Adam Savage on multimeters

[LazyJack]

All right, enough of this nonsense on the 87v!
Let's instead start discussion on why Keysight is dumb and unable to innovate, as it produced the same new version of the 3458A, instead of putting bluetooth speaker and RGB leds into it, as all proper manufacturers of bench multimeters do nowdays.

[EEVblog]

The existence of the 27II (and the 83V) are almost certainly due to the need to be drop-in replacements for old procedures designed around average-responding multimeters. (It's not cost savings, since they actually often cost more than the mainstream TRMS 28II and 87V.)

Correct. I've had this confirmed to me by Fluke themslves.

[EEVblog]

If they were we'd all still be using the Fluke 27FM.

Ironically Fluke had to dumb down the new 28-II meter and make the 27-II meter just to satisfy their military customers.

The 87IV also seems to have been a climb-down - too big of a change all at once?

Yes. They likely got their ear chewed out by the big customers for that upgrade. Marketing got a slap on the wrist and were forced to relabel it the 187.

[Fungus]

That’s because they can easily get it in the right mode wearing those clothes 

I'm only surprised they haven't got SpaceX-branded versions from Fluke.

[bd139]

I’d buy one 

[Fungus]

When you have people that might be under a lot of pressure performing complicated procedures, you want the procedures to be unambigous, as fail-safe as possible, and free from traps. 

This is why I think that most of Fluke's meters are unsuitable for that sort of situation and why the cheapo 113 could be the best choice for safety.


(PS: I looked at the date on the 113 manuals and brochures and it's as old as the 87V, not a recent innovation. Weird how I've never seen that meter before...did everybody else know about it?)

[Fungus]

Let's instead start discussion on why Keysight is dumb and unable to innovate, as it produced the same new version of the 3458A, instead of putting bluetooth speaker and RGB leds into it, as all proper manufacturers of bench multimeters do nowdays.

You jest but does the same thing happen in the oscilloscope world? Is there some old Tektronix oscilloscope that's "untouchable"?

[AVGresponding]

Let's instead start discussion on why Keysight is dumb and unable to innovate, as it produced the same new version of the 3458A, instead of putting bluetooth speaker and RGB leds into it, as all proper manufacturers of bench multimeters do nowdays.

You jest but does the same thing happen in the oscilloscope world? Is there some old Tektronix oscilloscope that's "untouchable"?

It's a bit different for scopes, as there's a good reason to chase higher bandwidth and memory depth. I expect the same situation does indeed occur though, in terms of institutions like the military etc keeping older equipment longer in order to not have to rewrite operational manuals.

[rsjsouza]

This is why I think that most of Fluke's meters are unsuitable for that sort of situation and why the cheapo 113 could be the best choice for safety.

Although a technicality, the 113 is very low input impedance across the ranges. I would instead shell out $20 more and get a 114, which is almost equally simple.

[EEVblog]

(PS: I looked at the date on the 113 manuals and brochures and it's as old as the 87V, not a recent innovation. Weird how I've never seen that meter before...did everybody else know about it?)

Not Fluke's first effort in the "small special purpose meter" market. Anyone remember the Fluke 10/12 from 1991?
The 113 was the replacement I believe

[LazyJack]

No, I just don't understand why you keep saying that Fluke should change stuff just for the sake of changing, where it seems to be that there are requirements (which do not match yours) that makes them happy selling the "old" stuff. Or makes Keysight invest not a small amount to recreate using modern parts a 30 years old instrument virtually unchanged from a user perspective (except for colour). Certainly they would not do that if the market would show otherwise.
With scopes I think there are many useful features that were enabled by modern digital technology, that offset the advantages of keeping old stuff. I would put size first, then all the digital bells and whistles. A DMM has much less functions and usually the procedures where these are  used do not require anything else. So why change?
Having said that, basically Tek defined the standard user back then. All proper analog scope and many early digital had the same basic layout for the knobs and buttons based on Tek's initial design.

[bd139]

(PS: I looked at the date on the 113 manuals and brochures and it's as old as the 87V, not a recent innovation. Weird how I've never seen that meter before...did everybody else know about it?)

Not Fluke's first effort in the "small special purpose meter" market. Anyone remember the Fluke 10/12 from 1991?
The 113 was the replacement I believe

My father had one of them. He bought it to replace his 77. At the end of the day he never used it because the  77 still worked. Eventually the battery (Duracell) leaked in it.  I suspect it got bought because it was shiny and never used because it was so different.

I inherited his 77 in 2002 and it worked until the switch wore out in 2010 ish.

[Fungus]

Although a technicality, the 113 is very low input impedance across the ranges.

3kOhms.

I would instead shell out $20 more and get a 114, which is almost equally simple.

The 114 is a better all-round meter but it's only CAT III rated.

[Bassman59]

In other news: The 179 is their "best overall" meter. 

I own a 179. I've had it for, oh, 20 years. Other than its propensity for eating batteries, it has served me well and I have no need to replace it with anything "better." (Though I was tempted by a Keysight hand-held at the end of last year when they had their deals -- but I figured if I was going to get another meter, it would be a benchtop, not another handheld.)

I have a 175 at the day job, from the same era as my 179. It, too, works reliably and I see no need to replace it. There are a few bench meters around but they tend to get absorbed into larger test sets.

But back to the 87 topic. I am reminded of the First Rule Of Holes: "When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging."

