Rigol Bench Digital Multimeters - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: ngkee22
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 17, 2010, 03:19:20 pm
content: I thought I would see what everyone thought about Rigol multimeters. From looking at the specs, they look like decent meters.Here are the model I am looking at.DM3058, DM3062.I currently have a Extech EX530 and does just about everything I need, I am just interested in getting a bench meter with more featuers.Leave your thoughts on Rigol multimeters and leave suggestions if you think there are better alternatives.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 17, 2010, 05:36:18 pm
content: I was surprised by the number of older, but highly accurate HP and Agilent bench DMM you can find on eBay, many are working. They are often in the $100-300, and given their reputation for support, they could be a cheaper way to go with similar risk as buying the Rigol: for a used HP the risk of it not working or being off spec, but if repaired properly worth 3-10x more than what you pay for it; for a new device with no reputation, of not living up to specs even if working.

author: ngkee22
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 17, 2010, 05:43:05 pm
content: I would rather buy HP/Agilent than most other brands, but usually they are expensive, especially new. I will watch ebay some and see what I can find.I wasn't aware that the Rigols had a bad reputation for the multimeters and didn't always meet specs. I only recenlty heard of the brand after reading about the osciloscope on this forum. I was hoping that since everyone liked the osciloscope, some of their other products would be good as well. That's why I have been trying to check the brand out a little on here and see what everyone thinks about Rigol.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 17, 2010, 06:27:24 pm
content: Hi,Sorry, I didn't mean Rigol has a bad reputation in DMM, its anunknownreputation, its neither bad nor good. You know what get with an HP or Agilent old or new, they spent decades establishing that reputation. Rigol made its name in oscilloscopes, and now is venturing into other test equipment.Consider for example the specs and cost of the reputable 34401A, I found without much searching:http://cgi.ebay.com/HP-Agilent-34401A-6-5-digit-Digital-Multimeter-DMM-/390208137568?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5ada37a960vs the DM3062, here just one, the basic Vdc accuracy of 0.0085%.http://www.rigol.com/templates/T_Product_en/index.aspx?nodeid=861http://www.tequipment.net/RigolDM3062.html?Source=GoogleYou can easily find reviews on the net. Here's one on the 3058, its 5 stars:http://www.globaltestsupply.com/c/221/Rigol_DM3058_Digital_Multimeter.htmlQuote from: ngkee22 on June 17, 2010, 05:43:05 pm

author: CDA
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: June 17, 2010, 06:28:09 pm
content: Also worth considering are Data Precision bench meters.I've got one here, 35 years old and spot on compared to my Flukes.I read somewhere that Fluke bought Data Precision's rights for bench meters sometime in the 70s, because they were further advanced than Fluke's.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 17, 2010, 10:46:35 pm
content: In my opinion, the Rigols are too close to similar Agilent/Fluke models in price to be worth it. Those brands are known for good quality, Rigol is quite unknown. Their scopes are wildly popular because Agilent re-branded them and they were one of the cheapest scopes that doesn't suck, but that doesn't mean they're great (it's just hard to do better without paying more). The DMM's are fairly unknown as far as I know. Documentation and support usually seems to suck. Do they publish at least full calibration documentation for their bench DMM's? They don't for their scopes, which is stupid in my opinion.If I was buying new, I'd be looking at the Agilent 344* stuff (eg. 34405A, 34401A) and the similar Fluke stuff. I've heard good things about Picotech, but don't think they're much cheaper.For hobby use, a used meter is much better value in my opinion. You can even get them calibrated from some ebay sellers. I would ask for a sample certificate and verify if they actually have adequate equipment that's in cal, or if they just plug it into a voltage standard and verify if it displays something close to 10V. This only makes sense with the more expensive units, since calibration is more-or-less a fixed cost, it doesn't make much sense to pay a premium to get a <$100 meter calibrated in my opinion.5.5 digits is fine for almost any use. 4.5 digit is usually good enough, but is not significantly better than many hand held meters. Note that bench meters (especially the older ones) usually focus on doing a few measurements (typically at least DCV and resistance, often ACV, sometimes DCI/ACI) very well, so they don't usually offer features like diode tests, continuity or capacitance. The newer models usually have more bells and whistles. Since they're often designed for system use (in automated test setups), they can usually do many readings