Brymen ... Fluke ... (Why pay extra?)

[mamalala]

In light of the "why buy fluke if brymen has the sam specs" thread, that is, this one: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/if-brymen-bm869s-is-cheaper-and-as-good-why-people-would-still-buy-fluke/...

There is a difference between high voltage and high energy. You can easily probe a high voltage circuit, with virtually anything. A simple, small load resistor is sufficient. However, in a high energy circuit, things are quite different.

With a Fluke DMM i can be sure that _i_ don't blow up. Heck, i have a 83 III, and it serves me well. (Anecdote alert!) A friend of mine had to probe the output of a VFD controller ... And the cheap meter he had did, literally, blow up in his hand. He was lucky to not have suffered worse injuries besides some slight psychological damage. And what he meassured was only 400 volts or so. However, it was high energy.

Also, what others have said. There is no point in 5+ digit handheld DMM's, simply because you can't get the required accuracy from a low-power circuit over time. You need a decent reference, prefeably heated, etc, requiring a lot of power even if not "used"...

But anyways. Resolution is not the point. Fail-Safe is. I feel extremely comfortable with poking the probes of my Fluke at the entry point of the supply line of this house, and i don't have to care what the DMM is set to. Sure, if i want a sane reading i better switch it to what i want to meassure. But hey... The main fuses here are 200 amps, per phase. 3 phases, no less. And in the grand scheme of things, that could be considered "low power". But still... 380 volts (well, actually 400, between two phases) at 200 amps ... if something goes wrong when you probe that, what do you prefer? A DMM that is 100 bucks cheaper, but has virtually no track record of such a situation? Or one that is known to fail "safe"? In other words: How much is your life worth to you?

Yes, the Fluke has less digits. So what? The value it displays simply "is the thing". Who cares if it is 5.000 or 5.001 volts? And again, show me a reference that is usable for that kind of resultion in a battery powered device...

So, yes. I happily pay 600 bucks for a "shoddy spec'd" DMM if it comes from Fluke, instead of 300 bucks for a "can do all" but "newcommer" DMM from some other brand. After all, my life is worth way more than 300 bucks ... at least to me ... Heck, even my hand, in wich a low-cost DMM may blow up, is worth way more to me.

Greetings,

Chris

[Muxr]

People will always have different preferences. Even though I like my Fluke meters, I don't want to live in the world where Fluke is the only DMM. Someone has to keep them honest.

We all have different reasons for the tools we chose. Hopefully those reasons are educated.

As far as test equipment goes nothing else seems more future proof than a multimeter. The good ones are made to last for decades. It makes no sense to skimp on them imho. Especially when you consider how often we rely on them for measurement.

[TheBay]

My trusty old Fluke 77 Series II has survived EVERYTHING I have thrown at it, it's had years and years of abuse I love the thing, it works perfectly but it's a bit basic. I'd love another Fluke, but in the UK they are just not priced right to buy if you are not a business, I cannot find a good deal on a new meter anywhere, so looking at the next best alternatives.

[Muxr]

My trusty old Fluke 77 Series II has survived EVERYTHING I have thrown at it, it's had years and years of abuse I love the thing, it works perfectly but it's a bit basic. I'd love another Fluke, but in the UK they are just not priced right to buy if you are not a business, I cannot find a good deal on a new meter anywhere, so looking at the next best alternatives.

How does VAT work.. based on the declared value by the sender?

I know the prices are ridiculous for you guys who have to pay VAT, but there are tons of used Fluke deals on Ebay, I wonder if you could get a deal that way [and lower the VAT].

[TheBay]

We have to add 20% to the price of something if it's not listed with VAT.
If we buy from abroad there is 20% VAT to add and other fees if outside of EU.

My trusty old Fluke 77 Series II has survived EVERYTHING I have thrown at it, it's had years and years of abuse I love the thing, it works perfectly but it's a bit basic. I'd love another Fluke, but in the UK they are just not priced right to buy if you are not a business, I cannot find a good deal on a new meter anywhere, so looking at the next best alternatives.