[oPossum]

Anyone remember the Fluke 10/12 from 1991?
The 113 was the replacement I believe

Yes! I bought one in '91 and later got another. Both still working like new 30 years later. ~7 year battery life from a 9V. They use a proprietary Fluke chip that has a resistance mode so versatile that they made a meter that uses only the resistance mode... The 7, 10, 11, and 12 all have the same PCB, just different buttons populated.

[Fungus]

In other news: The 179 is their "best overall" meter. 

I own a 179. I've had it for, oh, 20 years. Other than its propensity for eating batteries, it has served me well and I have no need to replace it with anything "better."

I find it weird that their "best overall" meter is $90 cheaper than their "best value" meter.

Wouldn't that make the 179 better value?

But back to the 87 topic. I am reminded of the First Rule Of Holes: "When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging."

Even when faced with logic like the above.

[fcb]

Bought a Fluke 12 when they released them in the UK.  I had to replace it sometime in 1993 when it went missing (with another Fluke 12) - I found it 3 months later exactly where I left it (ontop of a '609' cabinet on the side of the M62 near Ripponden) - it survived a winter and was still in-spec.  Still got it - still works, still has Yorkshire's finest muck down the side of the switch and in the bottom of the bumper.

My daily driver for many years is a Fluke 89 IV.

Buy Once, Cry Once.

[mansaxel]

(PS: I looked at the date on the 113 manuals and brochures and it's as old as the 87V, not a recent innovation. Weird how I've never seen that meter before...did everybody else know about it?)

Not Fluke's first effort in the "small special purpose meter" market. Anyone remember the Fluke 10/12 from 1991?
The 113 was the replacement I believe

I have the 10. Bought new in 1993, on its fifth (or so) 9V battery, still within spec on resistance, still is my toolcase carry-along, but am pondering swapping it for the MetraHit 25.

I got the 10 because I needed a reliable multimeter and being cash-starved, the 10 was the only sensible alternative. Of course there was a lot of competition, but since I did a fair lot of Class III measurements at ~400V (Is this three-phase outlet really correctly hooked up, and is there a neutral along?), I was not really attracted by anything except Fluke. They simply gave me the correct result more often. The fact that the competition was worse off of course was down to operator competence, a lot of the time, but a lot of the work was of the kind that really needed a sensible answer first attempt.

[AVGresponding]

I have the 10. Bought new in 1993, on its fifth (or so) 9V battery, still within spec on resistance, still is my toolcase carry-along, but am pondering swapping it for the MetraHit 25.

I got the 10 because I needed a reliable multimeter and being cash-starved, the 10 was the only sensible alternative. Of course there was a lot of competition, but since I did a fair lot of Class III measurements at ~400V (Is this three-phase outlet really correctly hooked up, and is there a neutral along?), I was not really attracted by anything except Fluke. They simply gave me the correct result more often. The fact that the competition was worse off of course was down to operator competence, a lot of the time, but a lot of the work was of the kind that really needed a sensible answer first attempt.

Hope that doesn't have the unshielded latching relays, like the M248B...

[mansaxel]

I have the 10. Bought new in 1993, on its fifth (or so) 9V battery, still within spec on resistance, still is my toolcase carry-along, but am pondering swapping it for the MetraHit 25.

Hope that doesn't have the unshielded latching relays, like the M248B...

No relays in the 25, as far as I can tell.

[HKJ]

For Fluke 87V you can Visit for more details: Spam link removed

From link:

Do you know? The 87V Multimeter is the only meter on the market which can operate and maintain accuracy while testing adjustable speed devices.

I did not know, I am pretty sure many multimeter can do that.

No doubt that the 87V is a good meter, but it is expansive and many other meters are better.

[BeBuLamar]

The Fluke 87V isn't the only meter with low pass filter for ACV. The 289 also has it although the 287 doesn't. Some of the high end Brymen also has it.
I had the Fluke 12 in the 80's. I use it along my 87. For most of the time the 12 was fine. I have a 114 for about 13 years now and recently bought a 113. They are both nice but I use the 87V most of the time. I have the 289 for like 3 years now and even it's a batteries eater I only had to replace the batteries a couple weeks ago. That's how often I use it.

[rsjsouza]

The Fluke 87V isn't the only meter with low pass filter for ACV.

Indeed it isn't. A huge variety of multimeters have this feature, including the cheap Chinese meters that name it "VFD" or LPF and, at least on my tests, typically cap it at around 400Hz. (UT139C, Bside ZT-Y, UT61E+ just to name a few).

[Scherms]

Dave found that the 88v RMS control is a chip separate from the main ICU and it has on the side 2 blank solder pins to solder on a 33uf capacitor to change from AVG to RMS mode...

Sorry I did not go to the trouble of measuring the input coupling, RMS averaging and output filter capacitors on my meter, didn't want to go to the trouble of desoldering them. I expect them all to be in the 1-10nF range.
Have yo read the AD737 datasheet? I have partly read it, as I understand, in the 88V they have compromised for mainly average AC measurements but with a little twist to aid in catching fast pulses. (Common-rail injection voltage or current pickup on ignition maybe?)

I couldn't really make sense of this phrase on page 67 of the 88V user manual though: "AC conversions are ac coupled and are average responding, rms indicating."

I wouldn't go to the trouble of removing the existing RC if you want to change to true RMS, they're not going to have a notable effect parallel to 33µF. I'd be worrying more about being set for the readjustment.

 

[EEVblog]

Dave found that the 88v RMS control is a chip separate from the main ICU and it has on the side 2 blank solder pins to solder on a 33uf capacitor to change from AVG to RMS mode...

Just remember that you have to recalibrate the whole meter.