josephkk April 5, 20132013-04-05
On Fri, 05 Apr 2013 20:22:49 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 4/5/2013 2:07 AM, josephkk wrote: >> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 13:52:24 -0700 (PDT), Francesco Poderico >> <francescopoderico@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> a few months ago I started to design and build my own =
oscilloscope...and in this groups I had a lot of help in solving some = problem...
>>> >>> http://thefpproject01.blogspot.co.uk/ >>> >>> I'm getting so excited now... and surprise at same time... how things=
are getting better and better.
>>> The oscilloscope is now very useful indeed, I have added the =
capability to see the spectrum, and it works really well.
>>> >>> I still have a long way to go... but it looks promising. please see =
the picture on my blog.
>>> >>> I'm starting thinking at the next prototype now... >>> shall I go for a 200 MHz + 64 KRAM ( which I can put on the market =
for less that 200 pounds cheap oscilloscope but does what it says...) or = shall I prototype a 1GSPS? and have a larger margin?
>>> Any suggestions is welcome. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Francesco >> >> Maybe 500Ms/s and 1 Ms ram. Really long record lengths have some =
specific
>> usefulness. > >Can you even buy 64 kword RAMs these days? A 32 MB SDRAM chip will do=20 >all that is needed I believe. Either run it at 100 MHz with twice the=20 >width of the storage needed or I expect it won't be hard to find SDRAM=20 >that can be clocked at 200 MHz. This wouldn't add much to the cost of=20 >the device, but would greatly improve functionality.
The 64k is a ram block inside the FPGA. Completely different situation. ?-)
Reply by rickman April 5, 20132013-04-05
On 4/5/2013 2:07 AM, josephkk wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 13:52:24 -0700 (PDT), Francesco Poderico > <francescopoderico@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> a few months ago I started to design and build my own oscilloscope...and in this groups I had a lot of help in solving some problem... >> >> http://thefpproject01.blogspot.co.uk/ >> >> I'm getting so excited now... and surprise at same time... how things are getting better and better. >> The oscilloscope is now very useful indeed, I have added the capability to see the spectrum, and it works really well. >> >> I still have a long way to go... but it looks promising. please see the picture on my blog. >> >> I'm starting thinking at the next prototype now... >> shall I go for a 200 MHz + 64 KRAM ( which I can put on the market for less that 200 pounds cheap oscilloscope but does what it says...) or shall I prototype a 1GSPS? and have a larger margin? >> Any suggestions is welcome. >> >> Thanks, >> Francesco > > Maybe 500Ms/s and 1 Ms ram. Really long record lengths have some specific > usefulness.
Can you even buy 64 kword RAMs these days? A 32 MB SDRAM chip will do all that is needed I believe. Either run it at 100 MHz with twice the width of the storage needed or I expect it won't be hard to find SDRAM that can be clocked at 200 MHz. This wouldn't add much to the cost of the device, but would greatly improve functionality. -- Rick
Reply by josephkk April 5, 20132013-04-05
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 13:52:24 -0700 (PDT), Francesco Poderico
<francescopoderico@googlemail.com> wrote:

>Hi all, >a few months ago I started to design and build my own oscilloscope...and=
in this groups I had a lot of help in solving some problem...
> >http://thefpproject01.blogspot.co.uk/ > >I'm getting so excited now... and surprise at same time... how things =
are getting better and better.
>The oscilloscope is now very useful indeed, I have added the capability =
to see the spectrum, and it works really well.
> >I still have a long way to go... but it looks promising. please see the =
picture on my blog.
> >I'm starting thinking at the next prototype now... >shall I go for a 200 MHz + 64 KRAM ( which I can put on the market for =
less that 200 pounds cheap oscilloscope but does what it says...) or = shall I prototype a 1GSPS? and have a larger margin?
>Any suggestions is welcome. > >Thanks, >Francesco
Maybe 500Ms/s and 1 Ms ram. Really long record lengths have some = specific usefulness. ?-)
Reply by rickman April 2, 20132013-04-02
On 3/31/2013 4:52 PM, Francesco Poderico wrote:
> Hi all, > a few months ago I started to design and build my own oscilloscope...and in this groups I had a lot of help in solving some problem... > > http://thefpproject01.blogspot.co.uk/ > > I'm getting so excited now... and surprise at same time... how things are getting better and better. > The oscilloscope is now very useful indeed, I have added the capability to see the spectrum, and it works really well. > > I still have a long way to go... but it looks promising. please see the picture on my blog. > > I'm starting thinking at the next prototype now... > shall I go for a 200 MHz + 64 KRAM ( which I can put on the market for less that 200 pounds cheap oscilloscope but does what it says...) or shall I prototype a 1GSPS? and have a larger margin? > Any suggestions is welcome.
You seem to be doing good work. Is your spec of 5 mV/div really valid? That would be pretty nice. Most of the low cost scopes don't do so well on sensitivity. -- Rick
Reply by Jan Panteltje April 1, 20132013-04-01
On a sunny day (Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:37:32 +0100) it happened John Devereux
<john@devereux.me.uk> wrote in <87y5d2juk3.fsf@devereux.me.uk>:

