First impressions of my new Fluke 17B

[saturation]

Electrically, the 17B is similar to the 114.  If anyone owns a 17B would be good to test it to see how its accuracy really is.  Flukes understate their accuracy to be conservative, so it may be better than the published specs.

so... whats the bottom line? kiriakos?

[Kiriakos-GR]

Fluke does not have standards,  it just making products that comply to some of them.    

Sure they do. They've got certain in-house standards when it comes to circuit design, build quality, build consistency, measurement accuracy over time, etc. Heck, they've even standardized their paint scheme.

-MightyTwin.

Thats true      

But be aware that in our times , the materials like high quality components,  
are everywhere ..  
Today ,  every one could build anything , and the " quality components "  are just an choice,
expressed in manufacturing cost  .

I am currently collecting the parts, so to build one truly professional Decade , at the class of 0.1% resistors tolerance .

This device  at this specs, assembled 15-20 years back , costs as 1.500 - 2000 $
The parts that I got today ... Vishay Dale resistors + gold plated aircraft switches,
did not cost more than 80$  as total ..      

And if I was an manufacturer , I would had probably , an cost of 20$ or less.

Conclusion .... Every one can build an high quality meter Today,
everywhere in the planet ,
if he just choose so .

So the old Fluke marketing firework , about " build quality "  & " quality components " ,
does not stand any more  , as reason to get an Fluke .

And by the way , I am just an stupid electrician ,  you ... all of you as electronics engineers, You should be aware of all of this, before me ..  

You all aware , that this days, all that it matters, are the good quality software ,
the superiority of the hardware components , has ended as issue for disputes , long long time ago ..    

[ThunderSqueak]

out of curiosity I decided to look for reviews of this meter (they are very lacking as it is a "sold in china" only meter).  I came across this review.

Reposting some internal construction photos and the review here just in case the other link goes away.  

First impression is good, the meter looks and feels like a Fluke meter. The meter feels sturdy. The LCD is big and clear. The function selector dial is good, it gives that positive “click” feeling.

Compared to the Fluke 77, this meter has better functionality in that it measures current down to the µA range, measures capacitance, and measures temperature using the provided K-type thermocouple probe.

The downside of the meter is that it doesn’t have Fluke’s auto touch hold, no-bar graph, and no LCD backlight. The overvoltage CAT rating is also slightly lower (300V CAT III vs 600V CAT III).

Compared to higher end Fluke models, this meter lacks the min/max function, does not measure true RMS and has no incorrect probe socket detection.

Internal contruction of the meter is really good. You can see the well designed PCB, the high quality components and the good soldering from the photos below. You can also see the big HRC fuses and the MOVs used for input protection.

[alm]

Thanks for the pics. I wonder what that bridge rectifier is doing there, it looks like it's connected to the COM terminal on one side and to the COM side of the 400mA fuse on the other side (although there may be hidden vias). Why would you need a bridge rectifier in a meter? I can't imagine that they use it for AC measurement, since they go down to the sub-millivolt level, but can't imagine it being for reverse polarity protection either. I don't think this meter is true-RMS, so it is possible that they use it to calculate the average voltage, and compensate for the diode drops (which have a significant tempco I believe). But the location close to the input jack seems odd.

Still uses a bunch of trimmers, no closed case calibration. It uses the cheap blob-on-PCB method, so no chance of repair if the main IC dies (but it's probably unavailable anyway). No issues with build quality as far as I can see.

[saturation]

It looks very well made.  If you peruse the Fluke 117 review by Dave on the eevblog, the construction of this Chinese Fluke rivals the US made one's easily, it differs mostly in its fundamental design rather than build.  

out of curiosity I decided to look for reviews of this meter (they are very lacking as it is a "sold in china" only meter).  I came across this review.

Reposting some internal construction photos and the review here just in case the other link goes away.  

First impression is good, the meter looks and feels like a Fluke meter. The meter feels sturdy. The LCD is big and clear. The function selector dial is good, it gives that positive “click” feeling.

Compared to the Fluke 77, this meter has better functionality in that it measures current down to the µA range, measures capacitance, and measures temperature using the provided K-type thermocouple probe.

The downside of the meter is that it doesn’t have Fluke’s auto touch hold, no-bar graph, and no LCD backlight. The overvoltage CAT rating is also slightly lower (300V CAT III vs 600V CAT III).

