So, I've been getting back into another of my old hobbies lately; electronics. A few days ago I got a Rigol DS-1052E oscilloscope, and have been
tinkering with it a bit.
Here's a very simple experiment I came up with that requires nothing more than an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscilloscope"
target="_blank">oscilloscope</a> <img src="../scipics/_wiki.png" />, a green LED (tried red, green works better), and a <a
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescent_lamp#Flicker_problems" target="_blank">fluorescent lamp</a> <img src="../scipics/_wiki.png"
/>. Simply connect the LED across the oscilloscope leads (cathode to the ground clamp, anode to the probe tip) and hold it facing an illuminated
fluorescent lamp in close proximity. Once you've adjusted the scope to view the waveform, you'll notice that it's roughly a rectified sine wave. If
you measure the frequency of the wave (peak-to-peak, skipping a 'rectified' peak), you should get a value close to the expected <a
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_frequency" target="_blank">line frequency</a> <img src="../scipics/_wiki.png" /> for your
area—60 Hz in my region.
Now for a(n attempted) short explanation, if I may. An oscilloscope allows us to observe variation in a voltage signal, and in this particular case,
over time. This experiment takes advantage of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LEDs_as_light_sensors#LED_as_light_sensor"
target="_blank">ability of an LED to produce a minute voltage from incident light.</a> <img src="../scipics/_wiki.png" /> The
oscilloscope measures the voltage produced, and displays it on the screen as a trace varying over time. As I said above, the shape of the trace is
essentially a 'rectified' sine wave. Why is the signal rectified? You may think it's due to the electrical properties of a diode, but you'd be
mistaken. The signal is rectified when it is first converted from an electrical current to light, in the fluorescent lamp. The signal from the LED
is merely corresponding to the intensity of the light produced by the lamp, which corresponds in turn to the voltage coming in on the power line.
So, there you have it; a simple experiment to check your mains frequency without jamming probes in the socket! Sorry for the poor explanation, but I
hope that someone might find this interesting. I hope to post more simple electronics experiments and musings in this topic.WGTR - 5-12-2013 at 15:53
You could also try a high sensitivity setting on the scope, hold the LED somewhat above the 0V
line on the channel, and see if you get feedback.bfesser - 5-12-2013 at 16:18
To be honest, I'm still at a beginner's level for use of the scope. The short users guide that came with it was in Chinese, and I really hate reading
PDFs on a screen. When I get another ream of printer paper, maybe I'll print the English language version. I'm sorry, but I don't understand your
post. Is there any way that you could rephrase that for a<del>n idiot</del> newbie like myself?WGTR - 5-12-2013 at 16:39
Oops, sorry about that. Electronics has been my "day job" for a long time.
Here is what I meant: If your LED produces a voltage in response to light, it might also respond
to the energy of the light emitted by the traces on your scope. Or it may not. It depends on what
spectrum your LED is sensitive to. If the viewing angle of the LED is restricted enough, and it is
sufficiently sensitive to the proper wavelength of light, then if you hold the LED a bit positive (or
negative, depending on the polarity of the LED) of where the trace is positioned on the display,
then the trace might follow the LED around the display.
One caveat would be if your scope display is noisy (as many of the LCD/TFT ones are), then you
might get noise pickup via capacitive couping to the scope probe, thereby giving you a lot of,
well, trash.
Edit: I hate reading PDFs on a screen too. I just got a phone call from someone reminding me that
I have a stack of printouts on the copier.
[Edited on 6-12-2013 by WGTR]Metacelsus - 5-12-2013 at 18:50
I have a 1950s era oscilloscope (gotta love those vacuum tubes) and will
certainly give this experiment, and WGTR's extension, a try. I probably won't have time for it until the weekend, though.vulture - 6-12-2013 at 07:12
My electronics knowledge is pretty limited, but couldn't this also be the result of induction in the LED wire? WGTR - 6-12-2013 at 08:43
Yes, but due to the rather short length of the exposed lead wires, inductive coupling would be minimal at 60Hz. What is more likely
to happen is, if the scope input is high impedance (1M-10M ohms, which it likely is), then there is going to be capacitive coupling from the
noise source to the probe tip. At the same time, due to the DC offset that is apparent from bfesser's scope image, it does look
like the LED is responding to light.
