Fluke 189 with leaking surface mount supercap (also Fluke 287, Fluke 289)

[Daruosha]

Hi
I'm sorry to bringing up an old thread and I know it has been talked a lot about this issue but please bear with me because I'm seriously confused.

I have 2 fluke 289. both have corroded cap and they can't hold the time when the battery is removed. I measured it's consumption right after installing the batteries. It draws 10 mA at first but after 1 min it stops at 20-30 uA (I think it charges the cap). Both working perfectly and I don't have any problems in measurements and I think battery consumptions are normal.

Note: I can't send them to Fluke

-- Now my questions:
1. Two people mentioned that after removing the cap their meters broke. How common is that? It can be related to other issues not removing cap?
2. Many substitute caps mentioned. 0.1F 3.3v, 0.22F 5.5v, 0.33F 5.5v? In super caps using higher capacity is dangerous or higher voltage?
3. The meter's firmware is 1.12. Is it better to change the super cap after updating to 1.16 or before that?
4. Should I wait for the cap to get discharged completely then removing them or it does not matter?
5. This question may look absurd but one person mentioned just using hot air to change the cap, not soldering iron?!!! but he did not mentioned why! (I think using soldering iron is better because using hot air, I thing it messes up the calibration)
6. The meters are calibrated in 2011. I don't care about the date but I'm worried that the battery corrosion expands or shorts. what do you thing? should change it?

Thank you in advance.

1- Removing the caps wouldn't do any harm. Fluke themselves  confirmed the purpose of that cap is to keep the clock.
2- Higher caps ratings are OK (except in high ripple filtering where ESR is important)
3- Firmware version doesn't matter.
4- If the corrosion process has been started, remove the cap ASAP.
5- Removing an SMD cap can be done in many many ways. Just do it the way it suites you and you feel comfortable enough to do it. If you do it properly with small enough air nozzles, hot air wouldn't do any damage and drift.
6- Yes, Change them.

[sotos]

I’m one of the guys that after removing the capacitor the meter refused to boot. I sent it to Fluke and they changed the capacitor and repaired the meter free of charge but I had to wait 1 month as I remember.

PS. I repair pcbs for a living and know how to solder and desolder through hole and smd components.

[coromonadalix]

@sotos  Errors can happen to experimented techs, an sudden discharge at the wrong place, bad manipulation  etc ...

Glad Fluke repaired it,  sad they haven't issued a official recall for this supercap, "they" know its a problem for a long time.

I used Panasonic  eec-s0hd334h      pn: p11064-nd at Digikey

But they are being phased out ... i have 3 left in case ...

[bayati]

Fluke has a big unofficial market in Iran (just like apple) but no official service. I think i should take a risk and do it. I try to discharge the super cap with a resistor before removing it. wish me luck

[sotos]

When you remove the capacitor don’t try to turn it on to see if it can work without the cap. I suggest you remove it put a new one in and then turn it on.
I did this to mine and didn’t boot, I tried it without the cap. Maybe it doesn’t like it.

[coromonadalix]

@ sotos   

My 189 worked pretty well without the supercap, I did not use any time logging feature and or set a clock

I wont say for the 289 series,  apparently there may be an real battery instead of an supercap ??  Some teardown photos showed that.

[say]

Could you please post a link of those photos.

[joeqsmith]

I was working with a friend that has a 189 a month ago.   I went to use his meter and it was dead.  He had just put fresh batteries in.  With permission, I took it apart and sure enough the cap was going bad.  No need to discharge it, it was flat.   These meters are getting old.

[Electro Detective]

I'm still sitting on the fence about removing the stupercrapacitors on the 189 and 289 

I would prefer to remove the caps and leave a blank space there,
but without killing the meter/s and or affecting their logging functions

or have the charger circuit/firmware/software go nuts with "Dude, where's my cap?!!"   


Reset of the clock on battery changes is a trivial matter compared to having leak prone caps and coin batteries lurking in there

Both meters working great, I really don't want to kill em
 

Would an electrically isolated soldering iron or station with a wee tiny tip be ok to get this done?
or should the iron be earth/ground referenced?

I don't want to mess with hot air, nor do I wish to encourage any ESD zaps during a simple heat and remove operation

i.e. I want them GONE without the    'SOL-Game Over'    thing flashing on the meter display 

[coromonadalix]

i've done the supercap change on a anti static bench mat, with an normally earth grounded  hakko soldering post, nothing fancy, if you're not so sure, discharge the supercap with an 100 ohms resistor ...


For the supposed battery in a 287 289   link : https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/fluke-189-with-leaking-surface-mount-coin-cell/225/

On the pcb it is marked BT1  :  https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/fluke-189-with-leaking-surface-mount-coin-cell/?action=dlattach;attach=311290;image

My 189 had c xxx marked on the pcb,  the confusion would be : it is a supercap used as a small battery ??