How does VAT work.. based on the declared value by the sender?

I know the prices are ridiculous for you guys who have to pay VAT, but there are tons of used Fluke deals on Ebay, I wonder if you could get a deal that way [and lower the VAT].

[KedasProbe]

I don't think you should use the Brand name as a Safety Rating.
If it pasted the test to get that Rating.....

[Fungus]

I know the prices are ridiculous for you guys who have to pay VAT, but there are tons of used Fluke deals on Ebay, I wonder if you could get a deal that way [and lower the VAT].

They might charge you VAT anyway if somebody at the post office takes a fancy to the parcel.

How does VAT work.. based on the declared value by the sender?

Yep.

[rsjsouza]

I don't think you should use the Brand name as a Safety Rating.
If it pasted the test to get that Rating.....

+1 to that. After all, I am pretty sure that Brymen (and perhaps Gossen) have models with higher CAT ratings than Flukes.

If the CAT ratings do not tell the whole story (perhaps by evaluating the physical ability of the meter to resist an explosion due to arc flash), then I would agree that the Fluke models I have used seem to be more tough than the Brymens I used. But that is only anecdotal evidence.

However, I don't think this market generates enough revenue to create the infrastructure necessary to perform these explosion tests and translate into comparable results (such as crash tests).

[Fungus]

My trusty old Fluke 77 Series II has survived EVERYTHING I have thrown at it, it's had years and years of abuse I love the thing, it works perfectly but it's a bit basic. I'd love another Fluke, but in the UK they are just not priced right to buy if you are not a business, I cannot find a good deal on a new meter anywhere, so looking at the next best alternatives.

Fluke makes some quite good multimeters for China/India markets, eg. the 18B+. They go for about $120 on eBay.

Dave did a teardown of the 17B (from when they first started making meters for this market):


nb. That meter arrived in a mailbag video and there was more discussion/testing there:


Or if you want something basic but nuclear-bomb-proof then get a Fluke 27 on eBay.

But... if you want more features you might want to look at another brand. Fluke is more focused on safety+dependability than features-per-buck.

[poorchava]

Not everything made by Fluke is so great. They have some products that are evidently customised versions of Chinese stuff.

[Fungus]

Not everything made by Fluke is so great. They have some products that are evidently customised versions of Chinese stuff.

Do they actually sell a bad product?

It'll be a cold day in hell before they'd release a second-rate multimeter. They have no reason to and it's just not worth the hit they'd take to their reputation.

[saturation]

Its well done engineering.  The 101 has less parts, less to go wrong and they can spread them out more, that is clearance and creepages,  greater than what CAT III requires, making it more electrically robust compared to the dense parts of the 87V.

The 87V failed at 13kV still, that's far above the 8kV required by CATIII, so it faired well, but the 101 is tougher in that respect.  From the post mortem of the failure shown in joe smiths' video, it looks like conditioning diodes failed simultaneously suggesting the MOVs did not respond fast enough and allowed kV to enter the low volt stages and blow the diodes.

The 101 series, 15+ series, and the 117 series, maybe even more, are all made in China and if you compare the parts and PCB side by side, they look similar, suggesting its the same factory, and parts supplier.  Its designed well for manufacture, there are no 'bodges' or repairs at least from all the sample teardowns shown, very likely no hand soldering too, so the long term product costs are low [likely all automated] with few bad boards from production or Fluke bins bad board rather than repair them.

The DMM functions are fairly mundane, so that Fluke custom chip has been tried tested, whatever it is.  Fluke emphasizes toughness, reliability, dependability and ergonomics, over more functions or digits.

Its mostly the lack of functions for the cost of the DMM that others bring up when comparing other DMMs against Fluke.

Their product testing lab is NRTL quality, and they have metrology NIST grade NVLAP labs, which overall means they have the engineering expertise and equipment to make very high quality devices, all in house.