If you want to minimize the effects of capacitive coupling on your LED, then a Faraday shield will help quite a bit. This means making
a cage of metal screening (that will still allow light through) around your LED, and then grounding the screen to the ground of the probe.
Then you'll know what components of the noise where light-related, and which ones are being capacitively coupled.bfesser - 6-12-2013 at 10:14
vulture, I had considered that. When a non-conductive opaque card was placed between the LED and the lamp; the waveform on the
'scope went flat. WGTR is correct about the DC offset. Here are the <a
href="http://www.rigol.com/prodserv/DS1000E/attachment/?act=view&itemid=1" target="_blank">probe specs</a> <img
src="../scipics/_ext.png" />. I'd make a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage" target="_blank">Farraday cage</a> <img
src="../scipics/_wiki.png" />, but I don't have any wire mesh handy—I'll have a look, next time I'm at the local surplus shop. I suppose
if they don't have wire mesh, I could rig up a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_tube" target="_blank">light guide</a> <img
src="../scipics/_wiki.png" /> or big ass lens to distance the wiring from the lamp.IrC - 6-12-2013 at 11:00
Would help to be more precise, always state parameters and settings. Unless we know your scope is set to DC input rather than AC, what looks like DC
offset could just be your vertical position is not centered. By stating trace is centered at zero input, DC selected on scope, then we know it is DC
offset. Helps to also state timebase and volts/div and if the variable is set in its lock so that we know the measurements from looking at the grid
pattern is accurate.
Also if a diode junction is involved and the coupled energy is large enough one could see 120 HZ harmonic waveforms. Also if the coupling is
capacitive and the energy is coming from the screen, a card may be blocking the voltages (it is an insulator, a dielectric which will charge up
reducing the field to the LED), and this could appear to be proof it was the light generating the voltage. While likely you are correct in what you
are seeing, I just point out a few minor considerations one must take into account.
By the way, cool mad science touch to use a Panavise to hold the probe. WGTR - 6-12-2013 at 11:55
IrC is correct; it's good practice to always specify how the scope is set up, especially if the results
are being published. This helps people who aren't familiar with a particular scope. Input coupling, volts per
division, seconds per division, and voltage offset are important. In fairness to bfesser, though, I could
determine all of those things by looking at the display screen capture. If information is being shared
between technicians on a project, then just showing the screen capture should be perfectly adequate.
For those who are used to using analog scopes, one thing to look out for is the aliasing problem in the
less expensive digital scopes. If you are looking at a 1MHz signal with the time base set to 1ms per
division, then an analog scope does this with no problem. A digital one can display some very strange
waveforms under the same conditions. You have to get into the habit of looking at an unknown signal
with a very fast time base at first, and then slowing it down again, watching for aliasing as you do.
It's obvious when/if it happens.
[Edited on 6-12-2013 by WGTR]IrC - 6-12-2013 at 12:31
I couldn't tell if he was in AC or DC as the left pic does not show the whole face. Also I am not familiar with the model he has. Due to a crappy
economy I am still using my Tektronix 2220 digital scope. 60 MHZ digital storage, fairly decent, well calibrated and I keep it in nice shape. Still
waiting for Publishers Clearing House to show up with my 10 million. I do think his scope is showing actual voltage output from the LED from light, be
interesting to use DC input and a bright flashlight to prove light is producing voltage from the LED. bfesser - 6-12-2013 at 15:17
Sorry, I'm totally new to this; have little clue what I'm doing. On that first screenshot; DC input coupling, yellow arrow designates 0V, 200 mV
& 5.000 ms per division.