[Electro Detective]

Mine both look like un-shaven, not so super capacitors

I reckon owners of later model 289, with the internal backup battery instead of the supercRapacitor, will be having similar adventures in a few years time,
especially if the battery sort of internally shorts itself or changes polarity, leaks, or just goes weird...   as I've seen happen on PC Bios backup batteries   

Why oh why did Fluke not fit a CR2032 battery style socket,
someplace where vibrations and leakage won't cause drama 

or silicone bodge it down... 

These are their flagship meters FFS (For Flukes Sake) and 289 is still current,
this silly business does not instill repeat buyer confidence, especially at those 'forget mates rates' prices...

 

[bayati]

Just to confirm that Fluke could do much better job, it is a picture of Samsung E250 motherboard. The board is made in 2006. It has a ~3.4v lithium battery at least 13 years old. As you see, no leaking and I read 3v on it right now. It is as small as the supercap that is used in the 189/289/287 (if not smaller).

[SteinarN]

My first post on this forum.

I've had a 287 for years, but from the start it was draining the batteries in a month or two just by sitting on the shelf, clock also lost its time.
Tonight i was searching this problem and I came over a couple threads on this forum. I have identified the supercap on the pcb and ordered 4 of these:
https://no.mouser.com/ProductDetail/555-DSK3R3H224U-HL

I hope this will cure the illness of my othervise excellent meter.

I have a few small projects I am working on and I hope I can get some help from you for those projects when I start on them later

Steinar

[say]

It should. Good luck

[bayati]

Hi guys.
I changed my 289's supercap.

My meter is built in 2011 Firmware 1.12. Before sharing my experience you should know that Fluke 289 is about 700$ to 800$ in Iran and as it is illegal to be exported to Iran, it is very rare and there is no warranty for it.

First I searched for a replacement cap and the best I could find in Iran was MGC 5.5V 0.33F (size wise not the best choice but the best for me). I bought it for 1$. It is a Japanese Ricoh cap so I believe it will serve for a long time. 

I opened the meter and I was reading 0.670v on the old supercap. I shorted it but I still read 0.670 . I disordered it anyway and soldered the new cap with soldering iron set on 330c. 
It boot with no problem but the hart attack happened when I checked the meter. It was reading too high!!
 
I opened it and thanks to the resent video of Dave, I thought maybe the shield is touching the negative lead of the cap as it is too big. I put tape on it and now it works perfectly.   

So i confirm that changing the cap does not break the meter. Just be ESD safe and do not turn it on before putting the new cap (I talked with someone who has removed the cap and it's working without it).
Tnx to all.

P.S. In the last picture the leads has been zeroed, that’s why it reads few counts down

P.S. look at the inductor above the supercap!!! I didn’t even touch it and I’m sure that I’m the first one who has opened it. It should be happened at the assembly.

*If the pictures don't open use this link: https://photos.app.goo.gl/nmGjZ31ACf3h1owY8

[bayati]

As we are talking about supercaps, you can use the following pdf (datasheet) or pictures to estimate the lifetime of your supercap.
based on this equation mine should last for ~6.5 years.

https://www.mouser.com/ds/2/88/EDL-19670.pdf

[FrankE]

The Supercap failed on my Fluke 289 so I sent it back to Fluke in the Netherlands in 2016 under an RMA for a warranty repair. I think it took about a week round trip,
I wouldn't have known the Supercap was the issue if it wasn't for a thread that year on here.
Every Friday I check all my batteries,replace/recharge as necessary. I also power on anything with a Supercap Friday and Tuesday (though I assume the 289s supercap is energised direct from the AA cells from before the switch. I noticed last Friday the time needed reset and the personal details have been wiped.

Changing the supercap is a warranty repair so shouldn't cost if still in warranty. The repair won't affect calibration and Fluke normally won't do a new factory calibration.

[agdr]

So today I finally get around to calling Fluke's repair department here in the US about my two 289's that seem to have the supercap issue (both forget the date and time when the batteries are removed).   I learn that the 289's have a 10 year warranty.  The warranty repair does come with the non-data type calibration.  Maybe their policy on calibration with repairs varies from country to country..

Also: I asked - when 289s go back to Fluke for repair you don't need to include the test leads, batteries, or any case.  Just the meters.  Shipping both via FedEx Ground today was $18.  If I had fully insured probably would have been more like $26.  Lol tried UPS first and they literally could not process the return address. Pffftt.  There are some building numbers in front of part of it, and the UPS system didn't show that exact building.  That is why I stopped using UPS for outbound a loooong time ago.

I hope this information helps others! 

