High-precision L/C Inductance Capacitance meter Design - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / projects

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 01, 2010, 06:26:01 pm
content: as requested by OP ofhttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=1855.0;topicseen... i have to move on here. So i hope some feedbacks...

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 01, 2010, 06:27:27 pm
content: Quote from: saturation on November 30, 2010, 10:02:34 pmok mr saturation! i think its time and place to discuss this more in depth. this looks nasty'ly simple (theoritically) and i've been astonished with it since the first time i opened the ee book and saw it. my basic rule is that when i cannot understand a simple system, then i should go even simpler. now, the RC and RL hi/lo pass filter is the most basic thing on earth, theoritically to build an LCR meter is great with the super simple 2 passive components circuit... but just how to practicality it is, is where i'm still stumbled at. so let me point out of what i understand...1) all we need is a setup/schematic shown in your link (either RC or RL), and... Vin supposedly be connected to some Vac generator... mcu PWM pin maybe?2) all on earth the basic equation is the famousw = 1 / RC. is this means, we need to setup a known w and R in order to get the C value?3) since we need to feed alternating V, is this means Vcc to -Vcc peak to peak instead of Vcc to 0V? so how to get the -Vcc voltage? can we put the R or L ground (as in the link's picture) to some dummy reference at Vcc/2 so we have Vcc/2 and -Vcc/2 seen by the filter circuit?4) and the rest of the math is done in mcu programming right? ok leave this for now, just assume i'm too good to program that "software'tically"... as i said, i always stuck with analog side.i'm looking forward/expecting/hope to see this basic questions evolve to a bigger thing like the many DIY circuits provided by dear fellow members here.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 01, 2010, 06:29:18 pm
content: maybe i got it wrong for the equation...continuation fromhttp://www.play-hookey.com/ac_theory/hi_pass_filters.htmlhere goes the ugly sketching. hope i got clearer solution.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 01, 2010, 06:31:10 pm
content: Quote from: saturation on December 01, 2010, 04:08:02 pm

author: jimmc
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 01, 2010, 07:41:41 pm
content: How about doing it this way?http://www.sillanumsoft.org/ZRLC.htmJim

author: TechGuy
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 01, 2010, 11:51:17 pm
content: Quote from: shafri on December 01, 2010, 06:36:40 pmSure. A MCU with a built in PWM output or timer with output. You just need the MCU to output a square-wave signal to feed in to the LCR circuit. Alternatively you can use a VCO/PLL with a DAC to control the VCO frequency. Ideally you want to use several data points at different frequencies to get a more accurate inductance value. The more data points you use the better precision you will get. You may want to consider using some logic to determine the optimal starting frequencies to begin data sampling. You would probable start out with a low frequency (1 Khz) and work you way up so the the ADC value in near the center of the ADC range, than start collecting data points by increasing the frequency in 5 to 10% increments. than use a math formula to calculate the inductance value. You will also need to include support to calibrate the meter by running tests with an open and short connection (where the inductor will go) so you include them into your calculations. For instance your ADC (used to measure the output voltage will may probable not be zero in a open circuit configuation. Also consider using a ADC with 12 to 14 bit resolution as the built in ADCs (usually 8 to 10-bit resolution) may not provide sufficient accuracy. Perhaps using low-side MOSFET driver would be better than driving the LCR circuit from the mcu PMW output. the MOSFET driver would provide some isolation\protection from the DUT and also permit you to feed in a higher voltage (12V to 18V for the typical MOSFET low side driver). You can also use a a pair of BJTs (NPN - PNP) in a totem pole circuit, but the beware of the Vce drop with BJTs.FWIW: I purchased a sencore LC-103 meter. the secore meter provides capacitor ESR and current leakage and can test caps up to a 1000V for leakage (many HV caps don't show high ESR or leakage at low voltage that most LCR meters are limited to).If your looking for a low cost LCR meter take a look at this model from Peak (atlas)http://www.peakelec.co.uk/acatalog/jz_lcr40.htmlhttp://www.anatekcorp.com/testequipment/atlaslcr.htm(US distributor)I have the Peak Semiconductor tester which works pretty good. Great for checking for busted transistors and diodes.http://www.anatekcorp.com/testequipment/atlas.htm