Just repeated the experiment. Hopefully the pictures will speak for themselves. [edit] Sorry, the photos are poor quality—I lazily took
them with a cell phone.
5.000ms/div.
Green LED 'sensor' on Channel 1: DC, 200mv/div.
White LED on Channel 2: DC, 2.00V/div.
[I love my PanaVise!]
[Edited on 6.12.13 by bfesser]IrC - 6-12-2013 at 17:13
I envy you. That is a nice model and 100 MHZ no less.
WGTR explained the symbols on your scope, "that little symbol (=) next to the channel indicator is the 'DC' symbol. The 'AC'
symbol is a '~'. The ground symbol is, well, a ground symbol. It's not very obvious at first glance."
If I ever get rich again I'm getting one of those, mine is too old.
Anyway, I am positive you are seeing an output induced by light on the LED. While I remember reading long ago about that property I never thought much
about it afterwards, so I'm sitting here playing with some super bright 20,000 MCD LED's and it does work. If only they thought to apply that to LED
flashlights you could charge it by day and use it at night. If only enough energy output was gained. WGTR - 6-12-2013 at 18:36
bfesser, that's a good presentation. The pictures make it easy to see the effects of modulated vs.
unmodulated light on your LED.
The only thing that would improve it would be to try shielding the LED as mentioned before, to see if that has
any effect. Both half-cycles are of unequal amplitude, and if you study it for a minute, you can see that there
is a 200mV peak-to-peak 60Hz signal being coupled onto your full-wave rectified signal, slightly out of phase.
That's most likely from electrostatic coupling.
[Edited on 7-12-2013 by WGTR]bfesser - 6-12-2013 at 19:01
<strong>IrC</strong>, it's still a 50 MHz scope. I've been aware of the hack, but haven't yet looked in detail to see whether or not
mine's vulnerable. Thanks for the link.
<a href="http://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/changing-the-rigol-ds1052e-to-ds1102e-using-usb-the-dummy-guide/" target="_blank">changing the rigol
DS1052E to DS1102E using USB , the dummy guide</a> <img src="../scipics/_ext.png" /> (EEVblog Forum)
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6WH7kW-NVg" target="_blank">EEVblog #19 - Rigol caught with their pants down!</a> <img
src="../scipics/_yt.png" />
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO5iGwHpmHc" target="_blank">EEVblog #37 - Rigol DS1052E Oscilloscope Teardown</a> <img
src="../scipics/_yt.png" />
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnhXfVYWYXE" target="_blank">EEVblog #70 - Turn your Rigol DS1052E Oscilloscope into a 100MHz DS1102E
(Hack)</a> <img src="../scipics/_yt.png" />
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2dGKcMtAvg" target="_blank">EEVblog #77 - Rigol DS1052E DS1102E Oscilloscope Hack Update</a>
<img src="../scipics/_yt.png" />
<strong>WGTR</strong>, I have an idea for shielding the LED; perhaps I'll try it out tomorrow.
In the meantime, I've been looking into the <a href="http://www.geda-project.org/" target="_blank">gEDA Project</a> <img
src="../scipics/_ext.png" />, an Electronic Design Automation (EDA) toolkit for GNU/Linux.IrC - 6-12-2013 at 19:10
Yeah I read the warnings and for a 400 dollar scope I would be hesitant to turn it into a boat anchor if the software rewrite went wrong. Metacelsus - 7-12-2013 at 16:49
I just tried the experiment and was unable to pick up anything but interference (I got the same very faint 60 Hz signal whether the LED was covered or
not). I may need to try a different LED. The one I used was a standard green variety.
[Edited on 8-12-2013 by Cheddite Cheese]NexusDNA - 7-12-2013 at 17:44
Two of my favorite hobbies are chemistry and eletronics, too!
Make Magazine is great for small [budget] projects.bfesser - 7-12-2013 at 18:49
Cheddite Cheese, did you use a compact fluorescent lamp (CFL), by chance?