Compared to higher end Fluke models, this meter lacks the min/max function, does not measure true RMS and has no incorrect probe socket detection.

Internal contruction of the meter is really good. You can see the well designed PCB, the high quality components and the good soldering from the photos below. You can also see the big HRC fuses and the MOVs used for input protection.

[cybergibbons]

Just picked up a Fluke 17B on Apliu Street in HK. Got a very good price for it - if you find the right store and haggle a bit you can get them down.

The meter is well made, as good as "normal" Flukes. The flip out stand pivots on the rubber case, feels a bit crap but works pretty well.

Apliu Street is amazing. Most of it is mobile phones, but there are guys fixing phone on stalls in the street, shops selling loads of components and tools, all very cheap. UNI-T is everywhere. Some of the meters are 1/4 the price compared to the UK.

There are Fluke meters for sale (couldn't find any 87s unfortunately), but there are also "Flukes" for sale....

[ThunderSqueak]

Just picked up a Fluke 17B on Apliu Street in HK. Got a very good price for it - if you find the right store and haggle a bit you can get them down.

The meter is well made, as good as "normal" Flukes. The flip out stand pivots on the rubber case, feels a bit crap but works pretty well.

Apliu Street is amazing. Most of it is mobile phones, but there are guys fixing phone on stalls in the street, shops selling loads of components and tools, all very cheap. UNI-T is everywhere. Some of the meters are 1/4 the price compared to the UK.

There are Fluke meters for sale (couldn't find any 87s unfortunately), but there are also "Flukes" for sale....

out of curiosity, what does a "Fluke" look like? :>

[Kiriakos-GR]

out of curiosity, what does a "Fluke" look like? :>

Because I am an " Foreigner " too , can you retype the question , with one more understandable manner. 

Thanks ..

@cybergibbons

as good as "normal" Flukes

I have not see any of those yet ... 
Even the Industrial 87 ... or the Car electricians model ... again Fluke 87 ....
They have so "silly"  low in volume beepers .... that I do wonder how an electrician ,
industrial  or for cars , will be able to listen it .. in a medium noisy environment.

Just of curiosity , why you did not get an "advanced" for the same Price UNI-T ?

 

[ThunderSqueak]

There are Fluke meters for sale (couldn't find any 87s unfortunately), but there are also "Flukes" for sale....

I was wondering if you used quotation marks to indicate a Fluke copy or counterfeit as you said there are flukes for sale, then said "flukes" in quotations as if to indicate that they are called flukes but are actually something else.

I was asking what one of the "Flukes" looked like, if it was a counterfeit.  I was curious to how close they were to the real thing.

Not sure how to type that in a more understandable manner   

[Kiriakos-GR]

Ok ... well  the answer are easy ...

There is an factory on Hong Kong , making DMM for the inner China market .

Some people likes to believe that they will be inferior from the ones marketed with the " Made in US " logo .
And this is just a joke , by my understanding ..
I do not believe that robots in construction lines , has feelings or make mistakes.
No matter the flags, on them.

An logical explanation , would be that the current agreement between Fluke in US and the Fluke in China,
are the reproduction of the " economic line " ,  DMM 's  for generic usage.

This agreement could possibly change in the near future , and more advanced models will possible come out, from this partnership ..  

The all planet spins around because people and companies , they cooperate and create partnerships.

This " fight for the flag " thing ..it must to stop .
Or , all the Americans they should throw their SONY TV sets from their windows .. ( Its an Japanese brand it does not belong to them )  "The flag "

I created on purpose this paranoid monologue , so to point out how ridicules it is , to blast the Flag ,
and not the bad product , no matter where it had be made .      

  
 So this " Flag war "  had cause this confusion , and explains and the quotation marks .
As an " not made in US one " ...  

 

[saturation]

If counterfeiters can copy any Fluke and provide a similar accuracy, precision, safety and physical robustness, then Fluke has a problem on their hands.  Its just like a counterfeit Rolex watch, how many has anyone seen that comes even close to the real thing in quality?

See an older discussion here:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=409.msg4265#msg4265



It was a good idea for Fluke to have a branch in China, not only to make instruments but to enforce it intellectual property, if that is possible there.