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 02, 2010, 12:00:08 am
content: I think using a square wave makes things needlessly complex, since square waves are composed of many harmonics, and the attenuation of the filter is different for the various harmonics. I would stick to sines. You could make an RC oscillator, or use some sort of audio source (don't expect great stability).I consider a function generator a basic piece of electronic equipment, together with stuff like soldering iron, DMM and scope, so you may consider getting one at some point in time, low-spec used ones can be pretty cheap.

author: TechGuy
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 02, 2010, 12:48:52 am
content: Quote from: alm on December 02, 2010, 12:00:08 amSuit yourself:http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/cdc3s04.pdf(5 bucks for a SPI controlled sinewave generator)Or the ever popular XR2206:http://www.exar.com/Common/Content/Document.ashx?id=16&LanguageId-1033(VCO function generator)

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 02, 2010, 01:34:07 am
content: Quote from: TechGuy on December 01, 2010, 11:51:17 pmlow cost? $117? WOW! thanx for the info thoughi've seen a discussion here somewhere about generating sine with mcu, might to have a look/search back on it and see how i can combine it in rc/rl filter.for now thehttp://electronics-diy.com/lc_meter.phpis on my left, the RLC pass filter is on my right, and in the middle with me? are the stars, moon and angel

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 02, 2010, 01:13:54 pm
content: Oops! Safri you should make it your mission to get a function generator when you can. They are all over the place, its one reason I assumed you owned one. As alm suggests, I too think every lab should have basic measurement instruments: a scope, a DMM, a function generator. Since these are present in most any labs, you can easily rig up an LCR measurement tool in a snap.If you have an MCU, some come with built in oscillators, you can output that. But to be able to measure reliably you'll need a wide range of programmable frequencies, otherwise you'll need a wide range of resistance that isn't wire wound. it may be too much work.Alm is right, square waves just adds more problems, but it can be done with it. The waveform will distort as the lower harmonics will be filtered, you need to watch the fundamental and you should know how to read a distorted square wave as a representation of frequency response.Quote from: shafri on December 01, 2010, 06:36:40 pmQuote from: alm on December 02, 2010, 12:00:08 am

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 02, 2010, 01:49:11 pm
content: You can certainly build an FG yourself. But getting a good one should be on a builder's bench.The cost of building a quality FG versus what you can buy with the same money isn't what it used to be, its just not cost effective to build a quality FG as a lab tool, just as with making your own DMM or a good scope.Its good to get the best tool you can afford to obtain, as all devices you build thereafter, and thus its quality, are measured against it and your skill. A skilled craftsman can only build so well with mediocre tools, but with good tools, the best possible can be had.That said, there are a lot of XR2206 style FG out there that cost as much as Instek's DDS version, which is a world away in stability, accuracy and distortion. There are many models, but I find Instek's cheapest can beat many costly but old designs easily.I got a model 1003 for $US150 delivered, from tequipment.net.Quote from: TechGuy on December 02, 2010, 12:48:52 am

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 02, 2010, 03:30:35 pm
content: Briefly, I used the circuit and equation setup on this thread, and used channel 1 for Vin and 2 for Vout.I took a bunch of random capacitors from a box, not knowing their values, but estimating them in the uF and nF range.I used a 9880 ohm resistor as checked with a Fluke 87V, it just happened to be around.I used sine waves, and began at 1 kHz, using a Instek 1003 DDS function generator.I first measured the FG output alone as Vin,then loaded with the circuit and the unknown capacitance. Generally, with the resistance used [ effectively impedance] Vin ~= Vout passed fc, but it was a good way to monitor both channels.Accuracy: 0.5% to 1% compared against capacitance measurement by a Fluke 87V.Some interesting insights:Since the Rigol is 8 bit, using 1V led to larger voltage measurement errors than using larger voltages, 5Vp-p minimum was better, I settled on 10Vp-p.I used the Rigol's automated measurement function to measure Vp-p voltages. I simply spun the frequency down or up until I met the cutoff voltage ~ 7.07V then plugged the frequency into the equation.

author: TechGuy
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 02, 2010, 08:55:33 pm
content: QuoteI think he already has one. I believe he wanted to build an LC meter that did all of the calculation using a MCU, not to manually do it with a signal generator and DMM.

