Adam Savage on multimeters - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: oz2cpu
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 12:03:09 pm
content: you just got to love this dude, he is so down to earth :-)

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 04:26:20 pm
content: I had seen that video some time ago and though about sending him a link to where I abuse this meter. But he's not a EE and I doubt has time for such dribble.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 05:34:30 pm
content: Savage lost me at "loyalty to Fluke". In the past their multimeters were great but the current Fluke has been bought out and living off of their past reputation for decades now.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 05:54:33 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on March 06, 2021, 04:26:20 pmAt least he's under no illusions about his abilities.(...and it's probably a good thing that the Fluke 101 doesn't measure amps)

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 06:00:36 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on March 06, 2021, 05:34:30 pmYou can't expect him to know that. He boughthisFluke for $40, 30 years ago.He's not recommending the 87V, the 101 is a nice little meter and you could do a lot worse than owning one.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 06:15:57 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 06, 2021, 05:54:33 pmWhich seems rare.Quote from: David Hess on March 06, 2021, 05:34:30 pmI've looked at a fair number of Fluke products (new and old) and outside of very old 87V failing prematurely, the rest have all done very well against my tests. Even the old 87V that was damaged, was repaired and retested with very good results. Very few brands have done as well. If I were an electrical technician or electrician, I would certainly consider them.

author: Hydron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 07:26:42 pm
content: Can't really complain about someone with his influence admitting their limited knowledge on a subject, but still managing to recommend something simple, safe and reasonably priced. Sure you can save $30 and get something with more features, but he doesn't have the experience of what meters are good value and safe, and the 101 is trustworthy to use on mains unlike many cheaper meters. Probably should have noted the lack of current range, but as someone said, it's likely a good thing for the intended audience!Also while he's probably plugging Fluke more than Danaher/Fortive deserves, being very up-front about the fact that he has a strong personal loyalty to the brand makes it pretty forgivable IMO (especially along with the admission that he's far from an expert when it comes to electronics).

author: floobydust
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 07:47:55 pm
content: When you need absolute reliability, Fluke multimeters have yet to be beat.Even though mega-conglomerate Fortive/Danaher has bastardized the brand name, cheapened it and outsourced it, and does nothing to innovate or roll out "new" products, they continue to milk the brand name's cow. But the overall, Fluke quality is mostly still there.I had a project in the jungle and no way I would take a Taiwan-build multimeter on the trip, they aren't that good.Drop testing, vibration, environmental sealing- everyone here just looks at digits and precision. In the field or a rough shop, that stuff matters.

author: HKJ
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 08:01:16 pm
content: Quote from: floobydust on March 06, 2021, 07:47:55 pmFluke is not the only reliable brand, Keysight and a few others do also get into that basket.One parameter Fluke is very good at is a simple and easy to use meter. It is very difficult to find any other brand that can match it. That means if I had to send a couple of technicians out to measure some values I would give them Fluke meters (Not 287 or 289), because the risk of errors is lower than with other meters. The price of the meters is mostly insignificant, people are much more expensive.This is not the same as saying that Fluke is the best brand, I seldom use a Fluke meter at home, even though I have a couple.

author: Hydron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 09:23:04 pm
content: Quote from: HKJ on March 06, 2021, 08:01:16 pmUnless you have an 87V, and try to measure DC current...(I've had and heavily used one for about a decade, and it's still annoying)

author: HKJ
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 09:42:59 pm
content: Quote from: Hydron on March 06, 2021, 09:23:04 pmI guess you are talking about burden voltage, but if you are asking technicians to do current measurement you better know about that!If the meter starts in AC or DC is not a issue, even a fairly dim technician will now something is wrong when they get a zero reading.To be honest, the technicians I have worked with do know what they are doing and would mostly get the get correct result Fluke or not (The mostly is due to some special conditions in a few cases and Fluke or not would not help).

author: Hydron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 09:50:46 pm
content: I was referring to always starting in AC current mode, which doesn't normally trick me (like you said, a zero reading is a clue to check it) but does still annoy me when doing DC electronics, especially after using a different meter for a while.If I need low burden voltage I'd normally use a different meter or technique.

author: Analog4
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 10:15:06 pm
content: Fluke meters weren't always reliable. In around 1978 I had a Fluke 8000 multimeter, which was not so rugged. Every 6 months or so I had to open the case and re-solder several broken solder joints. The battery charging circuit used an incandescent lamp for control.Example of the Fluke 8000....Fluke 8000A teardown and repair attempt:http://kuzyatech.com/fluke-8000a-teardown-and-repair-attempt

author: Analog4
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 10:21:26 pm
content: I have an old Fluke 70 multimeter, that bought maybe 25 years ago, which still works.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 06, 2021, 11:14:04 pm
content: QuoteI never had to re-solder anything in the meter except when I damaged it, which was often enough that I eventually bought an HP and never turned back. The damaged parts were custom made for Fluke and it would cost around $70 every time (with me doing the labor).From my own experience, I would say Fluke meters weren't always as electrically robust as they are today. While I still own my first HP meter and have never damaged it after looking at how easily I damaged a new Keysight handheld and after seeing their glass filled detent spring crack after a few switch cycles, I am less than impressed.

author: floobydust
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2021, 02:59:21 am
content: Away from the pristine workbench environment, handheld multimeters used out in the field need to be tough.Which multimeters have EMC, drop-test, vibration specs and an IP rating?Adam Savage's favorite Fluke 101 seems to be the cheapest DMM to have all of that- but Fortive seem to be playing games and have erased it- is it even for sale in North America now?The Fluke 107 USD $120 seems to be their lowest-end offering.

author: Analog4
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2021, 05:10:26 am
content: The Fluke 101 seems to be for sale on Amazon... $55https://www.amazon.com/Fluke-101-Multimeter-Resistance-Capacitance/dp/B00HE6MIJY

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2021, 05:36:01 am
content: I have had many DMMs over the years. High quality, brand named ones. El cheapos. Down to the ones that used to be free at Harbor Freight. I have had very few mechanical failures on any of them. If you drop a large casting on any of them some damage will occur. Those that have bail handles often break the handles, but this has no real impact on use. Leads do fail more frequently on the cheaper devices. But good leads and a cheap meter come in for less dollars that one of the brand name jobs. For most things you do with hand held meters, and particularly the kind of work that Adam Savage is describing don't require much in the way of accuracy. 10% probably more than enough. So I would look for just a few things if looking for a meter for Adam Savage type purchases. 1. Compact size. 2. Auto off or other feature to give very long battery life. 3. Rapid response on the continuity test.I'll leave it to the pro electricians and linemen that do all of their work on high energy circuits to obsess over the safety aspects. They really do need the Flukes and Simpsons and other top quality meters.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2021, 08:50:22 am
content: Quote from: floobydust on March 07, 2021, 02:59:21 amI don't think it was ever officially for sale in North America, it's one of Flukes "Asian Market" meters.

author: wizard69
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2021, 03:33:57 pm
content: Fluke may be poorly managed but I'd still rate them as one of the best meters to own for professional usage. I have had a lot of handheld meters over the years, from different manufactures and freely admit to using cheaper ones at home but for work I'd go with Fluke every time.I always here the whine about the lack of features but I'd really like to know how often these so called desirable features actually get used. Has anybody actually used a transistor checker feature on their two dollar meter and trusted the result? To the best of my knowledge nobody has an usable capacitance feature. If you need an LCR meter, then buy one. In many cases the same can be said for temperature monitoring. It is all about the right tool for the job.I'm a little tired to get into a discussion here but this Fluke hate is pretty senseless to me. To me it isn't any different than buying a Cannondale bike over a two bit Walmart special. Some people can't see the value in a unit that does the same thing. For others the quality of implementation makes all the difference.All of that said I do believe that fluke is somewhat behind in producing modern meters with modern interfaces. The problem here is that the meters that are really innovative in this respect are pretty expensive anyways.Quote from: David Hess on March 06, 2021, 05:34:30 pm