per second, especially the newer ones. This often translates in quicker response, and makes it easier to see that a signal is unstable. I often get annoyed at the low update rates of my Fluke hand held meters when using them side-by-side.Some attractive units in my opinion (in no particular order):Keithley 192/195A/196/199: I like their LED displays. The latter two are more recent and have a nicer interface. The 192 is really limited, no current, and even ohms and AC are optional. Most of them have GPIB standard. The 199 has weird current ranges (either 3A or 30mA). The 195A's accuracy is not great for a 5.5 digit unit. The 196 is basically the 6.5 digit version of the 199, with a few extra features and slightly nice controls. The 192/195A/199 can occasionally found for around $100, the 196 is more expensive.Fluke 8840/8842: Nice units, but usually overpriced in my opinion. They usually sell for $200, but have similar features to the 5.5 digit Keithley/HP meters, which are usually much cheaper. The VFD is nice, if it's not dim from being on 24/7 for many years. AC measurement is optional. I think GPIB is also an option.HP 3468A/3478A: They are quite similar, the 3468A lacks GPIB and one lower range, and is usually significantly cheaper. I dislike their unlit LCD displays, and they lack features like relative measurement, but are fine units.HP/Agilent 34401A: This is still a current model, and is significantly more expensive than the others in this list. Nice VFD, nice controls, 6.5 digit, lots of features. Has continuity and diode tests. I think it usually costs like $400 or so. Has GPIB and RS-232.Keithley 2000: Competitor for the HP 34401A, specs and features almost identical. Fine unit. Not as popular, I would want to pay slightly less for it than the HP 34401A in similar condition. Has GPIB and RS-232.HP 3456A/3457A: Huge 19" reference meters. 6.5 digit, good accuracy (slightly better than the 34401A). These are sometimes available for cheap, but shipping can be expensive. The 3456A lacks current ranges, but has a nice LED display. The 3457A has the same bad unlit LCD display as the 3468A/3478A, but is a newer unit, and is faster for system use. Has some more math features, will do 7.5 digit via GPIB. Not very important features in my opinion. Some people claim that the 3456A is more stable. Both have resistance ranges into the Gohms and pretty low ranges (good resolution).There are some other brands like Datron, Solartron, Prema and Schlumberger which made precision DMM's similar to the HP 3456A/3457A, many of them are fine units, but they are less popular, and documentation is often harder to find (both Agilent and Keithley make documentation for their older stuff available on their website).There are also various older and less capable units, like the Keithley 'portable' series (eg. 197(A), 175(A)) and the Fluke 8800/8810, but if you're considering new Rigol units, you probably want more features.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 18, 2010, 12:20:25 am
content: Alm, that was a great view of the history of high end bench DMMs, it should make for a good reference for anyone. Thank you for sharing.For the readers here, I bought a used HP 3456A for $100 in perfect working order.It was ~ $8,000 in the early 1980s, and it is so well made so many working units exist today, a testament to HP's reputation for quality devices. As for support, the service and users manual exist from Agilent, and most spare parts are easily available.Buyers of used equipment should consider the availability of parts for repair, should it be necessary. Devices made after the 1990s have higher integration and custom parts that maybe hard to find. It helps to download the service manual from the maker to see what a repair will entail if needed. The simple answer is buying a cheaper damaged model to salvage.Newer gear seems not more accurate than previous, but often faster in measurement speed, automation, networking and data capture, maybe at a lower price too for a new device. These are great for labs doing large volume production measurements, integrations into networks, and eases documentation production, but its not essential for those working in single user measurement needs or the power hobbyist.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2010, 05:24:20 pm
content: A review of the Rigol DM3051http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&u=http://tm.eefocus.com/stupid/blog/08-10/159090_7757f.html&rurl=translate.google.com&twu=1&usg=ALkJrhgcQhFihiN5q61_B1DGlAvVr5J4mQIt looks like our independent evaluation concur with this test.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 08, 2010, 06:40:11 pm
content: Quote from: Joy at MCS on December 08, 2010, 05:50:08 pmAnd what is your experience with Rigol support? As a former customer who dumped them because they were giving a rats ass about their users I'd like to hear whats the situation for resellers?Does Rigol talk to you?And if Rigol talks, do you get to talk to someone with a clue?And once you talked to someone with a clue, is it also someone with a clue next time?