[mr.fabe]

I recently had my 289 in for a faded display issue in low ohms and possible supercap issue.  Spoke with Fluke TS to confirm the work that was performed and the rep stated no pay, no calibration.  I received the unit back yesterday.  Fluke replaced the mobo and included a calibration certificate.  All expense covered under warranty except shipping to Fluke.

Changes from my original unit
Board ID was 3 replaced with 5
Build date 6/2010 replaced with 11/2017
FW v1.16 replaced with v1.41

I purchased this unit last month on fleabay.. forgot to tell them I wasn't the original owner 

[Electro Detective]

I got into one of those rare lab moods early today   
and decided to takes my chances and de-solder the supercrapacitor from both the 189 and 289,
with no intention of replacements same or better,

and damn the torpedoes...   

Got everything set up ready to unsolder, ensure no ESR drama, thinking about somehow safely discharging any residual charge from the supercaps first,

and... WHOA! wait a minute!   


I went another way:   

I CAREFULLY used my sharp sidecutters to cut the top metal tab off the supercap,
slowly lifted back the supercap to about 90 degrees max,
bent it back and forth a few times, supporting the back so no pressure on the PCB solder area,
till the bottom supercap tab snapped off clean

Cleaned up with isopropyl alcohol > Job done 


Both meters working perfect, set their clocks, and no more suss supercrapacitor issues to think about,
or rant on and Fluke bash at 189/289 posts 


FWIW: the supercap tab remnants can be unsoldered any time in the future if I    (no chance!  )
or the next owner wants to wack in a supercap, and resume the saga I just ended



i.e. No Fluke was harmed by this procedure to remove a malignant tumor   


Happy Fluke Camper again      

[Tim5000]

FW v1.16 replaced with v1.41

Firmware v1.41 - interesting! I wonder what the changes in that are.
The latest available on their website is 1.16: https://www.fluke.com/en-gb/support/software-downloads/fluke-287-and-289-multimeter-firmware-update

[mr.fabe]

FW v1.16 replaced with v1.41

Firmware v1.41 - interesting! I wonder what the changes in that are.
The latest available on their website is 1.16: https://www.fluke.com/en-gb/support/software-downloads/fluke-287-and-289-multimeter-firmware-update

If your unit is working well as it was designed, I wouldn't worry about the firmware changes between v1.16 and v1.41
The major problems have already been addressed.  It does boot fast and the batteries last a long time though...

[Electro Detective]

(Reader Alert: Tired and perhaps one beer too many zone...  )


Would soldering in a small PCB coin battery holder be a proposition, so as to 'plug' in a supercapacitor (with its tabs cut)
giving the meter owner the options of replacement and or removal any time

or perhaps a pair of wires soldered in that tiny spot,
and the supercap and or holder parked elsewhere in a bigger or blank space on the PCB and properly secured. 

-----------------

Here's another brain bender:

is there a simple component addon to act as a one way valve so the supercapacitor can be charged with just enough voltage/current to keep the clock alive for a few minutes during a battery swap,
but ensure there is no way any voltage/current or a short or freaky polarity reversal can kick back at the charge source.

Maybe it's in there already, I don't know    and haven't gone that far to work it out (no schematic+lazy)

Faulty, underated, temperamental, or shorted supercaps and or the charging circuit overdriven into a short, may have caused grief to 189, 289 and 89IV owners over the years, 
awarding an undeserved bad rep to these fine meters

Fluke could/should have handled this matter a LOT better than just dumping it on the owners to sort it out, surfing for info at forums and Youtube,
or hoping the issue will eventually time out and blow away

or cash strapped battlers can go without, sledge the Fluking meter    and wake up to affordable Aneng or better still Brymen/EEVblog meters 
and corporats toss them in the dumpster and buy cartons of new Flukes     

 

[coromonadalix]

@ Electro

This is too complicated for nothing,  a new supercap at 2-4 $ usd and voila, your troubles goes a way for a long time

[Electro Detective]

@ Electro

This is too complicated for nothing,  a new supercap at 2-4 $ usd and voila, your troubles goes a way for a long time

Hi mate, I'm aware of that option for a quick fix     but sometimes you can forget to check up on a multimeter for a long time, especially if the batteries last,

AND.. maybe have bad luck (that's me  ) with a faulty or leaky brand or batch of supercapacitor AGAIN,

or worse a freaky ESR zap or CAL nuke during the unsolder/soldering 

and be back to the beginning of the drama, or worse off 

These meters are too expensive to easily replace, and no real qualified local techs near me to fix them... for any amount less than the price of a new meter 



I'm leaving them out for now as the meters are working great and no more thinking about what's going on inside or what may happen   

and I don't mind updating the logger time clock once every few months (or longer) on battery change

and due to Daylight Savings Time here, you have to set the clock back or forward by one hour     twice a year anyway