The only think I can think of that is "special" about
Tek probes is the 1X/10X switch grounds the small ring
around the BNC connector, so that the unit will switch
and the appropriate 1x/10x lamps will light
automatically. Other good quality probes rated to the
response of the scopes work fine other than that
feature.
--- Tony Duell <ard_at_p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Tony Duell wrote:
> >
> > > RM-xxx is the Rack Mount version of the xxx. So
> the RM503 is a rackmount
> > > 503 (IIRC, that one doesn't take plug-ins at
> all), the RM561 is a
> > > rackmount 561 (later, smaller 500 series, taking
> plug-ins for both X and
> > > Y).
> >
> > Right, I knew about the RM-xxx meaning rackmount,
> but I wondered if the
> > 500 series might have shared a common design.
>
> Some did. The 53x, 54x, and (most of) 55x have
> similarities in mechanical
> construciton (and circuitry to some extent). The 53x
> were the
> low-bandwidth models and the 55x dual beam, of
> course. All took the same
> plug-ins.
>
> The 58x (100MHz bandwidth, with a beautiful CRT with
> distributed
> deflection plates and a built-in delay line) were
> similar but took
> different, higher-bandwidth plug-ins. You could use
> the plug-ins from the
> 53x, etc if you had a type 81 adpater between the
> plug-in and the 'scope.
>
> The above series had plug-in Y preamplifiers, but in
> general the
> timebased (and X deflection system) was built into
> the 'scope. There are
> certainly 2 exceptions to that -- the 536 took 2
> 'normal' plug-ins (one
> for each of X and Y -- there was a thing called a
> type T which was a
> timebase unit) and the 555 has plug-in timebases,
> but they're special
> modules, not interchangeable with anything else. The
> only reason they
> were plug-ins was to allow access for repairs,
> really.
>
> The 56x were the odd ones. The insturments
> (non-rack-mount versions) were
> a lot smaller than the other series. The plug-ins
> were totally different,
> and all 'scopes took plug-ins for X and Y.
>
> >
> > > If the brightness control section is still good,
> is there any reason not
> > > to bypass the switch on the back of it, and just
> use an external
> > > double-pole switch in series with the mains
> input? It would at least
> > > give you a working 'scope...
> >
> > Thats kinda how I found it when I got it...except
> that the wire that was
> > used to jumper the switch had obviously gotten
> very hot. Since the wire
> > had been tack soldered across the terminals, one
> side seems to have acted
> > like a fuse. I imagine the power switch was
> probably damaged due to the
> > same problem. Oh, and I found that someone had
> installed a much higher
> > rated fuse in the scope than should have been
> installed... Needless to
> > say, there is something else that needs to be
> fixed in the 'scope too :)
>
> Hmm.. Why do idiots persist in over-rating fuses
> when they blow???
>
> OK, you've probably got a serious short somewhere in
> the PSU section. A
> smoothing capacitor if you're lucky, shorted turns
> on the transformer if
> you're not. Tekky used to claim that these
> transformers have a lifetime
> warranty, but apparently their definition of
> 'lifetime' is not the same
> as mine -- you will not get a free (or any other)
> replacement now :-(.
>
> >
> > Do you know if the 561 will require genuine
> Tektronix probes like the
> > newer 60MHz analog Teks I mentioned before?
>
> I wasn't aware _any_ Tektronix 'scopes needed
> special probes (apart from
> the plug-ins that came with integral probes). On
> later 'scopes the probes
> will do things like set the on-screen readout, but
> that doesn't apply to
> the 561.
>
> Provided the probe can match the input impedance of
> the 'scope, it will
> work fine.
>
> -tony
>
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com
Received on Fri Oct 11 2002 - 22:43:01 BST