This chapter focuses on setting the context of what a university electronics laboratory bench looks like, including the various challenges that academics face in running their lab programs. I will examine some of the creative solutions which have been used to-date in order to maintain continuity in teaching and evaluate the (on-paper) Keysight Smart Bench Essentials offering for its features and merits. Finally, I will document some of the deviations I have had to make from my original RoadTest proposal due to some misunderstandings, present-day feature limitations and licensing issues.
The University Lab Bench
If you’re an engineer, you will probably have some fond memories of the university lab bench. After all, for many people, this is where their first true taste of electronics happened. For all the successes, there were likely plenty of frustrations and broken parts littering the path. This environment is not a particularly kind one, with equipment abuse being rampant as a result of ignorance, curiosity or even maliciousness. Likewise, spending on these labs tends to be rather limited, as the one room could have anywhere up to thirty sets of equipment, so costs to outfit the benches quickly add up. Over the years, the number of technical staff supporting these laboratories have steadily dwindled, and academics are slowly being expected to take over some of those formerly technical roles.
As a result, you can already imagine what a university lab bench might look like. Frequently, it is a disjoint mixture of heterogeneous entry-level pieces of test equipment with no integration whatsoever, bought whenever an opportunity comes around. User interfaces and displays are all mixed and students may spend quite a bit of time familiarising themselves with how to use the equipment. Even if some pieces of equipment on the bench have the ability to be remotely programmed, frequently they sit on the bench connected to just power and the device under test. Students furiously twiddle knobs and pencil down results, in a world where automation reigns supreme. Vendor software is rarely anything spectacular, as sometimes the less mainstream brands make their way into this segment, so it may not seem like they’re missing out on much. But it frustrates me greatly to see this as students are missing out on the fun – they’re merely doing the grunt work of building a bode plot step-by-step when that is not the way it should be done!
But this situation is understandable. Where there isn’t the money to refresh the bench with the latest mainstream mid-level equipment and there is the constant risk of abuse, the mix of older equipment is expected. Where academics have to take care of the lab, without the support and blessing of the technical staff and IT department, networking instruments and getting software deployed across a fleet of computers becomes near-impossible. The status-quo is a result of a least-resistance approach, but imagine what it could be given the right mix of opportunities? The pandemic shone a spotlight on the situation as academics needed to rapidly convert in-person labs to remote-learning delivery and the equipment often wasn’t ready or optimal.
Remote Learning Compromises
For the most part, COVID-19 seemingly came out of nowhere and left many academics scrambling to find remote ways to deliver their laboratory course component. While eLearning hybrid approaches have been well-established for lectures, there is an inherent difficulty to converting a practical lesson into something which can be remotely delivered as students cannot be expected to have their own test equipment or components.
From this, it seems a number of common compromises were instituted to try and bridge this gap. One of which was for a demonstrator to use higher-end test equipment which have competent remote front-panel interfaces which can be displayed on a computer or have a display output which can similarly be digitised onto a PC for sharing in a live video-conference-delivered class or via recorded video. In the worst case, academics may have to resort to pointing smartphone cameras or webcams at instruments, which frequently results in a poor view. The downside, obviously, is that the class is not hands-on and becomes more of a spectator event. Students lack hands-on experience, but this is a necessary compromise.
In other instances, I’ve witnessed courses being rewritten at short notice to accommodate take-home kits of components and test equipment “of last resort” that can be mailed out. This is a term that I have coined, which refers to very low-cost devices that provide only the most basic of test and measurement capabilities. Such devices are frequently USB connected and have little in the way of isolation, safety or accuracy specifications. They frequently have limited bandwidth capabilities, have limited bit-depth resolution and often have no anti-aliasing filters which can lead to confusing and misleading results. They also rarely tolerate abuse without resulting in damage and may not be robust to the regular student accident. However, these novelty devices often are the only devices which can be found at a sufficiently low price point that they can be provided to students to perform practical work at home. This approach does have the benefit of retaining the hands-on approach, but also means that students are not benefiting from having time on the bench with proper equipment. Some students may find this experience even more frustrating than normal because of test equipment limitations.