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2021, 04:08:49 pm
content: Quote from: Analog4 on March 07, 2021, 05:10:26 am$40 on Aliexpress, shipping included:https://www.aliexpress.com/wholesale?SearchText=fluke+101At that price everybody should have one.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2021, 04:22:52 pm
content: Quote from: wizard69 on March 07, 2021, 03:33:57 pmYou pay $450 for a meter and get a set of crappy TL75 leads and the carry case is another $70 extra?

author: J-R
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2021, 08:25:18 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 07, 2021, 04:22:52 pmOK, I'll play a little, I've got the Fluke 87V, 88V and 287, and none came with the TL75 leads, none cost me $450 and the one Fluke C35 carrying case I did buy was $23.79.So your comment is neither accurate nor productive.If you have a specific technical issue with a specific Fluke product, simply state the facts so we are aware of it.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2021, 09:53:25 pm
content: Quote from: J-R on March 07, 2021, 08:25:18 pmLucky you.In my country there's no such thing as a second hand Fluke 87V and a new one would cost much more than $450.Result? I bought a Brymen with more features for $180. Gold plated leads and case were included.Quote from: J-R on March 07, 2021, 08:25:18 pmMaybe that wasn't what was being discussed here. Maybe that's just you barging in.

author: J-R
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2021, 10:53:52 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 07, 2021, 09:53:25 pmThe fact remains you posted incorrect pricing and product information in direct response to a user located in the US. You even directed the words "You pay" at them.Quote from: Fungus on March 07, 2021, 09:53:25 pmAre you serious? In probably the most popular forum in the world for this type of discussion, specifically labelled "Products » Test Equipment", you consider a call out for a "specific technical issue" "barging in"?

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2021, 11:13:06 pm
content: Quote from: Analog4 on March 06, 2021, 10:15:06 pmI agree-----my work had several desk type Flukes from around that era.or decadesThe older one was erratic, but fixable, but the next generation one was horrible.The saying was:- "It's a Fluke if it works!"The stuff we used was routinely packed up, put into a road case & taken all over the State, so reliabilitywas at a premium!I never liked any of the handheld ones with the side buttons, either, but my more sensibly designed 77 has lasted for decades!The first handheld DMMs we had were Beckman (or " Beckperson" as we called'em).You could play football with them, & they would still work.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2021, 11:40:36 pm
content: Quote from: J-R on March 07, 2021, 10:53:52 pmLet's start with "Why hasn't the 87V been upgraded to CAT IV 1000V like the Brymens have?". I'm sure all the "pro electricians and linemen that do all of their work on high energy circuits" would appreciate that.Instead we find them fitting cheaper fuses in the latest models, visible tracks on the PCB after less than 100 cycles of the selector and missing o-rings (QC issues)?https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/fluke-87v-(2021)-teardown/msg3498862/#msg3498862Then there's "Why can't they add True RMS and a bar graph to the Fluke 17B+" (for example)? Is it because it would be expensive to do? The 17B+ would be a truly great hobbyist meter if it had those two things and could eat up a whole lot of Brymen sales. Are Fluke working on that?etc.

author: NoisyBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 12:03:03 am
content: I have a tiny sample size so it is statistically insignificant. But I have owned two 8000A for at least 15 years, both bought from eBay for nostalgic reason, one was broken from the start, but the other one has worked flawlessly. After an adjustment (thanks to Joe's guidance) a little over a year ago, it was back within spec. I just finished a checkup, all measurement are still within spec. I also pulled all the original electrolytic and checked them this time, all were still well within spec after 40+ years. That meter got used weekly, the only maintenance I do is to use deoxit D100, G100, and F100 to keep all the push buttons and input jacks clean. So I guess I am the lucky one, I plan to revive the other 8000A this summer if it is fixable.Quote from: joeqsmith on March 06, 2021, 11:14:04 pm

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 01:15:49 am
content: Quote from: David Hess on March 06, 2021, 05:34:30 pmThey have earned that reputation and loyalty.Name another digital meter brand that has been in continuous production for like 35 years like the 70 and 80 series have.Are you saying that the modern 70 and 80 series meters are crap?

author: Wytnucls
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 05:45:49 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 07, 2021, 11:40:36 pmFluke has the Amprobe HD160C already, CAT IV 1000V, with an IP rating of 67. Working outdoors with a meter that lacks an IP rating would be foolish, even if rated for 1000V.That cheap 87 V may be a refurbished unit, for all we know.The 17B was designed to compete in the low price Asian market.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 06:34:54 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 07, 2021, 11:40:36 pmThe 80 series has never really been targeted at the high end industrial testing market.They have the new 87V-MAX BTW:https://www.fluke.com/en-au/product/electrical-testing/digital-multimeters/87v-maxBut I don't think any Fluke branded meter has a 1000V CAT IV rating.And it's not just about the actual rating, it's also about confidence in the brand and work history, and how the meter performs in destructive overloads.It could very well be the case were a better designed 600V CAT IV meter is actually safer than a lesser designed 1000V CAT IV meter. Even the likes of Joe's testing is nothing compared to what a meter may experience in true high energy failure scenario.I think you'll have a hard time finding any industrial electrical person complaining that their Fluke 70 or 20 series meter isn't rugged and safe enough as-is.

author: mansaxel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 07:31:04 am
content: I think that, as Dave writes above, Fluke has earned its reputation and following. Last week I unpacked my 5th Fluke, an ex-Swedish Army 8060A that cost me all of 15€ plus shipping. Fitted a new 9V battery, and as they say, Fluke sez Bam! (30mΩ off on that range is within stated accuracy, by far.)Now, I am not the least surprised by the fact that by inclusion in a bigger corporation, there will be a focus on economical production and volume of sales. That is a natural consequence of management being recruited for expertise in capital gains vs performance gains. Of course one should not be surprised by comparatively small companies, pre-corporate-transition, having a more original product focus.Also, if you look where Fluke aims their marketing (at least here in Sweden), it's at the electrical contractor / process automation market, who all of a sudden find that they must actually understand what they're doing and be able to document it.That people whose focus area is best served by a precision bench DMM (because that is what electronics construction and tinkering probably would find most use for) then find the Fluke range less enticing is not entirely surprising. Sure, the entry-level electronics tinkerer (they who just learned to build a hardware debouncer for their Arduino) will probably have a handheld meter, but that is -- in spirit -- mostly an intermediate step to the 3458AI think that the Savage recommendation is a sensible one.Are there cheaper meters? Yes.Is Fluke the best available? No.Will it, in spite of that, still not kill the user while giving a sensible reading? Most certainly.And final note on capacitance measurement. I have the Fluke 123, which was until theunscrupulous enablersfine people of the TEA thread made me ask for, and receive a DE-5000 as a birthday gift, was my only capacitance tester. It's somewhat crude, but it works. It with confidence identifies a broken motor capacitor, and that is probably its intended usage. Saved me from buying a new clothes dryer.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 09:38:00 am
content: Quote from: J-R on March 07, 2021, 10:53:52 pmReally? $449 is the price that comes up on Fluke USA's web page if I do a google search.Fluke's 87V page says "TL75" on it for the supplied leads:https://www.fluke.com/en/product/electrical-testing/digital-multimeters/fluke-87v

