eevBLAB 91 - Why Are Fluke Meters So EXPENSIVE?

[Martin72]

Did you ever give away your brymen for external calibration ?
I did, few weeks ago after buying.
They (Cal-Lab) must do some adjustments for reaching the specs although the meter was new.
At work, we got some real old fluke 87, one of them is a Fluke 87 model ONE.
It is in the calibration circle for decades and musn´t adjusted until now.
Always in it´s specs.
That separate the boys from the men.

[Shock]

I'm not an expert but Brymens have been around a while, too, and the components inside Brymens are pretty much the same components as inside Flukes.

If Brymens were going out of spec then people would have noticed by now.

We already have one out of spec and it's been a day!
Joking, but it all depends where Brymen gets it's parts from.

I like the Brymen 869s. Not sure about the others though. I'll stick with "likely" for now and if proven wrong will be good for Fluke to have competition and make the Fluke 189II and 189 MAX.

[EEVblog]

I'm not an expert but Brymens have been around a while, too, and the components inside Brymens are pretty much the same components as inside Flukes.

If Brymens were going out of spec then people would have noticed by now.

We already have one out of spec and it's been a day!
Joking, but it all depends where Brymen gets it's parts from.

I like the Brymen 869s. Not sure about the others though. I'll stick with "likely" for now and if proven wrong will be good for Fluke to have competition and make the Fluke 189II and 189 MAX.

For those interested, as a large Brymen seller, there is certainly a not insignificant failure/return rate with them. I should have kept proper numbers on this, but I'd estimate a 0.1 to 0.2% failure rate. None of them have ever been reported as drifting or beign slightly out of cal, it's always some other failure mode. IIRC about three main chip failures.

[mansaxel]

For those interested, as a large Brymen seller, there is certainly a not insignificant failure/return rate with them. I should have kept proper numbers on this, but I'd estimate a 0.1 to 0.2% failure rate. None of them have ever been reported as drifting or beign slightly out of cal, it's always some other failure mode. IIRC about three main chip failures.

This is where a good reseller adds value; they can get some insights into product reliability where numbers matter; turning anecdotes into fact, or debunking them. 

This is data that the manufacturer might want to keep under wraps or maybe (in the case the product has a hard-to-utilise warranty, meaning it gets scrapped) does not have. The good resellers are transparent about what they learn as well.
 

To get to a guesstimated failure rate describable in tenths of a percent, one typically needs to have sold about 5000 of something, per model. Good on ya!

[Fungus]

For those interested, as a large Brymen seller, there is certainly a not insignificant failure/return rate with them. I should have kept proper numbers on this, but I'd estimate a 0.1 to 0.2% failure rate. None of them have ever been reported as drifting or beign slightly out of cal, it's always some other failure mode. IIRC about three main chip failures.

Were they DOA or did they take time to fail?

PS: Do you still have the three Brymens you reviewed in video #432 ?

[EEVblog]

For those interested, as a large Brymen seller, there is certainly a not insignificant failure/return rate with them. I should have kept proper numbers on this, but I'd estimate a 0.1 to 0.2% failure rate. None of them have ever been reported as drifting or beign slightly out of cal, it's always some other failure mode. IIRC about three main chip failures.

Were they DOA or did they take time to fail?
PS: Do you still have the three Brymens you reviewed in video #432 ?

Most took time to fail, although there have been a couple of DOA or Dodgy On Arrival.
Should still have those meters somewhere.

[GuidoK]

Did you ever give away your brymen for external calibration ?
I did, few weeks ago after buying.
They (Cal-Lab) must do some adjustments for reaching the specs although the meter was new.
At work, we got some real old fluke 87, one of them is a Fluke 87 model ONE.
It is in the calibration circle for decades and musn´t adjusted until now.
Always in it´s specs.
That separate the boys from the men.

I have my bm869s calibrated annually.
It always meets its specs, but even then, its a choice whether or not you also have it aligned.
Those are 2 different aspects.
Which model of yours had to be aligned and by how much on which value?

BTW I sometimes also doubt the calibration labs, although they are accredited by the national measuring institute and of course have very nice equipment etc etc.
There are times when I put the calibration reports next to eachother, and the first year a lot of values are adjusted upwards for a certain amont, and the next year, those same values are adjusted down with virtually the same amount that they were previously adjusted upwards. But they are small amounts, within the factory accuracy range.
Probably next year I'll try welectron. (I'm now using another lab in the netherlands.)
First investigate what exactly is the difference between a DAKKS calibration and an ISO17025 calibration....

I can imagine that a fluke might be cheaper to calibrate, as every lab can do them (they usually have both calibrators and software from fluke, and with the software some meters can virtually be calibrated automatically), and finding a lab that can do fluke's is certainly easier (however the brymen calibration protocol can be found online and any real lab should know how to use that)
However Welectron offers an iso17025 calibration for €58 ex vat. That's pretty cheap.

[Martin72]

Which model of yours had to be aligned and by how much on which value?

I gave my 869s back to welectron where I´ve bought it from, they´d send it away for calibration for a fixed price.
On which ranges I must have a look at the calibration report.

It always meets its specs, but even then, its a choice whether or not you also have it aligned.