Many Fluke DMM, especially the 80 series, have patents. If you look behind the 87V you should see 2:

Input circuit path:
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=x8kDAAAAEBAJ&dq=6,094,045

The capacitance measurement circuit:
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=fTwOAAAAEBAJ&dq=6275047




This was recently granted:

The input filter circuit:
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=EqioAAAAEBAJ&dq=7342393

[Kiriakos-GR]

It seems a large amount of DMM related patents were made by Raymond Zoellick of Fluke, from the late 1990s to early 2000s.  He maybe one the 80s series principle designers.

Houston we have a problem !!  

Well this  Registered patents , its an double side axe ... many found the way to register even the silliest things , so to have claims on them.
This race of registering patents, become an troublesome sport .
  
If I manage to register  " the breath " every one will have to pay me, so to take one.  

The only positive are, that after 25 years , any registered patent can be used freely .

The same story happened with the SONY Trinitron tubes ,  and the Mitsubishi one day after the patent termination, started to make the " Diamondtron " tubes , any many others similar flat ones.  

[cybergibbons]

out of curiosity, what does a "Fluke" look like? :>

There seemed to be five different things going on here:

• Real Fluke 15/17B, 115, 117, and 77 series as well.
• Meters that externally looked very, very similar to the 15B/17B, but had small differences on the LCD, silkscreen. Probes seemed low quality, dial sloppy, rubber cover felt different. Probably good copies. I don't think these are being made on the ghost shift, they aren't close enough.
• Meters that were only a token effort at looking like a Fluke 15B/17B. Clear differences in quality and functionality.
• Meters that looked nothing like a Fluke at all but said Fluke on them.
• Meters that looked quite Fluke like but were branded differently

[/li]
[/list]

UNI-T meters were everywhere - but I already have a UT51D and  UT71D.

There were Sanwa meters everywhere as well, but the price differences on the same model from shop to shop indicated that there were genuine and fake ones. I've not seen them before so would probably struggle to tell the difference.

I got the Fluke 17B for when I'm doing electrical work - I can trust the input protection.

[Kiriakos-GR]

UNI-T meters were everywhere - but I already have a UT51D and  UT71D.

I got the Fluke 17B for when I'm doing electrical work - I can trust the input protection.

The input protection , that protects the meter it self , from wrong settings ,
like be in Ohms and measure with the leads voltage... its something that I do appreciate too.
But this privilege , are offered  by the most well made DMM today.

I had never ever try to see what happens at my 20 years old Pros-Kit ( Mastech) if I add volts at the ohms setting..
But the bench type dinosaurs  like 8010A 8012A 8050A , they can handle that, and it does feels good.  

[cybergibbons]

Yes, we all do stupid things from time to time. It's the one thing that bothers me about my UNI-T meters - they just have small glass fuses, and seemingly little  input protection. Are they really safe to their ratings?

A colleague suffered extremely bad facial burns after a no-name voltage tester (like a Fluke T100, but I think it came free with an order) went to short when he was testing if the output of a timer switch was off. It was only 240V but it was still pretty bad...

[Kiriakos-GR]

Personally I do trust the UNI-T products, I have some of them for years.
Its the only trust-able brand from HK , in my eyes.

I even got their latest tester ..  
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=448.msg4831#msg4831

And I am more than happy ..  
So, yes I do trust them ..

But some times its not the brand or the model , every manufacturer has an percentage of premature failed products , thats why we have and the warranty period.    

In my repairs shop , I have 3 Phases  Mains ( 380 AC ) ... so testing my  voltage tester was an easy task ...

[saturation]

Yes, I agree K for certain industries, but with many of the established equipment manufacturers, many of their patents are truly useful, compared to what we see in the computer industry ... maybe because the market is much narrower in test equipment.

I found this list of Fluke patents related to DMM:

http://www.prc68.com/I/DMM.shtml

Its intellectual property is enough that Agilent will mention Fluke equipment for calibrating its handheld DMM line, including its 'calibrator handheld multimeter', here is the calibration sheet for the 1253A and 1401 calibrator.

It seems a large amount of DMM related patents were made by Raymond Zoellick of Fluke, from the late 1990s to early 2000s.  He maybe one the 80s series principle designers.

Houston we have a problem !!  

Well this  Registered patents , its an double side axe ... many found the way to register even the silliest things , so to have claims on them.
This race of registering patents, become an troublesome sport .
  