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 09:55:36 am
content: Quote from: mansaxel on March 08, 2021, 07:31:04 amI don't believe anybody's denying that. The problem is that Fluke has changed from a "make the best meter possible" company into a "Milk them for the most profit" company.Let's take the infamous 87V for example. Is there a single person here who can't think of a way to improve it?eg. 9999 counts so that you have the same number of digits on screen when you're measuring 5V and when you're measuring 7V?99 999 counts in high resolution mode?A decent AC TRMS bandwidth - like the Fluke 8060A had in the 1970s and a [urlhttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/recommendations-for-inexpensive-dmm-with-dbm-readout-at-audio-bandwidth/msg3497623/?topicseen#new]dBm scale.A way to power on in DC current mode by default, or at least not keep switching back to AC mode every time you move the selector.None of that changes the operation of the meter and can only enhance it's reputation.Quote from: mansaxel on March 08, 2021, 07:31:04 amMe too. The Fluke 101 is a bargain for $40, evenI'vegot one.Quote from: Wytnucls on March 08, 2021, 05:45:49 amIt's also carefully designed to not be able to compete with any of Flukes cash cows in the US of A.Flukeusedto make meters with TRMS and bar graphs in that price range but they phased them out. eg. this one:Why would they stop making meters like that? ONly one reason I can think of - to stop taking sales away from more expensive meters.I also have a really hard time believing that Fluke can't make a 17B with a decent continuity tester, etc. It's obviously bad on purpose.

author: Wytnucls
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 12:02:29 pm
content: The 112 had a dismal bandwidth of 500Hz and lame resolution (1mV/10mA). Something more akin to the 101 series.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 12:21:21 pm
content: Quote from: Wytnucls on March 08, 2021, 12:02:29 pmThe 112 and 117 is targeted for electricians. There is nothing wrong with it, its just not for electronics.Quote from: mansaxel on March 08, 2021, 07:31:04 amI have to agree. You could argue that there is the Brymen xxxx which is better for price, and the specifications is better. But there is the Fluke will be available in the local shop, and the Brymen likely not. And you can list a bunch of meters, people will only remember that it should be "the yellow one". And for Fluke, you can pick up practically any of the meters from today, or from 10 years ago, and it is likely going to be good enough.And I like the fact that his specific recommendation is one without current measurement. I dont think absolute beginners, or people who are not interested in electronics, or children should have multimeters with current measurement. Or more than 2 input jacks.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 12:39:02 pm
content: Quote from: Wytnucls on March 08, 2021, 12:02:29 pmThat's still more than the newer 17B.You're missing the entire point though: Fluke has stopped trying. They have two or three cash cows in the west and two or three deliberately crippled meters in the east.In the west they're even gouging customers who want decent leads with their flagship meter.

author: Wytnucls
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 01:03:04 pm
content: I dont have sales figures for Fluke to know if these are hot sellers or not, but the company innovated somewhat with the 3000FC, several scope multimeters, the 279FC, 3000FC, 28II Ex and the 233.As for the price gouging, that's par for the course in the real world.Check the price of accessories for luxury cars.In Europe the 87V comes standard with TL175 AFAIKThe Brymen 869 has been around for the best part of 12 years now. Not much has improved since then, not even an auto-hold feature, like on their latest models. No IP rating, NCV, or LoZ.So Fluke is not an isolated case. Gossen has tried to freshen up their low range, but they are still quite expensive, with few redeeming features.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 01:17:59 pm
content: Check the price for a Gossen magnetic hanger.

author: wizard69
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 03:55:54 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 08, 2021, 09:55:36 amProbably because it is a feature few people use. I can't even remember using a bar graph on a digital meter. Like a lot of features people pine for it is more fluff than useful.As for your other desires do realize that the target market really doesn't care! They would rather buy a known quantity than to experiment with features they don't need.There are plenty of fancy meters about, this one from AEMC: #MTX 3293B, is really interesting if a fancy display and a few extras are what you want. However the price makes Fluke look like a discounter. Further such a meter doesn't have a lot to offer the average Fluke user. I don't deny that there are meters with more "functionality", rather that most of these features don't offer the Fluke user much incentive to switch.Now all of that said, yes it would be nice to see Fluke innovate or at least enhance its meters more. Some things I'd love to see in a reasonably low cost meter:Larger displays, especially the main digits.Make that display bright.Backlight the dial and pushbuttons. (yes i could use more light at work). Or combine 1-3 here and implement a large touch screen. Here is where conflicts come in, it is hard to beat the glove friendly nature of buttons and knobs.Implement an open Bluetooth communications facility. More so make data collection dead simple! It takes way to much time to setup classic systems to collect arbitrary data. Fluke at otne time had a thermocouple based temperature monitor that could be set to simply stream out the meters readings to a serial port. CSV files please.Do away with compatibility with any sort of Alkaline battery. I don't really care if it is a primary cell solution or a rechargeable, I just don't want the temptation of leaking batteries in expensive meters anymore.If you are going to have the capability to monitor temperature make that capability totally independent of the other functions on the meter. I generally find temperature ranges on handheld meters to be pretty useless if they require switching away from the meters other features. This is why for the most part i prefer a separate meter for temperature monitoring. As such I'm not even sure I'd make use of an independent channel for temperature monitoring. The need to electrically isolate this feature would also likely drive up the cost so up in the air on this feature.Provide a flashlight function. yeah working in the dark againSpeaking of temperature, a display of ambient temperature would be useful. This could be done cheaply with a silicon detector.Put a hole in the case for a reasonably size Carabiner or cordage. Yeah I know making this not look like hell would be a challenge. However safety is important and part of that means keeping things on a leash when working at heights.There is a lot to be said for solar power. You may not have enough power available to run the unit but you could supplement a rechargeable battery and thus deal with the short run times rechargeables offer. Beyond that a modern meter should use modern low power semiconductor technology which would benefit battery and the efficacy of solar.An output to drive a separate and VERY LOUD buzzer for continuity checking. Either that or pair with and send beeps, to a Bluetooth connected head phones. I have one primary use here and that is to aid in the debug of large loops of guard door switches.mathematics. In this case the ability to apply a slope to the value being read.In any event a quick list. Note that many of these amount to "lets make existing functions more usable". So yeah I have nothing against innovation, just make it something I can actually benefit from having.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 07:58:16 pm
content: Quote from: HKJ on March 06, 2021, 08:01:16 pmKeysight handheld meters are in no way as robust as Flukes. They’re not designed as well, and they’re not built as well. You get more features for your money, but it comes at a cost. Fluke meters generally stay in-spec for decades. One of my Keysight handhelds had drifted out of calibrationwhile new in box. (I got it for peanuts so I was OK with it.) Joe mentioned a knob breaking. Not to mention the extremely widespread display failures on the OLED models.There are other brands of meters that truly compete with Fluke in the industrial markets where reliability is paramount. Think Gossen, Chauvin Arnoux, Hioki.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 08:03:19 pm
content: Quote from: wizard69 on March 08, 2021, 03:55:54 pmSwitch to temperature mode (with no thermocouple) and short the probes. Voila, ambient temperature.The 87V actually has two internal temperature sensors already: the cold junction compensation sensor (the one that reads the ambient shown in the process above), and a thermistor that automatically adjusts display contrast.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 08:09:00 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 07, 2021, 11:40:36 pmLittelfuse fuses are not lower quality than Bussmann, and I actually don’t think they’re any cheaper, generally speaking. I’m pretty sure Fluke has used both brands for a long time, even if they mostly use Bussmann.Initial scuffing of the selector contacts is perfectly normal. The question is, how does it hold up to 10 years of heavy use?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 11:23:24 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 08, 2021, 09:55:36 amWho says theyhaveto improve something that's been an industry standard for 35 years?Also, big companies like this are slow and hesitant to make changes. Take my GSM video that exposed an issue with the 87V, it took then 12 months to come out with a fix for it. I asked then why it took so long and they said something along the lines of "We like to take our time and make sure it's done right, and changing an industry standard product is a big deal".They are up to v5 so it's not like they haven't changed it. But it's like Keysight and their scopes, the Megazoom IV ASIC is now something like 11 years old and it's still selling.But maybe the real reason why they haven't changed the 87-V since it's release in 2004 is because their big customers don'twantthem to change it.Heck Fluke is the company that had to introduce the dumbed down 27-II thatdidn'thave True RMS because their military customers demanded it because countless test procedures had already been produced around the previous model.Fluke is a company that has a different focus to more consumer oriented companies.