P.S. I've got a pair of Sprague "Compulytic® 32D 3700 - 200 D.C." capacitors and a couple soldering irons that I'm looking to donate, if you
want them. I haven't tested them, but I'd assume that they're 3700 μF, 200 VDC rated. I recall you mentioning that you're into high-voltage
type stuff; but if you're not interested, I'll drop them off at Ax-Man. I can throw in a bunch of old components and maybe some tools, if you want
them.Metacelsus - 7-12-2013 at 18:58
No. It was one of the long "tube" lamps. U2U sent regarding the electronics stuff. Random - 8-12-2013 at 11:37
Hey guys not sure if this is offtopic but how hard and expensive would be to build a remote controlled robotic arm to perform more dagerous
experiments for me? For example a good thing would be staying away from toxic gases etc. No risks of dangerous boiling acids.. Sorry if it is off
topic.cpman - 10-12-2013 at 20:20
Do you have any suggestions about good oscilloscopes? I'd like to get one eventually...
Would it be feasible to build one?woelen - 11-12-2013 at 05:59
A good oscilloscope is quite expensive. But if you are only doing audio things or low frequency things, then a good substitute might be to buy a
decent audio card for your PC (one that allows you to sample at 192 kHz) and use that in conjunction with suitable software. There are shareware or
even open source programs which allow you to use your PC with audio card as a nice oscilloscope. I myself have such a thing and it works quite well.
You, however, need a decent audio card (I use a Sound Blaster Audigy II board). A decent card, however, does not need to cost more than $100. It
certainly does not need to be an audiophile device of several hundreds of dollars.
Just search the internet with terms as 'PC oscilloscope software'.
If you want a real oscilloscope, which goes from DC to tens of MHz, then be prepared to spend at least $500 or so.WGTR - 11-12-2013 at 07:52
Do you have any suggestions about good oscilloscopes? I'd like to get one eventually...
Would it be feasible to build one?
Agilent, Tektronix, HP...those guys make good equipment, but it helps to be familiar with what a scope does,
and what they are capable of now. Tektronix makes decent "low-end" stuff, but a lot of really good equipment
as well.
Analog scopes normally don't have digital storage, and have triggering that can be tempermental at times,
but they can't be beat for display accuracy and quality. If you keep your eyes open, you can get a good one
for less than $100. I picked up a Tektronix type 547 in a thrift store, complete with a rolling cart, for $75. It
kept my shop warm for many years (vacuum tubes).
Tektronix's low-end digital scopes give you the advantage of being able to store several waveforms in
memory, have versatile and dependable triggering, are lightweight and small, and will often have ethernet or
RS232 connectivity. They are very capable...that's the digital age for you. Since the screens are TFT displays,
they have limited resolution and have aliasing. If you can find one of Tektronix's DPO (digital phosphor
oscilloscopes) for cheap, then those are much better in terms of capability and display. If you are
planning on doing a lot of digital design work, I'd encourage holding out for a four-channel scope.
There's a Ham radio swapfest that happens every year in Schertz, Texas. It's actually going to be
in January, one month from today. To get the good stuff you have to get there right when it opens, but
don't overpay for anything. The prices comes down throughout the day:
If you've never been, I think you'd enjoy it. It's just a bunch of radio operators trading electronic equipment.
There are probably some other ones in Austin, though.Magpie - 16-11-2014 at 11:42
I'm looking to buy an oscilloscope for hobby use. I know a little about electronics having taken an electronics course in college a long time ago. I
have some limited assembly experience including that for a Heathkit (remember those?) volt-ohm meter.
Hantek offers a very compact and cheap oscilloscope that essentially uses your PC as a power supply and display monitor. See:
I would use it mostly for understanding/troubleshooting my relatively simple homemade circuits. Is this Hantek a reasonable option for me? woelen - 16-11-2014 at 13:31
For audio purposes and also for a little bit more (e.g. serial communications up to a few 100 kbit/s) this will be fine. A resolution of 8 bits is not
spectacular, but it will be enough to get good visible wave forms. Do not expect it to be useful for measurements of distortion and that kind of more
advanced things.