In the end, it shows the difference in Fluke product management, its not the country or people, its the engineers and managers designing the product that make the difference.

Now, as far as the sales and product support staff, that is another issue as its a whole different part of the company 

And yes, they charge you extra for all this behind the scenes stuff, too.   

given that there has been already much video review about high energy tests, etc etc. im actually more curious, what is the main factor that makes a fluke (esp the 101) out last even its own brother the 87? imagine if we could see (measure?) what was it that really failed when the energy levels ran over the dike walls (which "walls"?) ? 

who knows?  maybe there is a way to add a protection to the 87 and make it as "energy" proof as 101? maybe a small spark gap in a weak part? (it would probably involve destroying many more DMMs in finding that out lol  ) ... i wonder, did fluke destroy alot of 87s and then discover there is no other way? or they didnt?

[saturation]

I agree with fungus, Fluke is very quick to recall even the smallest problem with their devices they make, but what poorchava probably means is the made in China stuff I just discussed.

As for the reliability of their devices, its hard to say who is as good or near good to them.  The space shuttle program had fluke DMMs in their toolkit.  Several scopemeters are now the general troubleshooting tools left permanently in the space station.  With a special jacket, Fluke thermometers have been used in space walks, but otherwise these products are off-the-shelf, the same one's they sell to the public.

Its used almost exclusively by nearly all branches of the armed forces of the USA for gear maintenance, as well as by NASA, it could include many of the increasingly made in China DMMs today.

Not everything made by Fluke is so great. They have some products that are evidently customised versions of Chinese stuff.

Do they actually sell a bad product?

It'll be a cold day in hell before they'd release a second-rate multimeter. They have no reason to and it's just not worth the hit they'd take to their reputation.

[Fungus]

Its well done engineering.  The 101 has less parts, less to go wrong and they can spread them out more, that is clearance and creepages,  greater than what CAT III requires

Fluke describes the 101 as "extremely rugged".

I don't think they apply that term to any other low-end meter (or even high-end). They obviously took special care in the design of the 101 (not having an amps range helps, too).

[TheBay]

The 87V would be the minimum I'd want from Fluke, there is nothing wrong with my 77 Series II, it's just too basic for me, I need more functions.

My trusty old Fluke 77 Series II has survived EVERYTHING I have thrown at it, it's had years and years of abuse I love the thing, it works perfectly but it's a bit basic. I'd love another Fluke, but in the UK they are just not priced right to buy if you are not a business, I cannot find a good deal on a new meter anywhere, so looking at the next best alternatives.

Fluke makes some quite good multimeters for China/India markets, eg. the 18B+. They go for about $120 on eBay.

Dave did a teardown of the 17B (from when they first started making meters for this market):


nb. That meter arrived in a mailbag video and there was more discussion/testing there:


Or if you want something basic but nuclear-bomb-proof then get a Fluke 27 on eBay.

But... if you want more features you might want to look at another brand. Fluke is more focused on safety+dependability than features-per-buck.

[saturation]

Here is an equipment list for the Space shuttle and the last catalog for the US module of the ISS.  Then search the pdf for 'Fluke'.  If readers are interested, you can read what else is space worthy such as calculators and flashlights.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB8QFjAAahUKEwj6lb_dtsfHAhUDHB4KHZbwA00&url=http%3A%2F%2Fld.hq.nasa.gov%2Fdocs%2FShuttle_IFM_Tool_Catalog.pdf&ei=EgzeVfrECIO4eJbhj-gE&usg=AFQjCNFE_aZRa0ZRb2eu9BGDphnSYo1RTA&sig2=GrfI3WSutLp7lF0mQXLf_w


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB4QFjAAahUKEwj6tt-Ft8fHAhUJqx4KHVcKCFU&url=http%3A%2F%2Feveryspec.com%2FNASA%2FNASA-JSC%2FNASA-JSC-PUBS%2Fdownload.php%3Fspec%3DJSC-28533E.029700.pdf&ei=ZgzeVfrrIYnWeteUoKgF&usg=AFQjCNEiWdwSBbbVH9KxSAOe_rbBAOmVng&sig2=Y3XnnViHhq3Kccmqcr0CYw

[MT]

Its said among the insiders that the Chinese rower on the moon stopped working due to engineers had used Brymen apparatus to calibrate the temperature sensors!