Sure you have the choice to let the deviation as it is - as a private person.
Me, I got no choice as they did it "automatically" - When it´s cost not more, and it didn´t cost no more, my bonus..
At work, our external calibration service handle it in another way.
They test it and when it "fails", it fails, no re-adjustments will be done.
When I buy a new meter, I expect to have it in its own specified ranges, at least for a year or longer.
Therefore it was a suprise to me, as the meter came back with the protocol and remarks.
I would expect that when buying something from Uni-T, but not from Brymen.

BTW I sometimes also doubt the calibration labs, although they are accredited by the national measuring institute and of course have very nice equipment etc etc.

No need to have a doubt about it...
When it´s an accredited lab, theyr calibration references are above the ISO standard vulgo Dakks, which makes sense.

First investigate what exactly is the difference between a DAKKS calibration and an ISO17025 calibration....

Have fun...
The only thing I know is that it´s the worldwide reference standard, accepted from everyone including MIL purposes.

[GuidoK]

So did you already take a look at the calibration report on which ranges your meter failed?

tbh I think it's strange that at your workplace they dont realign the meters if they fall out of spec.
The realignment procedure is part of the meter's featureset and supported by the manufacturer.

That said, I sometimes have my doubt at these procedures, or the capabilities of calibration labs when I see multiple times in a row that the one year the meter gets adjusted a few µV up and the next year it gets adjusted virtually the same amount of µV down again and the year following it gets adjusted up again.
And not only with meters, I also have a precision shunt from Isabellenhütte on which I have annually calibrated at 20amps and also there I see fluctuations higher than I expected. But maybe it's just me.
I plan to switch calibration labs and see if this trend continues and is normal if I can find a lab that can do both within desired parameters.

[Muttley Snickers]

Free shipping!   

[Ed.Kloonk]

Free shipping!   

Chuck in a few spare fuses and we might have a deal.

[Scherms]

Expensive for some, maybe...

I bought an 'as new' but damaged Fluke 88v a while back that had an Eprom Error from GSM phone frequency exposure and it was sold dead 'for parts'...



I paid just under $50 US for this 88v and promptly sent it into Fluke Celemetrix in Sydney for the fixed rate $185 AUD repair. What I got back was a new version 11 (GSM proof) main board + calibration (with certificate), new holster, port covers, battery and CDRom. An almost new and complete Fluke 88v for $230 AUD, a saving of $788 AUD... not bad!

https://triplepoint.com.au/product/fluke-88v-deluxe-automotive-multimeter-2/

PS: Dave's discovery of a new 'free' mod of the ad737 RMS controller chip to force RMS function on this averaging unit makes my 'smart' purchase 88v now possibly as accurate as the 87v " ... chicken dinner"!



https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-1448-convert-a-fluke-77-iv-to-true-rms-for-10-cents/msg3936022/#msg3936022







 

[EEVblog]

Expensive for some, maybe...
I bought an 'as new' but damaged Fluke 88v a while back that had an Eprom Error from GSM phone frequency exposure and it was sold dead 'for parts'...
I paid just under $50 US for this 88v and promptly sent it into Fluke Celemetrix in Sydney for the fixed rate $185 AUD repair. What I got back was a new version 11 (GSM proof) main board + calibration (with certificate), new holster, port covers, battery and CDRom.

Crazy cheap!

[nightfire]

No need to have a doubt about it...
When it´s an accredited lab, theyr calibration references are above the ISO standard vulgo Dakks, which makes sense.

First investigate what exactly is the difference between a DAKKS calibration and an ISO17025 calibration....

Have fun...
The only thing I know is that it´s the worldwide reference standard, accepted from everyone including MIL purposes.

The ISO cal. ist basically a calibration to the standards the lab uses- DAKKS cal. is traceable (with papertrail) to some national standards, therefore it should have a better guaranteed precision and reproduceability between different labs.
IMHO only important when doing some very precise work or in fields where customers demand some crazy long papertrail for everything...

[james_s]

I have 7 Flukes, 8020, 8022, 2x 8060, 10, 123, 28. They don't let you down. Simple as that. I also have 2 off Gossen MetraHit (14 and 25), and a hp 973a. They don't let you down either.

That's pretty much what it comes down to. Fluke meters are cheap! Amortized over the ~12 years or so I've had my Fluke 87-III the cost was peanuts, I use it almost every day. I've dropped it on the floor, knocked it off ladders and accidentally probed 240VAC on the resistance range. It still looks and works like new, I trust it and never feel I have to question what it tells me. That's an absolute bargain in my mind.

[Cerebus]

I've dropped it on the floor, knocked it off ladders and accidentally probed 240VAC on the resistance range.

So basically you're saying "Don't lend James your multimeter.". 

[Ed.Kloonk]

I've dropped it on the floor, knocked it off ladders and accidentally probed 240VAC on the resistance range.

So basically you're saying "Don't lend James your multimeter.". 

Never let anyone borrow your wife or your tools...

[james_s]

So basically you're saying "Don't lend James your multimeter.". 

I wouldn't ask to borrow someone's expensive meter. It isn't a bench meter though, it's an industrial handheld and it gets used in the field as it was designed to be used. I don't abuse it intentionally but stuff happens.