Where all-else-fails, the final approach seems to emphasise the use of simulations in place of practical experiments. In some cases, simulations augment the limited practicals that are delivered, but simulations in general can be somewhat difficult to engage students in, especially when they do not take into account some of the non-idealities of components that separate theory from practice. The amount of time spent setting up and perfecting simulations can be frustrating.
Keysight Smart Bench Essentials as the Answer?
When I read the Keysight Smart Bench Essentials FAQ, it seemed like they had a solution to a number of these difficulties. Their Smart Bench Essentials combine a new line of “EDU” instruments which are very competitively priced, have competent specifications, quality and reliability one would expect from Keysight branded instruments, but also integrate BenchVue licenses allowing for the use of PathWave BenchVue software to integrate, manage and allow for cloud-based remote-learning sessions to be undertaken. Their emphasis on connected-bench really resonated with me, which is why I was eager to undertake this RoadTest, having been familiar with some Keysight equipment and the older Keysight BenchVue Platform that served to connect and control the equipment.
The Smart Bench Essentials series currently comprises the following instruments across four categories:
- Oscilloscope – EDUX1052A (2ch, 50MHz, 1GSa/s, 200kpts, I2C/UART decode) or EDUX1052G (adds Waveform Generator)
- Function Generator – EDU33211A (20MHz, 1ch, 16-bit, 1Mpts/wfm arb, 8Mpts total) or EDU33212A (adds 1ch)
- Power Supply – EDU36311A (3ch, 6V/5A + 2x30V/1A, 90W, OVP/OCP/OTP)
- Digital Multimeter – EDU34450A (5.5-digit, dual-display, 110 rdgs/s, 5kpts memory)
All instruments feature a “signature” 7” LCD display for the user interface and USB-Host port up-front, with USB and Ethernet connectivity around the rear for maximum flexibility in connectivity options.
With regards to the challenges, the pricing certainly makes refreshing the bench a bit more affordable, while the consistency of appearance and dark theming of the instruments provides an attractive visual upgrade as well. While the instruments are sold separately and it is possible to do a phased roll-out one instrument at a time, the difference in form factor between traditional instruments and the Smart Bench Essentials line may mean that upgrading everything at once makes better sense. That being said, if more capability is desired, the non-EDU models can be “mixed-in” given the same form-factor caveats as many come with BenchVue-included licenses. However, it should be noted that these instruments are only supported by PathWave BenchVue individual apps, not the older Keysight BenchVue Platform, so users will need to migrate up to PathWave to ensure integration.
While all Smart Bench Essentials instruments are remotely programmable and feature remote front-panel capabilities, the use of the PathWave Lab Operations for Remote Learning option would provide secure remote instrument access, collaboration, administration and integration with learning management systems which should simplify the task of turning a lab bench into a remote cloud-based one.
While this offering, in itself, does not resolve potential IT resourcing or deployment issues nor the need for careful redesign of teaching programs to suit the constraints of remote labs, having the infrastructure and equipment ready for the challenge can certainly reduce headaches. Likewise, having consistent hardware and software from a single vendor may ease installation and support issues while improving user experience for all.
Review Proposal Deviations
As proposed, my RoadTest would have featured an evaluation of elements of Keysight’s BenchVue Platform including BenchVue Mobile. However, as the Smart Bench Essentials is not supported by Keysight BenchVue Platform and is only supported with the newer PathWave BenchVue Individual Apps, evaluation of BenchVue Mobile did not make sense.
Furthermore, the items did not include licensing of the Lab Operations for Remote Learning option which I proposed to review. The reason for the confusion boils down to imprecise language used which I interpreted to mean that such licenses were included as part of the Smart Bench Essentials package, when they are merely an option that were not included.
Finally, there were a number of experiments that were to involve TestFlow automation. However, as the new PathWave BenchVue Individual Apps have not yet gained TestFlow integration and TestFlow is currently only a part of the older Keysight BenchVue Platform, only a simple demonstration of TestFlow was undertaken with the remainder of automation performed in a more traditional code-based way using pyvisa.