On 18 April 2014, Wang Jianyu, deputy secretary general of the Chinese Society of Space Research stated that the failure is not mechanical but electrical and are looking to bypass it. He also explained, "The temperature on the Moon is considerably lower than our previous estimation, adding that "certain components may be suffering from "frostbite".[

[Muxr]

Here is an equipment list for the Space shuttle and the last catalog for the US module of the ISS.  Then search the pdf for 'Fluke'.  If readers are interested, you can read what else is space worthy such as calculators and flashlights.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB8QFjAAahUKEwj6lb_dtsfHAhUDHB4KHZbwA00&url=http%3A%2F%2Fld.hq.nasa.gov%2Fdocs%2FShuttle_IFM_Tool_Catalog.pdf&ei=EgzeVfrECIO4eJbhj-gE&usg=AFQjCNFE_aZRa0ZRb2eu9BGDphnSYo1RTA&sig2=GrfI3WSutLp7lF0mQXLf_w


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB4QFjAAahUKEwj6tt-Ft8fHAhUJqx4KHVcKCFU&url=http%3A%2F%2Feveryspec.com%2FNASA%2FNASA-JSC%2FNASA-JSC-PUBS%2Fdownload.php%3Fspec%3DJSC-28533E.029700.pdf&ei=ZgzeVfrrIYnWeteUoKgF&usg=AFQjCNEiWdwSBbbVH9KxSAOe_rbBAOmVng&sig2=Y3XnnViHhq3Kccmqcr0CYw

Only one spare battery. I'd bring an 87 too.

[Fungus]

If readers are interested, you can read what else is space worthy such as calculators and flashlights.

The calculator shown in the doc doesn't match the photo. Text says "EL-506RB", photo is an EL-531R.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/121729219355

But ... it's a solar-powered version, which doesn't seem to exist.

OTOH the doc also says "modified for ISS" so maybe it's a custom-made calculator just for NASA.

[Lightages]

The thing to look for is not a brand name, but rather if the multimeter is third party tested to meet its claimed safety specification. If it has a TUV, UL, GS or similar test record to show it met its safety specification then you can trust it. If it merely says "CE" somewhere then go somewhere else. Also look for tear downs of the multimeter and see if the inside is actually built correctly. If the multimeter does not have a third party test certification and has a build that clearly can't meet its safety spec then avoid it. Fan boys and popular opinion are as useful as nipples on men. Look for proper certification and not the anecdotes of users who have never had a problem.

The brands who actually do real third party testing and can be trusted for their certifications include: Fluke, Brymen, Agilent, Gossen, Amprobe, Chauvin Arnoux, Yokogawa, and maybe others. I am sure that Hioki meets their safety ratings but they do not demonstrate any third party testing certifications. Manufacturers like Vichy, Victor, Uni-Trend, and others have been shown to be willing to bend the rules and make meters that don't come even close to meeting the safety specifications they have listed on their meters. Uni-T actually has one model of multimeter with two different approvals and construction. One is legal for sale in Europe and the other not. The difference? More input protection and a lower CAT rating.

Look for backed up claims instead of brands, popularity, or fan boyism.

[joeqsmith]

Its well done engineering.  The 101 has less parts, less to go wrong and they can spread them out more, that is clearance and creepages,  greater than what CAT III requires

Fluke describes the 101 as "extremely rugged".

I don't think they apply that term to any other low-end meter (or even high-end). They obviously took special care in the design of the 101 (not having an amps range helps, too).

Even that is an understatement!   