The main issue with such PC-based oscilloscopes for me is that it must be connected directly to a PC. I have my experimenting workbench on another
place than my PC. Using this in conjunction with a cheap and light laptop may be a nice option. From the PC's point of view, the software is not
demanding at all, so a small and light laptop may be an ideal companion for this device, especially if you can get one second hand for a nice price.
If you are into Arduino/Raspberry PI/Odroid electronics projects, then this oscilloscope will be a great addition to your lab. Such projects never
will be in the MHz range, at most in the 100's of kHz range, frequently much lower. For really high speed I/O such as can be achieved with the
Beaglebone Black (if you use the PRUs on that device), this oscilloscope may be too slow.WGTR - 16-11-2014 at 14:47
For generic testing, perhaps find a good, used, 'scope locally.
If there is a Ham radio club in your area, they may have weekly swap meets. There is a big one in January that occurs once a year in my area. A club
may also have classified listings for old equipment. If one of the members is impressed with your hobby, he may just give you a 'scope, or sell it at
a reduced price. Many Hams have helped me out over the years, and I have returned the favor to many others. Maybe you can make a few gallons of
ferric chloride for them, who knows (it's used for circuit board etching)?
It's tempting to get a fully featured digital model, but I spent a good ten years using a Tektronix 547. I bought that one in a thrift store for $75,
complete with a rolling cart. It uses vacuum tubes, and warms the room up in wintertime very well. It's been relegated to the corner of my lab right
now; supplanted by the snazzy new digital models, but it served me well for a decade. There is a fancy Polaroid camera option that mounts over the
display, but the advent of digital cameras has made that obsolete.
This little digital thing is nice and colourful, but i simply don't trust it.
I do miss a Good bench scope with 'proper' trace.
A digital display's aliasing will eat the lunch of anyone not expecting it! Analog displays don't have that problem. That's something that a younger
generation of technicians don't appreciate fully.IrC - 16-11-2014 at 17:23
I have the SainSmart DDS120 and a laptop on the left side of my bench, it is very similar to the Hantek Magpie mentioned. I bought it just to have a
scope that would allow me to do things in software with various measurements. But the A/D resolution is low and it is only useful for audio
experiments and looking at digital waveforms (but not very fast). Plus as WGTR mentioned aliasing is a real problem. I do not find it very useful,
more of a toy to play with out of curiosity. Plus unless you have a true line isolation setup you must be careful what you connect it to if you value
the computer. I mostly use the laptop to view schematics or a PDF service manual of things I am working on. It is very useful for that.
You really need a decent quality scope if you plan on doing very much or require even moderate precision. For years I used a phosphor storage
Tektronix with the Polaroid camera and used many rolls of film over the years. Clearly the digital camera is better but at least for the first decade
we had such tools I encountered real troubles using scopes that had a blue trace. The damn cameras either barely saw the brightest traces or refused
to capture any trace at all. Keep that in mind when buying older surplus gear such as digital camera attachments for an oscilloscope. Even my Sony
DSC-F717 has real trouble seeing a blue trace and it is overall a good camera. I found if I selected night vision it would capture a blue trace with
fine detail (minus color obviously).
I ran into a similar problem when I bought a transistor tester and wanted to photograph the display which was blue. Again night vision in macro mode
worked but later I bought the same tester in green which the camera sees fine in color mode.
I have a velleman PCSGU250 as well as an old analog 10MHz
scope that needs work. The velleman is a nice piece of equipment
as long as you trust yourself not to fry your computer by
overloading the scope. The velleman is much better at transient
detection that the old analog.
) and will
certainly give this experiment, and WGTR's extension, a try. I probably won't have time for it until the weekend, though.