I am just warming up the siglent sdm3065X, the rigol scope and the dmm ref.plus source...
I am just warming up the siglent sdm3065X, the rigol scope and the dmm ref.plus source...Just for the sake of my own sanity, the SDM3065X, was it NIST calibrated like I had asked or not?
Official statement:
https://siglentna.com/service-and-support/calibration-certificate/
Official statement:
https://siglentna.com/service-and-support/calibration-certificate/"We swear on the Bible that our calibration is good! (since we're not Christians we can say whatever we want )"
"Oh, actually, it's soooo goood that it's not only good on delivery, but also for up to 180 days".
"Hmm, nevermind 180 days - 18 months sounds even better! (it's still mostly BS but now we can sell even super-old crap for pennies that nobody wants to buy, so it collects the dust in the warehouse)."
Such are the realities of worldwide distribution chains or is that too complex to get your head around.
Such are the realities of worldwide distribution chains or is that too complex to get your head around.Wouldn't it be easier to perform calibration before sending out units to the end users?
Most places which care about calibration will not accept any manufacturer's calibration anyway because who knows what happens to the unit during transport, storage, handling, etc, and will want to do a proper calibration anyway - and at some place which is independent of manufacturer. And for the rest of the buying public it doesn't matter anyway, so manufacturer can write whatever.
At the end of the day cars to undergo a pre-delivery inspections, and some of the scope cost in the same ballpark as cars - so why not?
To do so would mean every reseller worldwide would require a Cal lab.
Dunno what other brands do but every Siglent unit Cal sheet specifies the factory calibration equipment used, the model and SN# and its Cal expiry date.
Is that not enough to convey accurate calibration that meets datasheet spec ?
Every end seller is different and may not do PD checks, but we do.
To do so would mean every reseller worldwide would require a Cal lab.Or have a contract with one.
Dunno what other brands do but every Siglent unit Cal sheet specifies the factory calibration equipment used, the model and SN# and its Cal expiry date.
Is that not enough to convey accurate calibration that meets datasheet spec ?It doesn't guarantee that nothing happens to it between factory cal and actual delivery to the end user. And you should know better than most how shipping goes sometimes.
Every end seller is different and may not do PD checks, but we do.If I would be the manufacturer I would require resellers to do it.
Because I do care that my customers get what I advertise.
Here in Canada we have an official Rigol rep which does all of this, but to my knowledge there is no Siglent rep in the country at all.
To add additional cost and delay to equipment supply ?
Don't have such issue here, however I trust border Customs far less.
OTOH I have a 26.5 GHz VNA to deliver 1500km away which I will be doing in person where in some effort to minimise risk, airline baggage handlers are the only unknown.
Of any/all brands ?
Fail to see advantage of such when gear has been tested to remain within spec for a considerable period post manufacture.
So do we however we have no reason to distrust Siglent Cal anymore than a Cal from any other TE producer.
You need update your knowledge.
From the US 'Partners' map:
Canada
ACA TMetrix
800-665-7301
www.tmetrix.com
info@tmetrix.com
RCC Electronics
800-668-6053
www.rcce.com
sales@rcce.com
Techno-Test
450-681-5777
www.Techno-Test.com
info@techno-test.com
What you linked are resellers, not representatives.
Then Siglent NA in Ohio are your reps.
Just for the sake of my own sanity, the SDM3065X, was it NIST calibrated like I had asked or not?
i see tea'ism comes to the party now, after siglenism... find Dave's video in the early age... DSO is not for Vdc accuracy... why this has to happen so many times? why?
Then Siglent NA in Ohio are your reps.Now you see the problem. Apparently Siglent is not interested in our market enough, unlike Rigol.
Agreed. A DMM is the wrong tool to measure oscilloscope accuracy anyway. For that you need a calibrated signal (AC) source which can also output tens to several hundred Volts.
It seems pointless to measure "AC accuracy" on a 'scope. If the DC accuracy is good then "AC accuracy" is down to the user settings.
On a DMM it makes sense because they have TRMS converter chips inside them and they don't work the same way oscilloscopes do.
i see tea'ism comes to the party now, after siglenism... find Dave's video in the early age... DSO is not for Vdc accuracy... why this has to happen so many times? why?
i see tea'ism comes to the party now, after siglenism... find Dave's video in the early age... DSO is not for Vdc accuracy... why this has to happen so many times? why?The selling point of 12bit DSOs is that they're more accurate than 8 bit DSOs. IIRC, Rigol marketing said 60%. So, it seemed to me that testing the accuracy would be interesting. I sought to determine if the DSO was truly accurate or just had improved dynamic range.