author: DJPhil
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 03, 2010, 03:58:11 am
content: Quote from: saturation on December 02, 2010, 01:49:11 pmI've been eyeballing that, and the version that's ~$20US more expensive with 'voltage display'. It's good to hear positive things from a pro, as I feel I'm looking in the right direction. It's now officially next on my list after a scope.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 03, 2010, 01:24:02 pm
content: Its worth it even if you already own an FG, to get into DDS, as Dave discussed in one eevblog, its a large leap in stability and reduced distortion over an analog FG, for <= price!If you know of other makes other than Instek, please link so I can review them.I do not know of any FG near this price range for a DDS FG, from a reputable manufacturer, as this Instek. Its like the 1062 scope versus the Rigol, the entry level is very competitive and affordable for it class of instrument.For +$20 for the voltage readout I pondered that too, but a lot depends on how accurate it is. Strictly speaking you can easily check it with a DMM, which is what I do.FWIW the box is essentially empty, it weighs very little. I bet the design could be far smaller, but they are saving money by reusing the casing for the standard range of FG.It comes with a cal certificate too, which surprised me, using GW and Fluke instruments for traceability.Quote from: DJPhil on December 03, 2010, 03:58:11 am

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 03, 2010, 03:02:05 pm
content: Quote from: TechGuy on December 02, 2010, 08:55:33 pmin fact, i dont have any. my tools for ee are just...1) iron n gun n acc2) DMM3) Rigol4) and lastly, a nicely modded cheapy PC PSU.i still dont have a justification to get one FG. if the reason is only to build this rig, then i think i better off with the ebay diy ready made thing... or even the more serious and professional brand LCR meter. i'm not expert and hobbiest enough for this. but the need to measure L and C is there for me, esp the smaller one, since i'm working/learning on RF system that needs these L and C stuffs.ps: i wish i have a strong reason to get one FG.btw: any suggestion for a good but "programmable arbitrary anything shaped" function generator, in the range of less than $100-$300? if in case this is the final outcome for me? to buy a FG. or maybe i'm just dreaming for that price?

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 03, 2010, 04:31:53 pm
content: Quote from: shafri on December 03, 2010, 03:02:05 pmI think you're dreaming if you expect a real new arbitrary waveform generator for that price. Even the Rigol model with crappy software/support was something like $600+ last time I checked.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 03, 2010, 04:59:41 pm
content: I've seen USB based AWG at hobbyist level prices.A reason for getting the Instek is the quality of the generated output, but who knows what these Hantek/Riko can do? On paper, this cheapo seem as good if not better. If you get one review it for us.A post on eevblog:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?action=search2Alas, the OP has not reposted any further review.For $180 US from China:http://www.youroscilloscope.com/usb-pc-functionarbitrary-waveform-generator-dds3x25-p-18.htmlOn ebay for $150:http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=150439450643&hlp=false&rvr_id=178392101396&crlp=1_263602_304652&UA=WXF%3F&GUID=ad8419371280a02681b38503ffc8ed2c&itemid=150439450643&ff4=263602_304652

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 03, 2010, 06:01:51 pm
content: sorry, try this:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=197.msg1892#msg1892Quote from: shafri on December 03, 2010, 05:54:22 pm

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 03, 2010, 06:38:23 pm
content: this thread is not so new... so let me gather some older discussions here...https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=293.0https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=335.0https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=945.0https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=478.0(i was in there fooling around)https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=785.0(esr discussion)https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=1177.0(while searching LM311)and some useful links from there:http://www.rfcandy.biz/communication/imp_lc.html(detailed explanation, very good reference, yet to read and register)http://ironbark.bendigo.latrobe.edu.au/~rice/lc/index2.html(another variant, with HEX code)http://www.todopic.com.ar/foros/index.php?topic=26840.0(foreign language)http://octopus.freeyellow.com/99.html(99cent esr)http://electronics-diy.com/lc_meter.php(how many times do i have to look at this?)

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 03, 2010, 06:50:00 pm
content: Quote from: saturation on December 03, 2010, 06:01:51 pmi think the guy clearly indicated his problem with1) winXP only software2) ni-visa3) aborting installer4) support service5) and loads of complaintsi still in "reasonable doubt" that maybe the guy is not competent enuf to handle such situation?, or is this problem still relevant today? as he never mentioned the real working experience and crappiness with the software gui and features etc, but... well, i'll dig more deeper if i have those $600.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 03, 2010, 06:57:45 pm
content: looking at the part LM311 datasheet, shattered my hope since i only have LM393. turned out LM311 to be something else.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 03, 2010, 07:34:01 pm
content: ok. after making an exhaustive DG1022 search in eevblog. i come out with another issue, ie load impedance. it is said any FG/AWG will default to 50ohm load impedance (whatever it is means), so... the problem is... say i have the FG and feed it to the Vi RL/RC filter, how do i know if the Vi is actually feed by Vpp thats is display in the FG monitor? it could be 2xVdd? or something else that will make 0.707Vdd observation near impossible to get the correct L or C value. its explained inhttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=1613.msg21950#msg21950by BoredAtWork.