author: Analog4
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 11:24:24 pm
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on March 07, 2021, 11:13:06 pmAt work, we used to say that about the Fluke 8000A back in 1978...."It's a Fluke if it works!"I still have the first digital multimeter I purchased (Beckman DM20) . My old Lafayette VOM died years ago.I generally trust my old Fluke 70 more than the Beckman DM20. I think a Greenlee DM860 may be in my future.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2021, 11:39:57 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 08, 2021, 11:23:24 pmYes, this "change it right now" seems to be very 21 century thinking.The company receives feedback. They write it down, write a change request. If there are plenty of them, they review them and maybe they get implemented. It's not software, you cannot change already shipped products. And sometimes you just have to take a step back, and say:"I hear you, but the product is actually good enough in our opinion, so we are not going to change it, despite your valid criticism."

author: J-R
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2021, 12:03:29 am
content: There are Fluke and reseller kits available with different accessories included. Fluke typically sells at list price although currently they are having a sale on some products. I'm not sure why anyone in 2021 would not check around for the best deal.$441.99 "Industrial Electrician Combo Kit"https://www.amazon.com/Fluke-87V-E2-Industrial-Electrician/dp/B000TKPRFO$439.99 "Multimeter VIP Kit"https://www.transcat.com/brand/fluke-store/fluke-digital-multimeters/fluke-87-5-vip-fluke-87-5$349.88 "87V/E2"https://www.ebay.com/itm/FLUKE-87V-E2-Industrial-Electrician-Combo-Kit-UGLY-BOX-SPECIAL/124607102254

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2021, 06:40:55 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 08, 2021, 11:23:24 pmTotally agree. It boggles my mind how some people struggle to understand that change for the sake of change isn’t actually a virtue. And that change causes a domino effect of costs in many situations.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2021, 07:18:39 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 08, 2021, 11:23:24 pmObviously they don'thaveto do it.Quote from: tooki on March 09, 2021, 06:40:55 amWhat's the alternative? Never change, still be producing the exact same 87V 100 years from now?That'sthe mentality that boggles my mind - that even a once-per decade feature refresh is unthinkable.(Yeah, yeah, the "87V Max"...)Imagine it's 2015 and Fluke releases the 87VI with 9999/99999 counts, 200MHz TRMS bandwidth and it autoranges twice as fast.Small changes that won't affect any procedures or manuals unless they rely on getting "wrong" measurements (eg. when measuring a 20kHz signal).Are you saying you wouldn't want one?I'm calling bullshit on that.I'm betting that a lot of people around here would buy onejustto get the faster autoranging.I'd also bet a lot of money that Fluke could release a decent $200 meter and all those entrenched contracts, procedures and manuals would suddenly start being reevaluated.Bottom line: It's the Fluke name and yellow color that counts, not the exact technical specs of the meters.PS: A lot of the richest companies in the world are built around "change for change's sake", eg. Apple, Microsoft, Google, Auto makers...

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2021, 07:52:52 am
content: Agree with you last point.Some products are just “done”. Unfortunately marketards keep pushing for ground breaking new ideas and things so they can up sell over the competition. At best a product line should be honed carefully, the 87 series being a fine example.But realistically a lot of companies never get to “done” and barely I suspect actually end up putting a product in an end user’s hand. Working in isolation is risky.Keysight are a fine example of that. The U1241C proudly states it has an auto hold feature, but it’s unusable. Did anyone ever actually put it in an engineer’s hand? When whining about this I am told that I need to go into a menu and set something and do this and do that. So the end user gets into defending poor defaults. Really it doesn’t work anything like it should even with that set up.Brymen are another example with the 867. Proudly stating backlight. But it’s horrible and turns off before you’ve got to take the reading you need. Doh. But that’s worse is the horrible sub mode memory which means every time you rotate the switch you have to decipher which annunciators are on to work out which sub mode you left it in last time. Then reason about how many times you have to press to button to get it back to where you want about it.So that’s why people go Fluke first. Someone actually acknowledged something was done and thought about the end users.The competition is too busy marketing features and new lines while repeating the same mistakes over and over again.Edit: as for the aforementioned 8000A, that thing is a turd. But they learned from it and didn’t make the mistakes again.

author: floobydust
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2021, 07:54:35 am
content: John Fluke Co. spent a lot of money on R&D. To make a top notch DMM, you must have many custom parts - the multimeter IC, the resistor divider array, the PTC/MOV's, the fuses - all are custom Fluke parts because what's out there wasn't feasible and he had no problem blazing the trail.But the Fluke silicon is getting old and would have to be redone to modernize the feature set. Linear Tech's openness gobbled up by Analog Devices and when's the last time they made anything custom? North American semiconductor manufacturers have nothing for a DMM IC, beyond the antique Maxim MAX134. You'd have to go to Asia and Hycon or Crystek - and your IP would get ripped off or volumes too low for them to bat an eyelash.Fortive/Danaher continues to milk the old cow and provide value to shareholders. The 87V Max shows they can only make little changes here and there for fear of wrecking the legend. Gone are the days of engineering as the emphasis, nowadays it's all short-term corporate profit as the goal. Fortive/Danaher is impotent with regards to innovation and new product development, they will never make new custom silicon for a new DMM. Agilent handhelds didn't try either.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2021, 10:29:10 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 08, 2021, 11:23:24 pmIt alreadyhaschanged over that time, IV times!Some of those changes were quite big: They moved buttons around, the number of counts changed, they changed the current range default from DC to AC, they added temperature, they changed the way you switch into hi-res mode...All those are changes that would break procedures, manuals, etc.PS: What was wrong with the87 IV? It seems to have been very short lived.

author: Wytnucls
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2021, 11:13:54 am
content: Nothing wrong, except that it had nothing in common with the 87III. It was dropped along with the 89 IV, to introduce the 187 and 189.To fill the gap between the 87III and the new meters, the 183 and 185 were coralled at night from Tektronix.Strangely enough, the new 189 had less internal memory than the retiring 89 IV (100 versus 700). Otherwise they were identical.The 187 gained a better voltage accuracy and an optional computer logging over the 87 IV.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2021, 12:47:00 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 09, 2021, 10:29:10 amIn much the same way UNI-T has changed their UT-61, Fluke seems to like the number "87". I wonder why.Nice looking high contrast paper white background 187. I've never seen one look near that nice in the wild.

author: Wytnucls
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2021, 02:18:12 pm
content: This is as good as it gets.The 89 IV seems to have the edge in this picture:

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2021, 06:19:01 pm
content: I watched this video a couple of months ago and completely understand his reasoning to get a Fluke again - one without current measurement no less, for extra protection against user error. I would be a bit weary of actually vouching for the 101*, but I fully understand his reasoning.Regarding the Fluke vs. others debacle, from my POV there is no uncompromised solution. Fluke DMMs compromise the latest features and accuracy but rest on their laurels of track record, durability and resilience to abuse. I know of a few other brands that have reasonable track record as well (Sanwa and Hioki come to my mind, mostly because I know how several popular VOMs sold in Brasil in the 80s are still alive and well, but others would probably make that list).Also, thinking about Fluke as DMMs only is a bit myopic. A quick glance at their test measurement product line (not counting biomedical, etc.) reveals a vast array of products.As for longevity and track record, it clearly has an immense value in the marketplace - otherwise, whySimpson meterswould still be sold new and at a very steep price?*I had quality problems in two units - one missing anunciators and both with corrosion/crude inside. Sure, they were bought from online stores therefore one can't necessarily guarantee proper storage conditions, but both were new and un-opened from what I could tell.

author: Analog4
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2021, 08:46:36 pm
content: According to the multimeter spreadsheet....The Bryman BM869 & Greenlee DM-860A have a single 9V battery.The Fluke 87V has a 9V batteryFluke 289 & 287 use 6 AA batteries. Those meters need an update for battery power draw.

author: wizard69
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 04:02:14 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 08, 2021, 11:23:24 pmIf people haven't worked in a regulated industry they have no idea how much of a problem it can be to get something changed. I got involved in a project to replace an illuminator on a centering machine. In this case nothing more than a dirt simple illumination source and a fiber optic. The paper work took far longer than the mechanical design. Having a known instrument that remains stable in its design over the years, just makes managers feel comfortable. The very thing that people here complain about in reference to Fluke is exactly why they have the following they do.As a side note, if somebody 30 years ago would have tired to tell me that I would not be able to buy light bulbs for optical instruments, in 2020, I would have laughed. Now I'm the one searching all over the planet for specialist bulbs because of the tremendous amount of work involved in buying something modern and getting the validation done.

author: wizard69
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 04:43:03 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 09, 2021, 07:18:39 amIt is only a problem if your mind has been biased believing that frequent updates are a good thing. Some designs are just classics and don't need constant updating. Consider some things from the mechanical world, The BridgePort Mill, The Hardinge HLV or Monarch 10EE lathes. These designs have remained basically the same for decades now. The only changes being made to items technology passed by. To be honest I don't expect Flukes mainstream meter to last for 5 or 6 decades but the followups will deliver the same class performance.QuoteWhich would immediately cause all sorts of grief in industries that have standardized on the 87. By the way fluke has other meters that it can innovate on.QuoteYour really have to become familiar with regulated industries before making comments like that. By definition changing the meter would require changing the SOP, manuals and any thing else related. Also wrong is meaningless here if you get different results with a new meter, by definition the results you get with the old meter are what you would need to duplicate and are "right". Otherwise you have to redo your procedures and go through a validation.QuoteMe, personally I might want one. Professionally it is an extremely complicated question to answer.Beyond that you seem to be one of these people obsessed with digits. Resolution has its value no doubt, but often it isn't needed.QuoteWell that is nice. The reality is far different and you don't seem to understand that the reason the model 87 still sells well is because customers what it the way it is. It might not be the meter for you but in many respects it is an industry standard.QuoteNope! Fluke would be better off offering a new meter that is a completely different model. I've been involved in more than a couple of engineering efforts to validate minor changes to a process or instrument and such an effort is often many times more involved than whatever minor change is being inflicted on the instrument. It is such tedious work that people will do almost anything to avoid the challenge.QuoteYes they do and frankly I have an Apple M1 based Mac Book Air, so I know exactly what that change for change sake does. However we are talking a different industry here, and Fluke with the 87 is doing what its users expects of it.You see here I'm more along your lines of thinking when it comes to buying stuff for personal use. That is if the budget allows for it, and often it doesn't, thus used stuff. However what is good for ones personal usage isn't so good for work. This is the difference, one situation I don't have a care about what I'm using the other I need to follow procedures.

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 05:20:51 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 09, 2021, 07:18:39 amI don't think anyone is going to rewrite and recertify their procedures to save a few bucks on a DMM that has a lifetime warranty anyway. And if they would, I suspect Fluke might worry that they might decide on a different product, given the vagaries of government and corporate contracting. One of the key selling points of the unloved Fluke 8846A is that it emulates 30-year old worn out meters, saving various operators the need of revisiting code that was written by people that retired 20 years ago.Some product areas thrive on change and innovation, whether contrived or genuine. Others don't and some products have been perfected, or at least brought to the point where further improvements are just not what customers are asking for. KitchenAid introduced the Model K mixer in 1937. You can buy one new today, completely compatible with all the bowls and accessories of an 80+ year old design. I think it is still the top selling stand mixer in the world.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 05:26:12 am
content: Quote from: wizard69 on March 10, 2021, 04:02:14 amThe funny thing is, Broadcasting was a "Regulated industry", but really, at least in Oz, the regulator didn't really give a stuff about how you achieved it, as long as the ultimate product transmitted to the viewers/listeners was within spec for the applicable Broadcast Standards.TV & sound broadcasting equipment was often subject to major modification over the decades of life which were common in the past, to allow for the unavailability of earlier components.Replacing all failed components "like for like" would have been incredibly costly, & pretty much untenable.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 06:27:35 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 09, 2021, 07:18:39 am... and IMHO, a lot of their changes are ultimately for the worse. I used to work as a UX designer, and the current trend of “airy”, “flat” UI design is a usability nightmare.Many good products do remain on the market unchanged (or as 100% drop-in replacements) for a long time. I was also going to give the example of KitchenAid stand mixers: their first model came out over 100 years ago, and to this day, all attachments sold for those work with a brand new one, and vice versa. They now sell additional models, but the base model is still a drop-in replacement.There are tons of tools that remain unchanged for decades or longer, because someone long ago got it right.Fluke got the 87V right. It’s an industry standard for a reason. There’s no one feature in it that is market leading. But the whole package is balanced just right for its target market,which isn’t you.For customers who want more “innovation”, they sell other models.Quote from: bdunham7 on March 10, 2021, 05:20:51 amFunny that you also thought of KitchenAid! I had already started a reply yesterday but ran out of time on the train. But even the pre-model K attachments are compatible.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 06:55:26 am
content: Quote from: wizard69 on March 10, 2021, 04:43:03 amNot really, I'm just sticking to changes thatwouldn'tneed procedures/processes to be rewritten but would still improve then meter and get the world buzzing/talking about the new Fluke87 VI.I get that moving buttons around is bad but having the same number of digits on screen when measuring 5V and 7V seems a natural progression that wouldn't confuseanybodybut could sell a few more meters.Similarly: The time for the result to appear on screen isn't going to be written inanymanuals but "industry's fastest autoranging" would be a selling point.Quote from: wizard69 on March 10, 2021, 04:43:03 amFluke isn't doing that though, or if they do it's always at a price point or feature combination that doesn't compete with the 87V.(ie. It will either be more expensive or deliberately lacking an important feature - eg. TRMS/uA)This^^^ is what makes me suspect that the 87V isn't as cast-in-stone as everybody is saying. I'm not saying you could take it away without leaving a major problem but I don't believe it's 100% impossible to incrementally improve it. It would still be a Fluke 87, people could still ask for it by name and sign off on it without thinking.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 12:19:28 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on March 10, 2021, 06:27:35 am^^^ ThisIt's actually kinda nice to have a long term standard like this.Also, don't forget government and military contracts. It's not uncommon for governments and the military to get companies to comit to supply contracts for sometimes decades. That means theycan'tchange it.Well, theycouldrelease an 87VI, but they'd likely still have to comit to producing the 87V, and that could be confusing for the market.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 12:30:43 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 10, 2021, 06:55:26 amTry reading a few military manuals some time, you'd be surprised how little things you might not think matter, matter.Just the act of changing the name from 87V to 87VI would require a change.QuoteYou need to work in a heavily regulated industry to understand.Counts changes the resolution on autoranging too rendering info showing significant figures no longer matching.QuoteWhy would they want to compete with their own top selling product?Standard business practice to be very careful about that.You seem upset that Fluke aren't making the meter you want at the price you want. I'd try and get over that, because they probably never will.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 01:36:41 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 10, 2021, 12:30:43 pmNo, I'm trying to understand why we'll all still be using the Fluke 87V a thousand years from now.Makes no sense to me.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 01:42:03 pm
content: Quote from: Analog4 on March 09, 2021, 08:46:36 pmI personally prefer 9V batteries due to leakage issues with AA/AAAHowever, the more modern Lithium non-rechargeable batteries are also pretty good with regards to leakage, thus the scales are tipping a bit (not all meters have good battery life with rechargeables, unfortunately).

