Fluke 28ii battery compartment bulge normal?

[trahloc]

Hey everyone,

After watching Dave's two videos on the Fluke 28ii vs the 87v I opted for the 28ii.  The AA batteries and extra ruggedness sold me.  I might not be dropping it off any overpasses but I'm still pretty evil to my gear.  So Amazon dropped it off today and I opened it up and saw the battery compartment was bulging.  I removed it and as I unscrewed the top two screws it popped open like it was spring loaded.  The bottom half of the unit sits flush, the top half bulges, although the very top is flush near the screws.  It just looks wrong and feels wrong in the hand.  I've included a photo with a piece of paper to help show it off on camera.  I can't imagine this is normal but I thought I'd ask the community who would know better than I.

[shane_95]

I guessing no, but I not to sure. I'm new and don't know much about this kinda stuff

[G7PSK]

Looks like it's warped to me, either when removed from the mould or it's got hot somewhere in transit or storage.

[saturation]

It doesn't look normal, ruggedized DMMs battery chambers are o ring or gasket sealed, in that pic it could not be seated correctly. 

If its just the o ring, remove it, and reclose the battery door.  Is it better or flush now?  If so inspect the O ring and insure its seated correctly.  If no change, check if the door wasn't made warped during manufacture.

[FlyingBrickyard]

As noted, that is not normal.  Mine doesn't look like that, it's completely flush as would be expected.

[shane_95]

can you contact amazon and tell them of the defect, and get your money back or a replacement sent out?

[JuiceKing]

This is not unusual. I bought one from Amazon just like that. I was about to send it back to Amazon for this reason, but when I saw another 28ii from another reseller that was exactly the same, I didn't bother returning it.

Some time later, I had to send my 28ii to Fluke for repair of a cracked display. (It spontaneously developed the crack in a corner with no provocation by me...never dropped, etc. Weird.) Fluke fixed it without a fuss or charge and returned it to me with the back still bulging out. They said that they replaced the entire case, so there you go.

I like the 28ii very much but to tell you the truth, the 87V would have been a better choice. The 28ii is needlessly overbuilt and bulky for benchtop and while good, is noticeably less responsive than the 87V for continuity testing.  The battery benefit is pretty minor IMHO. And, it's a good thing the AA batteries last a long, long time. They are a PITA to change.

- Ken

[FlyingBrickyard]

This is not unusual. I bought one from Amazon just like that. I was about to send it back to Amazon for this reason, but when I saw another 28ii from another reseller that was exactly the same, I didn't bother returning it.

EDIT:
I've had another closer look at mine, and it's not entirely flush either.  The orientation and scale of the picture (and my need of new glasses, apparently) threw me off a bit.  It doesn't look quite as severe on mine, but it is there.  I also pulled the cover off to take a look at the compartment and it's all very solid, and appears to seal in that location around the batteries themselves, not so much at the outer cover edge.

In short, yes, it's probably normal, and probably fine.  On mine it's only maybe 1/4 the thickness of the cover that doesn't sit flush at that location, but it isn't strictly flush like it is on the bottom 1/2 - 2/3 of the case.


2ND EDIT:

After having looked at it some more I think I've figured out why it's like that.  The O-ring is on the cover door, around the outer base of the battery box where it connects to the cover (the surface closest to the outside of the DMM when it's all assembled).  The door is shaped as it is to help provide and create a compressive force over the O-ring and battery compartment once the back is screwed on tight.  If it were absolutely flush I believe it would be harder for it to seal properly because there would be a large span without any arched structure above to help apply spring-like load. 

In short, it appears to be built a bit like a loaded bridge positioned over top of an O-ring seal.

The 28ii is needlessly overbuilt and bulky for benchtop and while good, is noticeably less responsive than the 87V for continuity testing.

How so?  I've not used an 87v myself, but my 28II gives me a continuity tone the instant the probes come together or they come into contact with something that allows a complete circuit.  There's no lag at all on my unit, so what makes it less responsive? 

[EEVblog]

My beat up one doesn't have that.
Does look wrong somehow.

Dave.

[FlyingBrickyard]

My beat up one doesn't have that.
Does look wrong somehow.

Dave.

If you haven't looked lately, could I trouble you to put eyes on it again just to confirm?  I was just reviewing video #64 (the 28II teardown) and it looked like there was a hint of it at the ~4:18 mark.

Still looking through the rest of it.

