Flir DM93 Multimeter

[kyleaudio]

Hi guys, I saw this multimeter in a magazine today, thought it looked pretty sweet, I also had no idea that Flir has a multimeter. I decided to check here and see what you guys thought about it, but I was surprised that I couldn't find anything in the search!

Looking at the specs and price, it looks comparable to the Fluke 87V and Agilent U1272A Meters. Anyone out there know anything about this meter? Sure wouldn't mind seeing a tear down and review of this!

http://www.flir.com/thermography/americas/us/view/?id=61256&collectionid=833&col=61425

[rolycat]

It looks as though it was only launched this month, along with a couple of clamp meters and some other test gear - a pocket non-contact voltage detector, a moisture meter and a videoscope.

The NCV detector looks like a neat little gadget, with a vibration alert, built-in torch (flashlight) and a reasonable price (~$35).

[kyleaudio]

Yeah, it does look like a new product line. If it's anything like their thermal imaging gear, It should be quite good! I like the looks of the Android Bluetooth software.

You are right about the NCV, looks like a nice tool to have around.

[Bored@Work]

I also had no idea that Flir has a multimeter.

One? They have a boatload of multimeters - sort of. FLIR owns Extech, offering all kinds of rebranded multimeters from around the world (ok, from Asia). http://www.extech.com/

[Lightages]

It looks interesting but... They are being idiots with making you make an account just to see the manual. Marketing mistake IMHO.

[EEVblog]

Yes, brand new, just released.
One is already on the way for teardown and review.

[kyleaudio]

Awesome Dave, looking forward to your review/tear-down on this one.

Bored@Work, I am aware that Flir and Extech had some sort of relationship(http://www.flir.com/instruments/us/en/list/?folder=5142), I just didn't know that Flir had their own multimeters under the flir brand. They are probably a higher quality if they are putting their brand on there. They sure do have nice thermal imaging gear, lets hope that this is as good!

Lightages, I agree, somewhat annoying... Maybe they just expect you to buy the meter if you want the manual? 

[mikeselectricstuff]

I was offered one to look at, but  said that as there were some firmware changes coming up, they would wait til tat was done.

However that was before the teardown vid - not heard anything from them since...

[retiredcaps]

It looks interesting but... They are being idiots with making you make an account just to see the manual. Marketing mistake IMHO.

+1.

I found the manual without registering.  I uploaded here (787kB) and on Martin's site.

[Wytnucls]

Martin had a quick overview of the meter recently. There are issues with the firmware, from what I saw.

[mianchen]

[Ebivetar]

It really looks awsome. For the price its pretty good.
I just keep wondering why heavy duty DMM don't have the rubber enclosure which almost all DMMs have.

[Wytnucls]

400 USD for a meter with a 40,000 count Cyrustek chip sounds a bit excessive. The UNI-T 71D has the same kind of specs and features, for a lot less money than that (150 USD). Of course, input protection is much better on the FLIR, but that hardly accounts for the price difference.
The main DMM IC chip is the same as the one used in the 71D, the ES51966.
The front end ADC is the AD7799
Driving the LCD screen is the Holtek HT1622 (HT1621 on the 71D)

The PCB reminds me of the CEM construction and I wouldn't be surprised if the meter is made in China by CEM, just like some of the Extech meters.

http://www.analog.com/static/imported-files/data_sheets/AD7798_7799.pdf

[Wytnucls]

Here is Martin's review with a look on the inside:

[scientist]

Will there be a hack for this one?

[sync]

400 USD for a meter with a 40,000 count Cyrustek chip sounds a bit excessive. The UNI-T 71D has the same kind of specs and features, for a lot less money than that (150 USD). Of course, input protection is much better on the FLIR, but that hardly accounts for the price difference.

I saw Martin's videos and I own a UT-71C. They are not in the same league. The Flir has much more features and it has a good, fast update rate. The UT-71 is slow, the handling is sometimes awkward and overall not a good meter. It's not worth 150$ IMHO.

Edit: I prefer my UT-61E over the UT-71.