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 03:52:28 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 10, 2021, 01:36:41 pmFungus, we talked about this inanother thread, where there are some untangible features that are really not able to be translated to a specifications sheet or manual.The 87V seems to be a perfect storm of characteristics of a DMM - at least attested by its popularity. Objectively, the meter performs very well the fundamental functionality of a DMM (V/Ω/A) within an accuracy that covers probably 99.9% of the use cases, has incredible resilience to abuse built into the product and attested by decades of history and it may be a real cash cow for its maker due to the small changes to its internals and interface (probably driven by the availability of its core processor, currently an MSP430).

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 04:15:48 pm
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on March 10, 2021, 03:52:28 pmI'm not saying it's no good, I'm saying it's still got a little bit of space for improvements.But ... the people here say it's untouchable, that no change is ever possible or even desirable.I have a hard time with that.I find itmucheasier to believe that if Fluke announces the Fluke 87 VI tomorrow then everybody here would be on the Fluke website within 10 seconds to read the specs and find pricing/availability.Youincluded.

author: mansaxel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 04:34:49 pm
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on March 10, 2021, 05:26:12 amI work in the broadcast industry as well, and we are a regulated industry, still.Our license to transmit requires us to do (and not do) a lot of things, and some of those are related to physics, like frequencies, output power, complicance to EBU standards (R 128 for programme loudness comes to mind) et c.Fortunately, we (and our sub-contractor who is responsible for transmissions) only need to prove that we are right, and that shall be verified by the regulator. We don't have to have a process approval, only an end result approval.The overwhelming part of "regulation" as a matter of fact controls what you publish, which can be checked with patience, a TV set, and a stopwatch.In medical, aerospace, and similar industries, the result counts, but the process might cause harm while producing the result, so the process is regulated to much higher degrees.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 05:16:06 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 10, 2021, 01:36:41 pmThe reasoning has been explained to youad nauseam. I really think you don’t understand (and actively refuse to believe) just how important these other aspects are. Just because model stability isn’t important toyoudoesn’t mean it’s not ofparamountimportance to others!Quote from: Fungus on March 10, 2021, 04:15:48 pmAllchange involves risk. It may be huge, it may be tiny, but it’s always non-zero. Some fields areextremelyrisk-averse, because the cost of failure is extremely high. Is it really worth it, to an airline or aircraft manufacturer, to risk passenger safety by updating test procedures to accommodate a new meter’s extra digit of resolution, when the old meter already offered more digits of resolution than they needed? What’s the cost to update the procedures and distribute them to all customers? Can you even ensure they all get it? And will they adhere to it? What if that extra digit of resolution gets misread by an experienced tech who is very accustomed to the old readings?Quote from: Fungus on March 10, 2021, 04:15:48 pmOf course we would go look. But that doesn’t mean we’d rush to actually replace our 87V’s, nor that we would rush to change all our test procedures at work.

author: Cubdriver
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 09:14:36 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 10, 2021, 01:36:41 pmBecause, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, there are applications where things are for all intents and purposes cast in stone. Things like military and aerospace test and maintenance. Procedures are written and certified using SPECIFIC MODELS of equipment. Rewriting them to use a different instrument entails a complicated, time consuming and very expensive recertification process. Companies are therefore understandably reluctant to switch from things that are working for their intended purpose to something new that has some bell or whistle that they do not need. Fluke understands this, and is as a result not inclined to make changes to a meter that is basically an industry standard.Hewlett-Packard introduced the 5245L electronic counter in 1963. It became wildly popular in industry, and as a result wound up in many test procedures. They introduced its intended replacement, the 5345A, in about 1975. The 5245L was last seen in the 1981 catalog, six years after the introduction of its 'replacement'. Its list price in 1981 was $1000morethan that of the 5345A. Why do you suppose they kept it around? Because companies that had it 'baked into' their test procedures would prefer to spend a few grand to buy a 'new' instrument with a nearly twenty year old design as opposed to buying something that was new and improved that would require expensive recertification. If memory serves, the 5340A counter followed a similar path, remaining as a "We'll build you one if youreallywant it but it'll cost you..." item in the catalogs for a few more years after its production had officially ended, for the same reasons.Sometimes new and improved isn't necessarily better.-Pat

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 10:10:31 pm
content: Quote from: Cubdriver on March 10, 2021, 09:14:36 pmAnd I've said repeatedly that I don't believe that those things are as cast in stone as you think they are. If they were we'd all still be using the Fluke 27FM.If something suitable and yellow comes along then things will change. Not overnight, sure, but... changecanhappen.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 10:52:52 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 10, 2021, 10:10:31 pmOr AVO Model 8?Quote

author: Cubdriver
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 10:54:41 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 10, 2021, 10:10:31 pmNor have I said that things never change - I'm simply pointing out that there are instances where it is complicated, time consuming and expensivetochange, and in those instances change is not implemented lightly, especially if what is currently in use works. If I can buy another of this meter that fulfills my needs and is currently written into my test procedure, or I can buy a 'new and improved' model that, for instance, settles faster or has a better continuity circuit (neither of which has any bearing on what I'm using the meter for), and spend what will likely be tens of thousands of dollars to certify this new meter for use in my testing,WHY WOULD I DO THE LATTER?You stated earlier "I'm not saying it's no good, I'm saying it's still got a little bit of space for improvements." Well, I think most anything falls into that category - you can nearly always make some slight improvement in something. The question is, is that improvement enough to justify the time and effort for those that use the meter to recertify a new device? It appears that, for the time being, Fluke does not feel that it is.-Pat

