nrf
Junior Member level 1
Hello everyone,
What I am getting out of the oscilloscope is a pulse whose falling edge is affected by a lot of jitter. The pulse even has extra little pulses at the end, syntom of noise. Which is the best way to estimate how wide the pulse really is?
1. Averaging with the oscilloscope and take the width at 50% level?
2. Through a PC, just take the very first falling edge of the pulse and ignore the extra pulses (simply truncating them)
3. Some extra processing of the raw data that I can get out of the PC?
I am also interested in understanding from a theoretical/statistical point of view the effect of the different techniques, but I have not found yet a satisfying paper describing that. Can you suggest something to read that covers this subject?
What I am getting out of the oscilloscope is a pulse whose falling edge is affected by a lot of jitter. The pulse even has extra little pulses at the end, syntom of noise. Which is the best way to estimate how wide the pulse really is?
1. Averaging with the oscilloscope and take the width at 50% level?
2. Through a PC, just take the very first falling edge of the pulse and ignore the extra pulses (simply truncating them)
3. Some extra processing of the raw data that I can get out of the PC?
I am also interested in understanding from a theoretical/statistical point of view the effect of the different techniques, but I have not found yet a satisfying paper describing that. Can you suggest something to read that covers this subject?