If I manage to register  " the breath " every one will have to pay me, so to take one.  

The only positive are, that after 25 years , any registered patent can be used freely .

The same story happened with the SONY Trinitron tubes ,  and the Mitsubishi one day after the patent termination, started to make the " Diamondtron " tubes , any many others similar flat ones.  

[saturation]

The problem is, unless you know DMM, you'll think they are all made the same or you'll simply forget since nothing has happened for a long time.  So, if you reach for a DMM and not think twice about its rating for electrical work, since we all do electronics and not exposed to these voltages routinely, getting a meter of lesser quality risks what you just mention.  You may want to add permanent labels on your lesser line of DMM and say not for use on junction boxes and more, or even line AC.

You can only die once.

If that didn't happen, it is still not possible to replace a finger, hand, arm, or just repair a burn to make you normal again if you are injured in electrical work.  Here is a recent story.

http://ecmweb.com/ops_maintenance/defective-test-equipment-20100101/

The summary, this accident was initiated by a multimeter, with a glass fuse.  

"Sequence of events — The meter suffered an internal failure, most likely due to a voltage transient. Because of the severe damage to the meter and circuit board, it was not possible to determine the precise failure. However, based on the evidence, I concluded that, as a result, the fuse attempted to open the circuit against a fault current and voltage that were far above its design capability. This caused it to arc and ultimately explode, which explains the bent scale plate, housing damage, and missing fuse and clips.

What actually started the arc at the bus bars? Either it resulted from the meter explosion itself or arcing at the probe tip as the electrician instinctively pulled it away in response to the noise and flash. Once the bus bars began to arc, the victims' fates were sealed, as there was no turning back at that point."

The remains of the MM:




The remains of the probe:

Yes, we all do stupid things from time to time. It's the one thing that bothers me about my UNI-T meters - they just have small glass fuses, and seemingly little  input protection. Are they really safe to their ratings?

A colleague suffered extremely bad facial burns after a no-name voltage tester (like a Fluke T100, but I think it came free with an order) went to short when he was testing if the output of a timer switch was off. It was only 240V but it was still pretty bad...

[Kiriakos-GR]

Well this conversation looks like a " déjà vu "  ..

Every time that some other brand than Fluke .. called as safe to use ...
Some one will  start ,  to  push things about " Highest safe limits "  .. explosions and transients .
And blame the glass fuses ..

I am against to this global terrorism philosophy , made by Fluke , so to brain wash   the common Joe ,
that only Fluke cares for him ... but he must pay the price premium !! so to not die ..

I do not know any company in the world , to had organize an so brain wash campaign,
about the DMM safety ...

Looks that  Philips / Siemens / MetraWatt /  UNI-T/ HP / CHAUVIN ARNOUX / and many Japanese brands ,
or Russian  brands ....  they like to see us dead ..

I am not debating here ,  I am just clarify that I am not an believer of the " Fluke master safety " Song.

The rest of the planet , are not fools .  

  
By watching the latest reviews of Dave , the most interesting , was the HRC fuses,
the Chinese manufacturers are smart ,   they know that the Americans love seeing HRC fuses,
so instead to fight back this theory , they just offer what the others expect to see .
Smart hey .. 
 

[jahonen]

I don't understand why Kiriakos always remembers to blame Fluke for extorting the users with safety issues. I think that Gossen-Metrawatt also reminds about the safety issues. I see it more widely. I don't personally care who makes the meter, but I do care does it really meet the relevant safety standards for the work. And I think that is the way Fluke meant it, not that only their products actually meet the standards. There are probably plenty of cheaper meters which fullfill appropriate CAT-ratings but problem with at least Chinese stuff is that you can't really trust them, due to that they have somewhat flexible practices for testing for compliance.

Yes, I have measured mains voltages many times with meter with certainly does not meet any kind of CAT criteria, but I definitely wouldn't want to do same thing on a circuit which has high destruction potential, like shown in previous posts.

It is important to notice that it is not the voltage alone what does the damage shown in the pictures, but the resulting high-current arc flash. So testing would require a power source with enough short-circuit current. For electronic and household electrical work with small fuses (up to 16 A 230 VAC around here), there is not enough short-circuit available to do so much damage, whether you have CAT-rated meter or not. Things however change quickly if one deals with distribution level.