>The only thing comparable to your scope recently was a lashed-up 120MHz >STM32F205 microcontroller running a 2MHz 12 bit external ADC. > >During testing I captured the sample buffer with gdb, dumped it through >a little python script I found that fed it into gnuplot. Ended up with >some really nice, true 12 bit high-resolution plots of various >waveforms. Could make a beautiful low frequency scope like that, maybe >with a really high resolution screen like the high end ultrabooks >use. Job for my pi perhaps?
Cool, yes it has plenty of memory to store waveforms, There is also 'risc OS' for it, I have it, but really had no time to delve into it,
Reply by John Devereux April 1, 20132013-04-01
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> writes:

> On a sunny day (Mon, 01 Apr 2013 11:17:41 +0100) it happened John Devereux > <john@devereux.me.uk> wrote in <87a9pilflm.fsf@devereux.me.uk>: > >>Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> writes: >> >>> On a sunny day (Sun, 31 Mar 2013 13:52:24 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Francesco >>> Poderico <francescopoderico@googlemail.com> wrote in >>> <590b0f32-e2d4-4011-b626-787668e223e4@googlegroups.com>: >>> >>>>Hi all, >>>>a few months ago I started to design and build my own oscilloscope...and in this groups I had a lot of help in solving some >>>>problem... >>>> >>>>http://thefpproject01.blogspot.co.uk/ >>>> >>>>I'm getting so excited now... and surprise at same time... how things are getting better and better. >>>>The oscilloscope is now very useful indeed, I have added the capability to see the spectrum, and it works really well. >>>> >>>>I still have a long way to go... but it looks promising. please see the picture on my blog. >>>> >>>>I'm starting thinking at the next prototype now... >>>>shall I go for a 200 MHz + 64 KRAM ( which I can put on the market for less that 200 pounds cheap oscilloscope but does what >>>>it >>>>says...) or shall I prototype a 1GSPS? and have a larger margin? >>>>Any suggestions is welcome. >>>> >>>>Thanks, >>>>Francesco >> >>Nice. >> >> >>> >>> Did you add tegh TV part? >> >>Hey Jan, >> >>Looks like you need to get a bigger PIC! :) > > Who knows: > PIC scope with FFT: > http://127.0.0.1/panteltje/pic/scope_pic/index.html
Yes, yes, nice... but Francesco is already doing 100MSPS and making good progress towards more it looks like.
> I do not even need a micro-processor for TV: > http://127.0.0.1/panteltje/scope_tv/index.html
I remember doing that, sort of, when I was a teenager with my first scope. Not very good though, did not know how to do the syncs properly, had to just adjust the frequency and hope it locked somehow. Was still cool to see!
> Just wrote a GPS NMEA parser in PIC 18F asm in 5726 bytes,, > position, speed, heading, altitude. > > And I did that with the PIC, programmer, and GPS in a different place, > all remote via ssh -Y from the laptop. > Zero crashes, else I would have had to go there to power cycle.... > > So proud of myself, can still do it :-) > > > root@raspberrypi:~/compile/pantel/gps_pic# jppp18pi -i gps.hex -e -p -Y > Loading hex file: > Program 5726 bytes at address 0x000000
[...]
> Your turn
The only thing comparable to your scope recently was a lashed-up 120MHz STM32F205 microcontroller running a 2MHz 12 bit external ADC. During testing I captured the sample buffer with gdb, dumped it through a little python script I found that fed it into gnuplot. Ended up with some really nice, true 12 bit high-resolution plots of various waveforms. Could make a beautiful low frequency scope like that, maybe with a really high resolution screen like the high end ultrabooks use. Job for my pi perhaps? -- John Devereux
Reply by Francesco Poderico April 1, 20132013-04-01
On Monday, 1 April 2013 00:24:18 UTC+1, brent  wrote:
> On Mar 31, 4:52=A0pm, Francesco Poderico >=20 > <francescopoder...@googlemail.com> wrote: >=20 > > Hi all, >=20 > > a few months ago I started to design and build my own oscilloscope...an=
d in this groups I had a lot of help in solving some problem...
>=20 > > >=20 > > http://thefpproject01.blogspot.co.uk/ >=20 > > >=20 > > I'm getting so excited now... and surprise at same time... how things a=
re getting better and better.
>=20 > > The oscilloscope is now very useful indeed, I have added the capability=
to see the spectrum, and it works really well.
>=20 > > >=20 > > I still have a long way to go... but it looks promising. please see the=
picture on my blog.
>=20 > > >=20 > > I'm starting thinking at the next prototype now... >=20 > > shall I go for a 200 MHz + 64 KRAM =A0( which I can put on the market f=
or less that 200 pounds cheap oscilloscope but does what it says...) or sha= ll I prototype a 1GSPS? and have a larger margin?
>=20 > > Any suggestions is welcome. >=20 > > >=20 > > Thanks, >=20 > > Francesco >=20 >=20 >=20 > You are doing great work!
Thanks, now works at 200 MSPS! :-)
Reply by Jan Panteltje April 1, 20132013-04-01
OK, one more time:

PIC scope with FFT:
 http://panteltje.com/panteltje/pic/scope_pic/index.html

I do not even need a micro-processor for TV:
 http://panteltje.com/panteltje/scope_tv/index.html

Reply by Jan Panteltje April 1, 20132013-04-01
Corrected links, sorry, gave localhost... :-)

> PIC scope with FFT:
http://panteltje.com/panteltje/scope_tv/index.html
>I do not even need a micro-processor for TV:
http://panteltje.com/panteltje/scope_tv/index.html