My original review would not have focused on instrument performance in any great way, however, in waiting for the clarifications necessary for the review and to compensate for the changed review structure, I decided to perform tests on instrument performance nevertheless and the results are quite eye-opening.
The two-month timeframe to evaluate the kit was a bit on the short side given the number of parts and the various experiments that could be performed, however, I hope you enjoy a few slightly more quirky experiments I’ve done, especially with the function generator.
Conclusion
The university lab bench is an unforgiving environment where many gain their first hands-on experience with electronics. It is often a space where various accidents happen, equipment gets abused inadvertently or sabotaged and thus is rarely ever fitted out with anything but a disjoint heterogeneous mix of entry-level equipment, frequently without any use of remote-control automation. The environment is highly cost-sensitive given the number of sets of equipment that are deployed and key challenges include the reduction in technical support staff and IT staff willingness to support connectivity of instruments. Academics frequently have to advocate for better arrangements, or else, the status quo is maintained.
The COVID-19 pandemic had resulted in a panic to find ways to deliver the laboratory component of electronics courses remotely. This included filmed or live demonstrations performed by demonstrators on higher-end equipment with competent remote front-panel capabilities or display outputs which could be captured. In desperation, cameras could also be pointed at instruments, although the experience is poor. Such demonstrations turn the practical component into a spectator event, leaving students without hands-on experience. Other courses have resorted to mail-out component kits and “instruments of last resort” which are often USB-connected, fragile, with limited capabilities, safety, sample rate, resolution and accuracy. While they fulfil the key constraint of price, students lack experience with real test equipment and may find frustration with the limitations and confusing results that may sometimes appear. Finally, a simulation approach has often been taken in-conjunction with the above, however, they are rarely engaging and often do not show the effects of non-idealities in components which separate theory from practice.
The Keysight Smart Bench Essentials seem to target some of these pain-points by offering a new line of EDU instruments which are very competitively priced, have competent specifications, quality and reliability one would expect from Keysight branded instruments, but also integrate BenchVue licenses allowing for the use of PathWave BenchVue software to integrate, manage and allow for cloud-based remote-learning sessions to be undertaken (although some of the latter features require additional licensing). The line consists of oscilloscopes (EDUX1052A, EDUX1052G), function generators (EDU33211A, EDU33212A), power supply (EDU36311A) and digital multimeter (EDU34450A) which all have a consistent UI, “signature” 7” LCD display, USB-host port on the front, USB and Ethernet connectivity on the rear for a truly “connected” bench. However, their new form factor does pose challenges with integrating the new equipment with more traditional devices.
This RoadTest review deviates from my proposal due to architectural differences between PathWave BenchVue Individual Apps (which support the Smart Bench Essentials) and Keysight BenchVue Platform (its predecessor), the lack of licensing for Lab Operations for Remote Learning and limited TestFlow integration at this time. In its place, I have decided to evaluate instrument performance and make use of more traditional code-based automation approaches using pyvisa. I have also conducted some rather interesting and quirky experiments, especially with the function generator, which I hope you will enjoy.
---
This post is part of the Keysight Smart Bench Essentials RoadTest Review.
Direct links to detailed blogs:
- Keysight SBE In-Depth – Ch1: The Need for Smarter Benches?
- Keysight SBE In-Depth – Ch2: Unboxing^4 & Design Features
- Keysight SBE In-Depth – Ch3: Initial Setup & Documentation
- Keysight SBE In-Depth – Ch4: On-the-Bench User Experience
- Keysight SBE In-Depth – Ch5: Connected to the LAN
- Keysight SBE In-Depth – Ch6: PathWave BenchVue Oscilloscope, Power Supply, Digital Multimeter & Function Generator
- Keysight SBE In-Depth – Ch7: Keysight BenchVue Test Flow Automation
- Keysight SBE In-Depth – Ch8: Instrument Performance Tests
- Keysight SBE In-Depth – Ch9: Peeking Under the Covers