[Wytnucls]

The FLIR doesn't have that much more features. dB and dBm with no way to change the reference voltage. Low Z, a low pass VFD filter and a couple of LEDs on the side. The 71 has a 4~20mA % and a Pass/Fail feature. It still doesn't account for such a huge price difference.
I'm not sure you watched the video properly or you would know that in 4,000 count mode, the 71 is as fast as the FLIR (They use the same IC).
Please, the 61E is a POS. It drifts all over the place. Get a proper voltage reference and you'll see. It's just a 2,000 count meter at best. My 71s, using more expensive components, have been rock steady over more than a year now.

[BravoV]

Please, the 61E is a POS. It drifts all over the place. Get a proper voltage reference and you'll see. It's just a 2,000 count meter at best.

Hey ... 61E is a DMM too, but the DMM stands for Drifty Multi Meter. 

Seriously, when every time I see Cyrustek based meter, the 1st thing pops up in my mind is to see whether it's has internal or external voltage reference, if its internal then definitely a thumb down. .

[Lightages]

I advocated for the UT61E, but I think less of it now too. The UT71E I got was WAY out of spec and was a bitch to get to stay on spec. It seems to be stable now. Maybe I got a lemon. It does happen to every manufacturer. The Flir DM93 looks OK, but for $400 it should be flawless IMHO. I will reserve my opinion on it until it sees a few more reviews and some in the field.

[Wytnucls]

The ES51966 has an internal bandgap reference, that seems to do the job. There is no obvious reason as to why an external bandgap reference would be any better, unless it has better specs.

[BravoV]

Maybe its just me, its just I don't feel confident for these relatively new IC designer houses when it comes to "long term" drift, especially with internal reference + all other functions and crammed all of it if possible into a single silicon die.

[nanofrog]

The Flir DM93 looks OK, but for $400 it should be flawless IMHO. I will reserve my opinion on it until it sees a few more reviews and some in the field.

+1 IMHO as well. 

Strong competition in this price bracket, such as the Fluke 287 or Agilent U1252B for example (~$420 range). Or for less, the Brymen BM869.

[Wytnucls]

Maybe its just me, its just I don't feel confident for these relatively new IC designer houses when it comes to "long term" drift, especially with internal reference + all other functions and crammed all of it if possible into a single silicon die.

Cyrustek is a respected Taiwanese company producing some fairly high end ICs, notably the DMM ES51966 and the LCR chips ES51919/20.
FLIR, sensibly, went for reliability and a cost-effective proven-design IC (since 2002), instead of a plethora of transistors and passive components. Top manufacturers who can afford it, like Fluke and Gossen, have had their own DMM ICs for some time. FLIR is not in the same league yet, except on price.

The ES51966 voltage reference is rated at a decent 50 ppm/C.
The UT71 is fitted with 0.02% metal film precision resistors rated at 5ppm/C.

[sync]

The FLIR doesn't have that much more features. dB and dBm with no way to change the reference voltage. Low Z, a low pass VFD filter and a couple of LEDs on the side.

Auto hold, a working continuity beeper (the UT-71 is way too slow), Bluetooth.
It cost about the same as a Fluke 87. Compare the Flir with the Fluke. The UT-71 is not a contender because it's not an industrial meter.

Please, the 61E is a POS. It drifts all over the place. Get a proper voltage reference and you'll see. It's just a 2,000 count meter at best. My 71s, using more expensive components, have been rock steady over more than a year now.

My UT-61E didn't drift very much. About 0.03% since I got it. Tested against several proper bench DMMs. Which have a far better stability than these cheap voltage references (DMMcheck, etc.). Other UT-61E may drift more. But I don't use it for precision stuff. It's for quick and dirty stuff. And for continuity testing where the UT-71 fails.

Edit: I don't know what your table shows. But if it's the drift in counts than it's not bad at all.

[Wytnucls]

You can compare it to the industrial Fluke 87 if you want, but no industrial company is going to buy that thing to replace their Flukes, just because it says FLIR on it. One can tell it is built very cheaply in China with low-end components. Those battery wires glued with hot snot to the case and that appalling paper shielding inside the cover are just some of the telltale signs of dodgy construction.

I compare it to the UT71D, because they both use the same DMM IC and have roughly the same specs. It is not a question of whether the 71 is better or worse than FLIR's first DMM, but why it should cost so much more.

So far I haven't seen anything that justifies the high price that takes it into Fluke's territory.