The 87V failed at 13kV still, that's far above the 8kV required by CATIII, so it faired well, but the 101 is tougher in that respect. 

That is correct.   Unlike every other meter that were tested at lower levels to determine where they failed, I had just assumed the 87V would handle the same transient that the 101 survived.   So, it was not ever tested at lower levels, only at the 13KV where it was damaged.   To present it as if it would have survived at 8KV is very misleading.

[saturation]

You're right Joe, I stand corrected.  It did survive volts but not ohms function.  It should be shown it did survive every impulse and tested to function. On Fluke's instructional video it does show the 87v surviving in volts mode up to 17kV but even then, they did not break each impulse test and check functionality like you did nor did they impulse it on the ohms mode.  Meter test begins at 16:00.

The 87V failed at 13kV still, that's far above the 8kV required by CATIII, so it faired well, but the 101 is tougher in that respect. 

That is correct.   Unlike every other meter that were tested at lower levels to determine where they failed, I had just assumed the 87V would handle the same transient that the 101 survived.   So, it was not ever tested at lower levels, only at the 13KV where it was damaged.   To present it as if it would have survived at 8KV is very misleading.

[joeqsmith]

You're right Joe, I stand corrected.  It did survive volts but not ohms function.  It should be shown it did survive every impulse and tested to function. On Fluke's instructional video it does show the 87v surviving in volts mode up to 17kV but even then, they did not break each impulse test and check functionality like you did nor did they impulse it on the ohms mode.  Meter test begins at 16:00.

Yes, I believe that is correct but would need to watch my own video to be sure.   Seems like it was just the higher resistance range.   A few other failed like this as well and were considered a failure as well.

The video makes it sound like they design the meter to survive the test.   But as you point out, they may only consider that in the voltage modes. 

I had seen Lightages had posted the following in the Beginners section:

None of the meters in his test did anything that could harm the user from what I have seen so far.

I think comments like this confuse people as well, especially in a forum targeted to beginners.   Not everyone understands what energy is and they see these sort of comments along with the 13KV and may think that a meter is robust because it survived my test.     I think this may have led Robomeds to post the comment:

Am I wrong in thinking that all of the meters you tested "passed" at least that part of the CAT 1 test since none caught fire, exploded etc?

Absolutely nothing wrong with that question and I am glad they asked.   I do think that people need to understand that most of the testing I did was 10J and less.   The starting point was under 1J and I could not even damage a small flashlight bulb!   When the final was ran between the Fluke and AMPROBE, there was hardly enough energy to light a 40W bulb let along damage a meter to the degree of the one shown in this video.     It was never my intent to run any sort of test like this but only to stress the meters front end circuits to see which was the most robust. 

People who think that 10J would ever do the sort of damage shown in this video need to go back to school.  Those that think I could pack a few KJs in a box that small give me way more credit than I deserve!   The second box was added just to get me to 20J!   

From a safety aspect, like many others have stated, I would go with meter that was independently checked.   I see the Brymen was. 

If we end up running another batch, I'm sure that people will continue to cloud this up.  I am not sure how to prevent it. 

[Muxr]

Actually from that video they talk about testing for transients in the ohms range as well for safety.

[saturation]

Yes.  The goal of safety certification is safety for the user and requires that safety be on all the ranges of the meter. 

It does not include that the device survive the transient.

Fluke literature says Fluke meters not only are safe to their CAT rating, but the device will survive the transient, which I presume means it will still be working to spec, per its data sheet.

What joe smith showed was so far, only the Fluke 101 survived and still functioned correctly after 13kV.

BTW, kudos must also be given to user "Meter Junkie" who independently tested the 101 at 12kV using a commercial grade impulse generator.  He as a video of the whole test sequence on joe smiths thread.  However, while the meter appeared, and he later discussed it was working as new, Meter Junkie didn't show on video it was working on every function tested.

Actually from that video they talk about testing for transients in the ohms range as well for safety.