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2021, 11:15:39 pm
content: Quote from: mansaxel on March 10, 2021, 04:34:49 pmBack in the day, in Oz, the broadcast regulator was stern but fair, & concentrated mainly upon the technical aspects.Strangely, sound broadcasting was regulated by the PMG's Dept, (later hived off to a dedicated department), but TV broadcasting was under the control of the "Australian Broadcasting Control Board", who started out as a "programme standards" body, but ended up as a technical regulator as well.Today, broadcasting is pretty much "self policing", as the current regulator, ACMA, have pretty much lost all its Engineering staff, concentrating upon employing lawyers & "bean counters".That is why I refer to broadcast regulation in the past tense.l

author: floobydust
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 05:29:23 am
content: I did laugh and then cry that Fluke HQ is next door to Boeing in Everett Washington.Oh look, they both had "Max" projects as a rehash of some old product because they are unable to make anything clean slate.The 87 has changed over the years, old IC ran off 9V, now 5V so loss of compliance voltage but who really noticed.I think Fluke had a great monopoly bypatenting multimeter input protection (1993)so nobody could make something that tough without fear of litigation. It did give them a leg up for many years.Lots of market analysis on the global multimeter market, anticipated to increase 4.3% from USD $847M 2018 to $1,047M in 2024. It grew 5% from 2014 to 2019. Looks worth it to make something new.https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/digital-multimeter-market-19694516.htmlhttps://www.credenceresearch.com/report/digital-multimeter-marketBut the121GW Kickstarter 2017raised AU $645K. Does it really cost that much to make a clean slate multimeter? And Dave's not going down that road again for some reason.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 06:34:30 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 10, 2021, 10:10:31 pmIronically Fluke had to dumb down the new 28-II meter and make the 27-II meter just to satisfy their military customers.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 06:40:51 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 10, 2021, 04:15:48 pmNo one is saying that, we are just pointing out a reason why Fluke aren't that keen to upgrade it. Who knows, they might have been working on a new upgrade for 5 years or something and it's coming out soon, or maybe not.QuoteOf course they would, but that doesn't mean it's the overiding reason they upgrade like it is for other companies. The likes of Fluke, HP/Agilent/Keysight, and Tek are very different companies to your average, and have very different customers they focus on.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 06:45:03 am
content: Quote from: tooki on March 10, 2021, 05:16:06 pmAnd that's the trick.These meters are so expensive that people aren't just going to rush and out buy the new one. The number of people doing is a drop in the ocean compared to regular sales which very likely aren't drying up because the model is "old".If Fluke sell say 100,000 87V's a year and continue to do so regardless, what's an extra few thousand who might rush out and buy the new model mean? Nothing really.The big volume customers like government and military will buy either the existing model or the new model regardless, so that number doesn't really change.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 07:49:03 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 11, 2021, 06:34:30 amThe 87IV also seems to have been a climb-down - too big of a change all at once?

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 08:44:25 am
content: Quote from: floobydust on March 11, 2021, 05:29:23 amHah! I hadn't made that connection before. Is the introduction of a "Max" model the sign that a company is now fully institutionalized/fossilized.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 10:54:12 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 10, 2021, 04:15:48 pmI understand your point of view but I don't necessarily think that the more swnsible opinions are really saying the 87 is absolutely perfect, but instead that corporate and government pragmatism are the masters of the 87 innovation roadmap.Quote from: Fungus on March 10, 2021, 04:15:48 pmThis already happened with the 87 MAX, which is another proof of pragmatism: let's test the waters by launching a very low risk rebadge of another product already in production (the 28II). If "sticks", we make a PR campaign explaining why the 28II had to be discontinued.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 11:20:32 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 10, 2021, 10:10:31 pmJust because you refuse to believe something doesn’t mean it isn’t true. Lots of people believe the earth is flat, but that doesn’t make it so...

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 11:53:35 am
content: Quote from: tooki on March 11, 2021, 11:20:32 amDo you have any evidence to the contrary, eg. en actual example of an official procedure/manual which says "Take the Fluke 87V and select voltage mode, then measure voltage at test point A".Even if you do, how common would they be compared to one that says: "Using an approved multimeter, select voltage mode then measure voltage at test point A".Personally I'd hope they'd choose a much safer meter than the 87V for critical systems or life/death situations, eg. one that doesn't have four holes in the front to make mistakes connecting the test leads to it and only has one function per range selector position.eg.The Fluke 110.Oh, wait! That meter's only CAT III 600V...!Why would Fluke do something like that? Is it because people might buy the simple/easy 110 instead of one of their cash cow meters?FWIW I just looked at Flukesentire rangeand there's not a single meter on their site with only two input jacks and more than CAT III 600V rating. That's no accident, it compromises safety, and it shows just how "sold" Fluke are these days.Edit: No, I missed one! The 113 has a CAT IV 600V rating. It fooled me with fuzzy pixels and because they didn't write "Cat III 1000V" next to it on the meter. See below....Quote from: tooki on March 11, 2021, 11:20:32 amDo "lots" of peopleseriouslybelieve that?

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 11:54:33 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 11, 2021, 06:45:03 amAccording to Fluke it's their "Best value" meter!In other news: The 179 is their "best overall" meter.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 12:10:13 pm
content: Actual innovation from Fluke?I just saw this on their web site. An almost completely automatic meter for $150, CAT IV rated, Low Z check, bar graph, fast continuity buzzer (they actually give a number for that - 500uS response!), only two positions on the range selector switch and one secondary function (capacitance).Same electrical safety as an 87V but much safer operation. Maybe Fluke's safest multimeter is a $150 multimeter...?I really wasn't expecting a meter like this from Fluke. It's more like something Aneng would come up with.https://www.fluke.com/en-sg/product/electrical-testing/digital-multimeters/fluke-113OK, it's not much use to an EE but it shows Fluke hasn't firedallthe engineers yet.Over to joe...

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 12:57:10 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 11, 2021, 11:53:35 amThe Fluke 189 that a friend gave to me was owned by a friend of his who had passed away. The meter was actually own by a company that is no longer around. This company wrote software specifically for that meter (using the interface cable). The software helped semi-automate some of the measurements. I understand that when the meter was reaching it's end of life, the company basically bought much of the stock or had some exclusive deal. I doubt very much safety was considered in their choice to base their testing on the 189 as much as the features it offered.The US DOD used to have a website where they had scanned many manuals for the equipment they used. It was a gold mine for people like me who bought obsolete equipment for my hobby. After 9/11, they locked it down and I'm not sure if it still exists. Many of the scanned manuals you find today were taken from that site. Have a BAMA for example.Anyway.... reading these manuals, in many cases the test procedures would call out specific equipment to be used. I own an very old HP8640B RF generator. Large, heavy, LED readout, mechanically tuned.... It seems like it was a staple in the military due to how clean the output signal was, long after I would have expected the product to be obsolete.https://bama.edebris.com/download/hp/8640b/tm%209-4935-601-14-7&p.pdf

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 01:55:12 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 11, 2021, 11:53:35 amI’ll leave it up to (ex-) military folks to answer that, as they know it better than I. I have seen (non-military) procedure manuals specifying a particular model of test gear, though.Quote from: Fungus on March 11, 2021, 11:53:35 amWhile they’re still a minority, it’s a shockingly large number of people. (I mean, it should be zero. Not several percent. Some surveys put it at over 5%!!) If you have Netflix, there’s a glorious documentary about them called “Behind the Curve”. Be judicious about eating or drinking while watching it, as those people are inadvertentlyhilarious.https://www.netflix.com/title/81015076?s=i&trkid=255824129

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 01:59:11 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on March 11, 2021, 12:57:10 pmIs just that so that the grunts don't try to measure volts on the signal generator or is detailed operation of the equipment used contained inside each test procedure?ie. Does it say "measure the voltage using the HP1234A" then assume you're going to read the HP1234A operators manual to find out how to measure voltage, or does the test procedure include pictures of the HP1234A along with where to put the cables and which buttons to push.The "read the device manual" makes most sense but I've seen some military paperwork and it's measured in shelf-feet so the other option is entirely possible. OTOH it makes you incredibly dependent on availability of the devices so it seems like a really bad idea. It's also a lot more work to produce the documentation, but hey... taxpayer money!

author: dcac
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 01:59:47 pm
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on March 10, 2021, 01:42:03 pm9V batteries can leak too - but perhaps not as violently. On some leaky 9V I’ve encountered it started at the terminals then over to the connector and then it managed to creep inside the battery leads to the PCB.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 02:12:22 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on March 11, 2021, 01:55:12 pmYes, I've seen lists of "Equipment to be used" followed by a list of model numbers. What happens if the device breaks and they can't get another one? Work can't stop, there has to be a substitute device.(Pass me a pencil and I'll fix the manual...)The Army plans for availability and obsolescence. In the case of the Fluke 27FM I believe they made a deal with Fluke to garantee production for X number of years which is why Fluke was still making them well into the 21st century.

author: dcac
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 02:25:34 pm
content: Quote from: floobydust on March 11, 2021, 05:29:23 amI believe the 121GW was an unique situation where the manufacture (UEi) approached Dave with the idea of making a EEVBlog multimeter from scratch based on his input and to some degree his supervision - but as I understand it - he couldn’t really make any demands on the performance of the final product. So perhaps not really an ideal situation.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 05:24:37 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 11, 2021, 02:12:22 pmThe kinds of customers that have that level of strictness aren't exactly the kind who only buy just one. They have contracts with stipulations and will stock up if need be.Quote from: Fungus on March 11, 2021, 02:12:22 pmYeah, and then get your ass fired/discharged for gross negligence.Quote from: Fungus on March 11, 2021, 02:12:22 pmUmmmm, this proves the need for long-term product availability.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.)