HRC fuses apply only to current ranges, for voltage ranges, there are other things to do to ensure CAT-compliance (like enough creepage distance on the PCB between nodes at different voltages, or "high-voltage isolation slots", like Dave calls them), which precautions obviously have been overlooked.

Regards,
Janne

[Kiriakos-GR]

Ok lets speak seriously here ...   No I will not use my words , even If I do have every  right to have my own personal opinion ..


Officially  in Europe , based on the latest European Directive called as ELOT HD 384 ..

Electrical tests over mains installations can be accepted only by those meters ..

Macrotest 5035
Fluke 1651
METREL MI 3102  http://www.metrel.si/products/electrical-installations-safety/multifunction-testers-eurotest-family/mi-3102-eurotest-xe.html

If you do not own any of those  1000$  testers , do not touch AC Mains ..

[cybergibbons]

Kiriakos - those are installation testers, not multimeters.

In the UK, you are recommended to use a 600V CAT-III meter if you are working with anything outside of household, single-phase mains. If you are working on anything further upstream that distribution (i.e. practically unprotected), then those rules are out of the window.

Glass fuses don't have the interuption rating required to be safe if you are working with what could be several kiloamps of current in a fault.

[NiHaoMike]

It is important to notice that it is not the voltage alone what does the damage shown in the pictures, but the resulting high-current arc flash. So testing would require a power source with enough short-circuit current. For electronic and household electrical work with small fuses (up to 16 A 230 VAC around here), there is not enough short-circuit available to do so much damage, whether you have CAT-rated meter or not. Things however change quickly if one deals with distribution level.

A friend of mine has a scar on her arm from an accident involving measuring a computer power supply with a cheap multimeter set to amps. The insulation melted right off the probe wire and it got hot enough to cause a serious burn. That was just with a 300W or so ATX power supply, mind you. If she did the same with a car battery, she would be lucky to be able to tell me the story.

What surprises me is why don't good meter probes have HRC fuses built into them. A CAT IV meter is not any good if the cause of the accident is the probe wire getting cut by a sharp metal edge or melting on a hot exhaust manifold.

[PetrosA]

It's enough to look at datasheets for some common size fuses and it becomes apparent that there is a huge difference in the breaking capacity between glass and sand filled ceramic fuses.

This text is quoted from here:

http://www.ce-mag.com/archive/05/01/018.html

Interruption Rating. Also commonly known as breaking capacity, a fuse’s interruption rating is the maximum approved current that the device can safely interrupt at rated voltage. Depending upon the type and design of the fuse, this current can range from a few amperes to several thousand. Typically, glass fuses have a low breaking capacity, while ceramic ones have a high breaking capacity.

If breaking capacity is exceeded, there is a risk that the fuse could blow apart like a firecracker, expelling molten material, damaging surrounding circuitry, or even harming the user.

A typical rating in accordance with UL 248-14 is 10,000 A at 125 V ac. Using this as an example, if an overcurrent fault of less than 10,000 A occurs on a 125-V-ac line, the fuse will open safely. However, if the overcurrent is greater than 10,000 A, the risk increases for damage to occur.

IEC 60127-2 categorizes fuses into three groups in terms of their breaking capacities.1 Low-breaking-capacity fuses are those tested to 35 A or to 10 times their rated current, whichever is greater. Industry uses the letter L to designate this type of fuse. A fuse said to exhibit enhanced breaking capacity is tested to 150 A and carries the letter E as a symbol of its capability. A fuse with high breaking capacity, designated with an H, is tested to 1500 A.

It's obvious that these standards are not made up by Fluke or any other company acting on their own. They are the product of years of safety testing. Every fuse I've ever seen in any country I've been in that handles mains current has been a sand filled fuse. With all the evidence supporting the use of HRC fuses for mains use, only a stubborn "mangas" would continue to claim that glass fuses are fine

[PetrosA]

What surprises me is why don't good meter probes have HRC fuses built into them. A CAT IV meter is not any good if the cause of the accident is the probe wire getting cut by a sharp metal edge or melting on a hot exhaust manifold.

More and more of the probe leads I see are high temperature silicone rubber, probably to prevent them melting. If there is enough pressure on the probe lead to cut it on something other than a knife, I'd say the technician is doing something wrong in the first place. I think putting the fuse in the probe or inline with the lead would offer less protection in case of an explosion.