author: tyblu
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 03, 2010, 10:47:32 pm
content: The whole point of filters is to change its impedance at different frequencies. Attaching a 'scope probe at the input and output of your filter provides perfectly valid readings (for sub-RF waves; for sub-mm, you'll need to pay attention to measurement impedance). If you need to rely on the voltage output display on the FG to determine your load voltage, you must know the load at that frequency. 50-ohm impedance is a standardized number used across many high frequency devices (due to material constraints and history). It is possible to make matching networks for any load such that the FG output voltage will appear at the input of your circuit, but likely not necessary, as it is really the change in voltage from your circuit input to output one is interested in. If k-times the FG voltage appears at your circuit input and you need a 1:1 ratio and don't care about phase, then you can just dial the FG output knob to 1/k.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 04, 2010, 12:36:44 pm
content: Quote from: shafri on December 03, 2010, 07:34:01 pmYou make a relative measurement, by dividing the output voltage by the input voltage, whatever the input voltage is. If you are capable of measuring the output voltage you are for sure also capable of measuring the input voltage.But still, these DIY meters with a 311 comperator as oscillator circuits are a viable alternative. All common parts and easy to build.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 10, 2010, 04:07:06 pm
content: another poison that lands on my skin...https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=1392.0;topicseenits good to have a FG, but i think why not i get more extended wave by getting AWG. i've looking at the rigol DG1022, one thing that catch my eye is "seamless connection with existing DS series DSO, which i already got. but yet, i still havent seen any hard negative or positive feedback on it. the negative comment i saw before is not really "hard" exceptsaturation's postabout a "translated chinese site" link, but then, i dont fully get what the guy tried to explain.maybe with this AWG, i dont have to worry about upgrading from a simpler FG if i want to extend my working scope, eg RF (which i'm currently working on) or "super high powered" audio amp (which i will be planning, maybe).how about USB "nano-type" AWG? are they good/accurate?

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 10, 2010, 07:43:00 pm
content: Hi shafri,A big difference in an AWG over FG is cost. The prices are dropping, but good ones still cost far more than a DDS FG.The $600 Rigol AWG review from the Chinese website was written in 2008, maybe Rigol has improved on these issues; here's the cleaned up translation in the author's words:Superimposed white noise limited to 5MHz, pulse only support to 3MHz, frequency accuracy limited to 100ppmch2 is unequal {to Ch1}, any generated waveform limited to 1kpts, 10bit; output amplitude not more than 3VppUnit crashed during testingch1 channel maximum output setting at 23.98dBm but measured output was only 15dBm, until the occassional restart made it output properlythe magnitude of the output flatness is very bad; biggest difference 6Vppwhen using the Sweep function, flatness decreased, while the manual scan no effect on the flatness.-----A recent comment on the Rigol at eevblog:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=197.msg1892#msg1892the Instek 1003 has rated stability output of < 20ppm and wholly stable across all its output range, but it has only 1 channel. The Instek 1003 is $150, you can get a Hantek USB generator for the same money, but how accurate is it in terms of its waveforms and stability?http://compare.ebay.com/like/150439450643?var=lv&ltyp=AllFixedPriceItemTypes&var=sbar&rvr_id=182556568013&crlp=1_263602_309572&UA=WXF%3F&GUID=ad8419371280a02681b38503ffc8ed2c&itemid=150439450643&ff4=263602_309572AWG come in difference price ranges, so how can there be so much variation? One large cost is making output stable across any condition an arbitrary wave can exist:http://www.tti-test.com/1/arb-infotour-tti/arb-infotour.htmQuote from: shafri on December 10, 2010, 04:07:06 pm

