DLO-138 OScope

Nice

I see stm32duino.com gets a mention on the github main page, and Stevestrong’s fast TFT lib also gets a mention here…
https://github.com/ardyesp/DLO-138/tree … src/TFTLib

This is sure interesting take on things! That being said, I wonder, does anyone moves things to F4xx already? Because russian-speaking osci-making community are doing that, they are taking the lead!
F407, for example. There are chinese boards with that (I have one). Yes, those are not almost-free as BluePills, but, I understand that hardware is much much more capable and non-restricting

The question is what brings the F407 more than F103 can offer.
If the display update rate is “acceptable” for the user, I see not reason why to go for F407 (although I am aware of all advantages that it would bring).

Btw, @willfly1, congrats, simple and therefore cool look! I like very much the design!

My “not-so-educated guess” would be usage of better internal ADCs, working in tandem (can be done on beefy versions of F303 too, four ADCs. Example: UCE-DSO-210 by uCore). Probably amount of RAM. Moving display away from SPI.

The F4 versions have much faster clock speeds so FFT and display issues will be a lesser problem.
Also have a loooot more RAM = bigger sample buffer.
And It enables the use of an external faster ADC, maybe on the 50MSPS range…

I’m assembling some PCB adapter boards with a F429 and F746 to do some experiments…

It would be great to replace the manual gain switches (and gain pins) with menus and MCP6S92’s
Might have a go on this

P.S. BTW is there a video with this setup/code? how many FPS?

Dual 1Msps ADc readings is no problem for F103, the question is whether there is need for more. If yes, then it is F407 a clear choice.
Otherwise the TFT update, I can tell you, is very fast with the current lib (8 bit parallel, not SPI). Check it out here.
As I told, if there is no speciality requested (like FFT or higher sps), I am convinced that F103 is still a good choice.

But this does not mean that I will not test it with my F407 board

As far as I know, thing that “I don’t need higher bandwidth, cause I look at low frequency signals” is common misconception, for digital oscilloscopes. More samples per second means more real information taken about signal (and not, say, constructing signal from 4 points). So, if we want to see some bad spikes in not so high frequency main signal – we need as much points digitized as possible. More professionals than me – please correct if I said not completely correct.
P.S.: every DSO’s dream is to became like analog one (but with all that superb servicing features that digitals has)

stevestrong wrote:Dual 1Msps ADc readings is no problem for F103, the question is whether there is need for more. If yes, then it is F407 a clear choice.
Otherwise the TFT update, I can tell you, is very fast with the current lib (8 bit parallel, not SPI). Check it out here.
As I told, if there is no speciality requested (like FFT or higher sps), I am convinced that F103 is still a good choice.

But this does not mean that I will not test it with my F407 board

rexnanet wrote:
P.S. BTW is there a video with this setup/code? how many FPS?

willfly1 wrote:rexnanet wrote:
P.S. BTW is there a video with this setup/code? how many FPS?

Question to willfly1: what about adopting Your software do DSO-150? I understand, it is much like DSO-138, but with digital switches (74HC4051)?
Here:
http://www.jyetech.com/Products/LcdScope/e150.php (I love that “band-witch” part in first line… )
http://www.jyetech.com/Products/LcdScop … _Shell.pdf

ThunderOwl wrote:Question to willfly1: what about adopting Your software do DSO-150? I understand, it is much like DSO-138, but with digital switches (74HC4051)?
Here:
http://www.jyetech.com/Products/LcdScope/e150.php (I love that “band-witch” part in first line… )
http://www.jyetech.com/Products/LcdScop … _Shell.pdf

willfly1, could you tell please, what exactly display did you use? Controller, and size? Thank You.

ThunderOwl wrote:willfly1, could you tell please, what exactly display did you use? Controller, and size? Thank You.

the DLO-138 OScope with SPI Display (ILI9341 2.8″)
at Youtube:

https://youtu.be/qCSDx5EP6Vw

Hi willfly1,

I have tested your program a little bit with the SPI display:

good design, nearly all functions you need and also quick on the SPI display! Super !

Only the rotary encoder is – I think – better integrated in the 10$ O-Scope:

You can select there the “Function” ( timeBase, Offset,…) with the encoder, then switch with button of the encoder to “Parameters” and change the parameters with the same encoder (z.B 20,50,100µs for e.g. timeBase).

It’s quicker with the encoder and you can go to the other functions on the left or right site by turning cw or ccw, you can go in Your SW with the button only ccw.
For instance, if you have select “AUTO”, you have to switch about 10 time to come to the timebase-field.

I have modified the code a little bit and integrate Touch-functionality (URTOUCH-Lib) and test it with frequency input for DDS AD9851:

the first picture shows the Touch Panel for set frequency, the second the selected frequency from AD9851:

DLO138-Set-Frequency-AD9851.JPG (39.58 KiB) Viewed 1381 times

mausi_mick wrote:I have modified the code a little bit and integrate Touch-functionality (URTOUCH-Lib) and test it with frequency input for DDS AD9851:

the first picture shows the Touch Panel for set frequency, the second the selected frequency from AD9851:

DLO138-Set-Frequency-AD9851.JPG

DLO138-Show-Frequency_AD9851.JPG

I have aligned the Pin-Mapping for maple mini for my 10$ O-Scope and the DLO-138.
So I can test both variants.
The input area on the display for the frequency is only provisionally for the test.

Question please, is ADC sampling (its coding, theoretical numbers achieved) different in “STM-O-Scope” and this new “DLO-138-Scope”?

From what I saw on DSO-138 firmware, the sampling code is hidden in a pre-compiled lib so I don’t know how they sample the signals.
But on DLO-138 I still haven’t checked that, is it the same block as on DSO-138?