### Network

# turn your expensive oscilloscope into a $5 clock R #### redbelly Jan 1, 1970 0$10,000.00 computer? Are you interested in a used bridge, cheap?

.. . . conveniently located near downtown Minneapolis . . .

Mark

N

Jan 1, 1970
0
D

Jan 1, 1970
0
J

#### Jan Panteltje

Jan 1, 1970
0
Our expensive scopes already have time-of-day clocks.
Can't you just tie a long rope on the oscilloscope and make a pendulum
out of it?

No need for that, it orbits the sun once a year, all by itself.

J

#### John Larkin

Jan 1, 1970
0
Can't you just tie a long rope on the oscilloscope and make a pendulum
out of it?

Maybe I can get it to sweep exactly once per day.

John

C

#### CBFalconer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Don said:
Can't you just tie a long rope on the oscilloscope and make a
pendulum out of it?

Good idea. That requires a display module, and a sensor to detect
the passage of the scope. You also need some sort of power to
overcome the frictional etc. losses in the pendulum. I suspect the
PIC coding will be more complex. It will probably also need an
accurate oscillator to detect heat, atmospheric etc. influence on
the pendulum and to apply corrections.

D

#### David L. Jones

Jan 1, 1970
0
Neat.

Could one make the 4th "unused" voltage level something out of range
of the display, so that the extra lines are not visible?

Some scopes have a Z-axis intensity/blanking input which could
probably be used for that.

Dave.

V

Jan 1, 1970
0
BrunoG said:
Hi,

Here is my suggestion to turn your oscilloscope into a clock with a PIC a 4
resistors :
http://www.micro-examples.com/public/microex-navig/doc/082-pic-oscillo-clock

There is one thing that I didn't understand: are you guys have terribly
nothing to do?

If you show a TV picture using an oscilloscope, could it be a way around
the TV tax in some countries?

DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant
http://www.abvolt.com

M

#### Michael R. Kesti

Jan 1, 1970
0
There is one thing that I didn't understand: are you guys have terribly
nothing to do?

Have you never created designs just for the joy of doing so?
If you show a TV picture using an oscilloscope, could it be a way around
the TV tax in some countries?

I suspect it is the signal received that is taxed rather than the receiver.

G

#### Guy Macon

Jan 1, 1970
0
David said:
The entire image needs to move slowly around on the screen randomly to
prevent screen burn-in.

Many years ago I was the test equipment repair technician at Perkin
Elmer Wangco division, which had several hundred Tektronix 465B scopes.
We had this one scope that had a hard-to-find problem in the trigger
circuit. Using that scope, I ran a test: I removed the bezel, put
the scope in x-y mode with inputs grounded (thus creating a single
dot that doesn't move), placed the dot in a corner of the screen
that the bezel normally covered, turned the intensity all the way
up, and left it that way for six months. No burn in visible. No
spot visible when turned off, no change in intensity when bright or
dim traces crossed the spot.

That particular lab required walking to the back wall in the dark
to reach the light switches. That 465B put out just enough light
to stop from tripping over things. You could say that I turned
an expensive oscilloscope into a \$3 night-light...

N

#### Nobody

Jan 1, 1970
0
If you show a TV picture using an oscilloscope, could it be a way around
the TV tax in some countries?

Nope; at least, not in the UK. If you receive a TV broadcast (whether by
radio, cable, internet[1], etc), you are required to pay the licence fee.

If you have a normal TV set, but only ever use it for watching DVDs (or as
a monitor for CCTV or an old home microcomputer), you don't need a
licence. OTOH, if you record broadcasts with a VCR, but don't actually
have a TV, you still need a licence.

only broadcasts. The distinction is whether the viewers all watch
concurrently, so a a streaming service where each viewer's stream starts
when that viewer connects isn't a broadcast.