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 06:14:59 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 11, 2021, 01:59:11 pmFor example they may have and alignment procedure for a radio and will call out the equipment to use and how to set it up. It would seem typical.I have worked on a few designs for the DOD. Everything was tightly controlled. Say you had a 10uF 16V Alum Elec from some vendor and you decided to change to the same part from another supplier.... Nope.. Want to change your code, nope. Also I understood that if something were to happen where we could not supply parts, they had some ways to make sure that was resolved.Some time ago I posted about Northrup and the MX missile. Takes it to a new extreme.I understand some civilian industries are very procedure driven. Makes sense really. Medical and nuclear power generation to name a few.

author: mansaxel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 07:10:04 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on March 11, 2021, 06:14:59 pmThe B-17 Flying Fortress is very complicated to get in the air and back down again, because there is a sequence of events that need to happen just right, or your flight ends prematurely in a bad way.Not until the check list was invented and mandated did the accident frequency drop enough that they could go to war and get shot down by external causes. Source:USAFWhen 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.Imagine being the radio operator in the movie Crimson Tide, trying to fix a VLF receiver with the two highest-in-command officers on the boat standing over him. The EE with their fantasy and skillsmightmake a Doc Brown appearance and conjure up a better-performing receiver from a chewing gum, a steel comb, and some cling film from the galley since their Brymen can measure the MF thanks to its frequency response, but the petty officer willreasonably reliablyswap a component or sub-assembly, adjust the PSU regulation to perhaps 2% precision using a Simpson 260, slap the receiver together, and receive the message.Likewise, the only non-manufacturing organisation I've ever worked in that took ESD seriously was the military. Probably because they have so much gear, run it so long, and have a lot of paperwork to get a FRU issued that there actually is some follow-up on causes of failure. Consequently, there is procedure.

author: Mortymore
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 08:10:35 pm
content: SpaceX also likes the yellow stuffNovember 2020May 2020

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 08:23:01 pm
content: That’s because they can easily get it in the right mode wearing those clothes

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 10:08:31 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on March 11, 2021, 01:55:12 pmI agree, one of the funniest docos I've seen in a long time.

author: LazyJack
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 10:09:29 pm
content: 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.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 10:11:35 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on March 11, 2021, 05:24:37 pmCorrect. I've had this confirmed to me by Fluke themslves.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 10:16:05 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 11, 2021, 07:49:03 amYes. 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.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 10:24:28 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on March 11, 2021, 08:23:01 pmI'm only surprised they haven't got SpaceX-branded versions from Fluke.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 10:42:17 pm
content: I’d buy one

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 10:56:02 pm
content: Quote from: mansaxel on March 11, 2021, 07:10:04 pmThis 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?)

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 10:58:19 pm
content: Quote from: LazyJack on March 11, 2021, 10:09:29 pmYou jest but does the same thing happen in the oscilloscope world? Is there some old Tektronix oscilloscope that's "untouchable"?

author: AVGresponding
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2021, 11:26:14 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 11, 2021, 10:58:19 pmIt'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.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2021, 02:17:01 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 11, 2021, 10:56:02 pmAlthough 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.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 12, 2021, 06:32:21 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 11, 2021, 10:56:02 pmNot 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

author: LazyJack
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2021, 07:40:49 am
content: 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.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2021, 07:57:12 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 12, 2021, 06:32:21 amMy 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.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2021, 08:57:23 am
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on March 12, 2021, 02:17:01 am3kOhms.Quote from: rsjsouza on March 12, 2021, 02:17:01 amThe 114 is a better all-round meter but it's only CAT III rated.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2021, 05:06:46 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 11, 2021, 11:54:33 amI 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."

author: oPossum
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2021, 05:36:22 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 12, 2021, 06:32:21 amYes! 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.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2021, 05:41:57 pm
content: Quote from: Bassman59 on March 12, 2021, 05:06:46 pmI find it weird that their "best overall" meter is $90 cheaper than their "best value" meter.Wouldn't that make the 179 better value?Quote from: Bassman59 on March 12, 2021, 05:06:46 pmEven when faced with logic like the above.

author: fcb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 12, 2021, 06:04:21 pm
content: 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.

author: mansaxel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2021, 08:56:57 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 12, 2021, 06:32:21 amI 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.

author: AVGresponding
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2021, 09:27:11 am
content: Quote from: mansaxel on March 13, 2021, 08:56:57 amHope that doesn't have the unshielded latching relays, like the M248B...

author: mansaxel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2021, 09:43:52 am
content: Quote from: AVGresponding on March 13, 2021, 09:27:11 amNo relays in the 25, as far as I can tell.

author: HKJ
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2021, 04:12:32 pm
content: Quote from: largeststage on May 09, 2021, 03:50:08 pmFrom link:QuoteI 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.

author: BeBuLamar
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2021, 07:14:12 pm
content: 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.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2021, 11:00:46 pm
content: Quote from: BeBuLamar on May 09, 2021, 07:14:12 pmIndeed 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).

author: Scherms
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 01:58:43 pm
content: 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...Quote from: shakalnokturn on April 05, 2022, 12:23:51 pm

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 12:06:22 am
content: Quote from: Scherms on April 01, 2022, 01:58:43 pmJust remember that you have to recalibrate the whole meter.

author: Scherms
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2022, 03:21:58 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 02, 2022, 12:06:22 amQuote from: shakalnokturn on April 03, 2022, 11:18:54 pmHere is an updated picture of the area in question on the Fluke 88v, there are differences than the 87v! What are the cap and resistor (blue box) doing there between the blank pads and the AD737 chip? Would they need to be removed for the mod?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 05, 2022, 11:13:20 am
content: Can you measure the value of that cap?Manual says: "AC conversions are ac coupled and are average responding, rms indicating. "

author: Scherms
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2022, 03:25:29 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 05, 2022, 11:13:20 amQuote from: shakalnokturn on April 05, 2022, 12:23:51 pmSorry no, butShakalnokturnmight do... and if only there was a circuit diagram for the 88v!If it is average responding then WTH is "rms indicating" supposed to mean here (oxymoron)?Do you have a link to the spec page of the AD737 chip indicated as that might shed some light?

author: HKJ
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2022, 03:42:04 pm
content: Quote from: Scherms on April 05, 2022, 03:25:29 pmThis means the meter is calibrated to show equivalent to rms with a sinus input. I suppose all average responding meters are calibrated that way.

author: Scherms
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 06, 2022, 04:32:38 am
content: EXPLAINEDQuote from: alm on April 05, 2022, 11:23:01 pm