EDIT:  Hmm, at the 19 minute mark (meter inverted in the holster) it doesn't look like there's much of one, or it could be the light. 

[olsenn]

I have a bulge! Trust me, it's no Fluke.

[JuiceKing]

The 28ii is needlessly overbuilt and bulky for benchtop and while good, is noticeably less responsive than the 87V for continuity testing.

How so?  I've not used an 87v myself, but my 28II gives me a continuity tone the instant the probes come together or they come into contact with something that allows a complete circuit.  There's no lag at all on my unit, so what makes it less responsive?

Yes, the 28ii is good in this regard, but the 87v is a bit better. If you try, it's easy to catch the 28ii flat-footed and miss a very fast "match strike" continuity test like the kind Dave does in his multimeter test videos. The 87v is more responsive and less likely to miss a very brief connection. Perhaps it's related to the difference in the voltage used by the ohmmeter (2.8V in 87v vs. 0.5V in the 28ii). Hardly worth mentioning, but if you are hunting for differences in performance, it comes down to subtleties like this because in all other respects I find performance of the two meters to be indistinguishable.

[FlyingBrickyard]

Gotcha, and thanks for the clarification.

As to the bulge itself, I've taken several pictures of my meter (which is similar to the one in the OP) and have sent them off in an email to Fluke support.

When/if I hear back I'll share their response.

[JuiceKing]

Gotcha, and thanks for the clarification.

As to the bulge itself, I've taken several pictures of my meter (which is similar to the one in the OP) and have sent them off in an email to Fluke support.

When/if I hear back I'll share their response.

Thanks, I'll be very curious what they say!

BTW, it's also probably worth mentioning that the 28ii service manual calls for 6 in-lb of torque for the battery door screws and 12 in-lb of torque for the case screws. Precision torque drivers aren't cheap and if you can't find an adjustable one with a range that covers 6-12 in-lbs you actually need two of them. This only matters if you care about following Fluke's instructions to retain IP67 ratings after opening up things up yourself.

[FlyingBrickyard]

Again, good to know, thanks.

Fortunately I do have such a driver available.

[trahloc]

Gotcha, and thanks for the clarification.

As to the bulge itself, I've taken several pictures of my meter (which is similar to the one in the OP) and have sent them off in an email to Fluke support.

When/if I hear back I'll share their response.

I'd love to hear what they say.

BTW, it's also probably worth mentioning that the 28ii service manual calls for 6 in-lb of torque for the battery door screws and 12 in-lb of torque for the case screws. Precision torque drivers aren't cheap and if you can't find an adjustable one with a range that covers 6-12 in-lbs you actually need two of them. This only matters if you care about following Fluke's instructions to retain IP67 ratings after opening up things up yourself.

Well I have no interest in taking the whole unit apart but seeing a bulge in a brand new product that costs a pretty penny made me curious to open the battery compartment and see if something was broken.  Although I don't have a torque driver ... yet ... it's on my wishlist.

can you contact amazon and tell them of the defect, and get your money back or a replacement sent out?

Yup, Amazon is really good about that sort of thing.

[bitshape]

My own 28II has the bulge also new out of the box.

I immediately replaced the standard Energizer AA Alkaline's to Energizer AA Lithium's and I couldn't get the casing flush or almost flush. I suspected the O-ring and without the O-ring it is, as you expect, fully flush.
So my solution was to gently threat the O-ring itself with a little bit of grease (Vaseline) on my finger, only to gently 'wet it'!, so that it can more easily slide in the right place when you put the back of the battery-compartment together. Now it's almost Flush, still putting enough force on the o-ring for a correct IP67 seal. 

I'm very happy with the 28II, only Fluke's display's are a little bad at some viewing-angle from the top.

[saturation]

Yes, this is the preferred way, and insures the best seat.  Any O ring lubricant is good, most folks will be able to obtain something like Vaseline, or professionally with silicone.

My own 28II has the bulge also new out of the box.

I immediately replaced the standard Energizer AA Alkaline's to Energizer AA Lithium's and I couldn't get the casing flush or almost flush. I suspected the O-ring and without the O-ring it is, as you expect, fully flush.
So my solution was to gently threat the O-ring itself with a little bit of grease (Vaseline) on my finger, only to gently 'wet it'!, so that it can more easily slide in the right place when you put the back of the battery-compartment together. Now it's almost Flush, still putting enough force on the o-ring for a correct IP67 seal. 

