Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'impedance analyzer'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • News
    • New Users Introduction
    • Announcements
  • Digilent Technical Forums
    • FPGA
    • Digilent Microcontroller Boards
    • Non-Digilent Microcontrollers
    • Add-on Boards
    • Scopes & Instruments
    • LabVIEW
    • Other
  • General Discussion
    • Project Vault
    • Learn
    • Suggestions & Feedback
    • Buy, Sell, Trade
    • Sales Questions
    • Off Topic
    • Educators
    • Technical Based Off-Topic Discussions

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 7 results

  1. Dear all, The impedance analyzer module for the AD2 works quite well with the Wafeform software on my Windows 10 PC. However, it would be great to be able to use the module with e.g. a python program and the SDK. Is there an example in python or c how to control the relays and gain of the module ? Regards, Rudolf Sprik
  2. gasstationwithoutpumps

    Impedance Analyzer offset bug

    In Waveforms 3.8.17 (beta), I have encountered a bug in the impedance analyzer when the offset voltage is not zero. I was measuring the impedance of 10µF capacitors with the adapter board at 100Ω, and I got perfectly fine readings when I used amplitude=1V, offset=0V. But when I switched to using amplitude=1V, offset=4V, the impedance was reported as essentially infinite (dropping down to maybe 100MΩ around 100kHz). I got this result with several different capacitors, so it is unlikely that poor connections were responsible. The short and open compensations were redone for the new offset, and seemed to be reasonable. Providing a DC offset when testing electrolytic capacitors is essential, and a DC offset is also useful for determining the voltage dependance of ceramic capacitors, so fixing this bug seems to be fairly important.
  3. gasstationwithoutpumps

    Impedance Analyzer "resistor too high!?"

    I do not understand the algorithm being used for reporting "resistor too high!?" in the impedance analyzer. It seems to pop up whenever the phase is close to 0°, which makes no sense to me. The resistor is too large when the magnitude of impedance measured is less than about 0.01 times the reference resistance—the phase isn't really a relevant parameter. A slightly more sophisticated algorithm might look at the voltages of the two measurements and report the resistance being too large or too small when the relevant voltage (across the resistor or across the DUT) gets down to only a few bits in the ADC. Speaking of voltages—shouldn't the impedance analyzer warn the user when too much current is being asked of the function generator? With a 10Ω reference resistor, the short compensation calls for 100mA/V, but the output stage of the function generator is limited to about ±35mA so even the default ±1V is too much amplitude. Detecting that the voltage measured does not match the voltage requested should not be very difficult.
  4. gasstationwithoutpumps

    Minor bug in Waveforms 3.8.2

    There is a minor bug in Waveforms 3.8.2 in the Impedance Analyzer: the metadata for probe resistance and capacitance seem to be swapped: #ProbeCapacitance: 1.04e+06 Ω #ProbeResistance: 4.3e-11 F Also, the metadata does not include the excitation (amplitude and offset). I would check the beta release of newer versions, but there doesn't seem to be a beta for the Mac OS X, just Windows and Linux.
  5. Hi, I'm trying to measure the capacitance of a sensor, and am using the impedance analyzer tool to do so. If I do not connect anything I notice it sees a 22pF parallel capacitance. Is this because the program does not automatically compensate for the internal 24pF capacitance? EDIT: I am using the Analog Discovery 2 with Waveforms 3.8.2
  6. gasstationwithoutpumps

    Suggestion for impedance analyzer

    I have a suggestion for the user interface for the impedance analyzer: remove the terminology "resistor first" or "load first" as first/second is rather meaningless in a circuit. Instead have options ch1 R+load ch2 load ch1 R+load ch2 R ch1 R ch2 load ch1 load ch2 R The third and fourth options would allow better measurements on the Analog Discovery 2, as the relevant voltages would be measured directly, rather than relying on the subtraction of two measurements. Using the difference increases the noise and does not allow increasing the gain when the voltage difference is small.
  7. gasstationwithoutpumps

    impedance analyzer questions

    Why does the impedance analyzer only allow 10Ω, 100Ω, 1kΩ, 10kΩ, 100kΩ, and 1MΩ reference resistors? I might have a precision 510Ω resistor that I want to use for a reference. Or, as happened for me today, I might want to use a 1Ω resistor as a reference (I was trying to determine the saturation current for an inductor, so I needed a large DC current, plus a small signal to measure impedance with.) I added an external transistor to provide gain from the function generator, but the 10Ω constraint meant that I couldn't raise the current much without hitting voltage limits. (I'll have to use the network analyzer and do my own fitting, rather defeating the advantage of the impedance analyzer) I found the impedance analyzer a bit non-intuitive to use and almost completely undocumented. It is a bit annoying that compensation needs to be redone any time the sweep is changed, and there there is no way to store a number of different compensation sets, switching between them as needed. I was also wondering why the impedance analyzer used a shared ground, rather than taking advantage of having differential inputs to measure the voltage across the resistor and the unknown impedance separately. Using the differential channels, one can have a larger difference in |Z| between the reference and the unknown, since you don't have to compare R with R+Z, but only with Z.