I'm very happy with the 28II, only Fluke's display's are a little bad at some viewing-angle from the top.

[FlyingBrickyard]

Good idea, and one it looks like I'm going to have to do myself, as Fluke have thus far been completely unresponsive.

I'll have to dig up some silicone lubricant.  Petroleum jelly (Vaseline) will cause deterioration of the O-ring material. 

I used to use Vaseline when I was assembling reloadable rocket motors because the O-rings were going to get destroyed within the next 20 minutes anyway, but here the application is a bit longer term - hopefully. 

[bitshape]

Good idea, and one it looks like I'm going to have to do myself, as Fluke have thus far been completely unresponsive.

I'll have to dig up some silicone lubricant.  Petroleum jelly (Vaseline) will cause deterioration of the O-ring material. 

I used to use Vaseline when I was assembling reloadable rocket motors because the O-rings were going to get destroyed within the next 20 minutes anyway, but here the application is a bit longer term - hopefully. 

It all depends on the material of the Gasket/O-ring (and the material of the Housing) which lubricant you could safely use:

The Vaseline Grease is fairly safe on a Silicone Gasket and most other materials, but not on a Gasket made of EPDM. [see: Chemical Compatibility Vaseline]

The Silicone Grease is safe on almost every Gasket material, but not so on a Silicone Gasket! [see: Chemical Compatibility Silicon Greases]

The main question is, what is Fluke using as the gasket/O-ring material on the 28II batterycompartment-seal?
 I guess by the looks and feel of it, it is a Fluorosilicone Elastomer Gasket/O-ring which is safe with both Silicone Grease & Vaseline Grease.
 Or maybe it is just a Silicone Elastomer Gasket/O-ring, then you are better off with Vaseline Grease than a Silicone Grease. (See the above link's of the Chemical Compatibility of the Materials)

[FlyingBrickyard]

I tried a bit of silicon lube (figuring it had the least chance of doing damage - thanks for those links!), and it didn't change anything, unfortunately.

That said, I do think the gasket/o-ring is seating fully, and even if water were to get in there I don't really see any place for it to go.  The battery compartment itself is sealed by the gasket, there's no place for it to infiltrate around the backing screws, and the fuse compartment has its own watertight seal on the other end of the meter. 

I'd still prefer it was absolutely flush with the back, and I still hope to hear something back from Fluke.  So far the lack of response has been the most distressing part of all of this.  However, putting that all aside, even if it's perhaps "not right", I think it qualifies as "good enough", and I won't have any real reason to be worried about it - especially since it's kept in the holster anyway.

[FlyingBrickyard]

I just now got word back from Fluke.

They claim that a minor bulge in the cover is normal on most units, and that all meters are vacuum tested to ensure a proper seal prior to being sent out.

However, judging by the pictures I sent they feel that the bulge on my meter is excessive, and they'd like the unit back so they can have a look at it.  They're sending me out a new unit as a replacement prior to my sending in the current one so I won't have to go without.

Can't complain about that.  Glad to see they're coming through.

[retiredcaps]

They're sending me out a new unit as a replacement prior to my sending in the current one so I won't have to go without.

Just curious who pays to send the original back to Fluke?  You?  Or are they sending a prepaid shipping box/label/arrangement?

Please post a picture of your replacement when you get it.

[FlyingBrickyard]

Just curious who pays to send the original back to Fluke?  You?  Or are they sending a prepaid shipping box/label/arrangement?

That wasn't specified, but since their first reply offered to just up and ship me a replacement without requiring any deposit or credit card info, and they have requested my original back so they can do an inspection - my assumption is they'll include a label.

I could be wrong of course, but it would be an odd place for them to drop the ball after taking that much initiative to this point.

I'll post updates here when there's anything to report.  I'm expecting I won't see the replacement meter for at least 7-10 days since Fluke is about as far away from me as is geographically possible in the continental US.

[elinick]

My apologies for resurrecting a pretty old thread.  I recently purchased a new 28II and the back of mine looks exactly like the back of OP's meter.   I did try opening it and looked for a mis-seated gasket, but no.  The meter is perfectly functional, but I should have high expectations for a high end Fluke, right?  That back cover is not right.  I'm wondering what (if anything) to do about it. 

Assuming I take this up with Fluke, what is the most efficient way to engage them?  Phone?  Email? A web form on their site?  Tweet?

Thanks,
Evan