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 11, 2010, 01:34:23 am
content: thanx saturation.how serious is the 100ppm inaccuracy? 50ppm (90days), 100ppm within a year, what? is this figure is going up and up in time? so within 5 years maybe it will be 500-1000ppm inaccuracy?how serious is the output flatness? what is output flatness? sorry, never own one of this toy.http://cgi.ebay.com.my/AT8602B-Digital-Function-Signal-Generator-0-2MHZ-2MHZ-/320451191042?pt=BI_Signal_Sources&hash=item4a9c612102an Atten function generator, half the price of AWG. So roughly i'll be paying double, one for function, and one for arbitrary. will do more reserach on this.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2011, 04:38:39 pm
content: Its hard to say how serious, that's why you have to trust the makers to do the right accelerated aging and testing. The specs quoted you mentioned in bold are from the 1022 manual.As for the Instek, it said the 1003 specs were:Stability & Accuracy each at+/- 20ppmAging+/- 5ppm/yearFlatness simply means the amplitude output will not change with frequency and will maintain the same Vac p-p.Yes, that drift and per waveform stability is higher compared to the Instek.Quote from: shafri on December 11, 2010, 01:34:23 am

author: grenert
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2011, 02:11:02 am
content: This is getting way off topic, but the Velleman PCGU1000 looks like a promising inexpensive (about $200) USB DDS FG:http://www.vellemanusa.com/us/enu/product/view/?id=523616One user did some extensive testing with good results:http://forum.velleman.eu/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2041The same guy posts some additional tests here:http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/equipment-tools/158515-function-generator.htmlFor an LCR meter (back on topic), I built one of these:http://www.m3electronix.com/featureslcr.html

author: DJPhil
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2011, 09:38:24 am
content: Quote from: grenert on January 21, 2011, 02:11:02 amVery interesting!Their SDK is in revision 5, with examples in Delphi, VB6, and VB2008 Express. Looks pretty good for low frequency work. I'd pretty much settled on the 1003, now I'm not so sure.Quote from: grenert on January 21, 2011, 02:11:02 amThis looks like the most solid kit I've seen so far. For some reason their sales page is broken, so I don't even know what they're asking price is!I'd like to know more about what you think of your M3. I've been skating by without a way to measure inductance (easily) for too long, and now it looks like I'll be getting into RF soon, so the added features would prove useful.Is it awesome enough that I should send them an email asking after a kit?

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2011, 12:33:33 pm
content: Impressive results on the Velleman! Sorry I did not see it sooner. I don't know if the Instek 1003 will be equally as good as I don't have the same lab equipment as the tester. The harmonic distortion of the sine wave output at 100kHz is at the noise floor of the Rigol 1052E. -50dB, still higher than the spec reported for the 1003 spec of -55dB. Nevertheless, the Velleman is better than the Instek as it does AWG for very low cost.http://www.velleman.be/downloads/0/information/pcgu1000_review_cknight.pdfIts not too far off topic, this thread discussed how you can make a simple ~0.5% LCR meter on-the-fly so long as you have a function generator and scope to measure L or C.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=1869.msg25868#msg25868Quote from: grenert on January 21, 2011, 02:11:02 am

author: grenert
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2011, 06:17:01 pm
content: Quote from: DJPhil on January 21, 2011, 09:38:24 amIt is indeed awesomeThe things I like about it are:Really comprehensive, high-resolution measurements of capacitors and inductors.Resistance down to 1 milliohm with 4-lead measurement (but see below).Ability to measure power transformers and chokes. It'll even figure out the secondary voltage on an unknown transformer! I have also built the LC meter from AADE (http://aade.com/lcmeter.htm), another awesome kit. However, it only measures at higher frequencies (from tens-hundreds of thousands of Hz) and can't do low-frequency measurement needed for big iron cores. The M3 measures at several different (user-selectable) frequencies from 100/120-15000 Hz. On the other hand, when I just want to match capacitors (by capacitance), I actually go to the AADE first, because it's so quick to use.Really nice display and printed metal case. The case is pre-drilled, too, which is a big deal for a guy like me with POOR drilling skills.SMALL for all it can do. Its capabilities seem like something from a big rack-mount meter.Some negatives (like Dave, gotta point out the negatives too, even when you love a product):Little clicky buttons are perfectly functional, but I'd prefer more substantial ones. That would probably make construction a little harder.You have to make the four leads yourself out of miniclips and mini-coax cable. It wasn't easy. The task would be a lot easier with a high quality soldering iron with a fine tip.I thought that the attachment to the clips was a little bit tenuous because there is no strain relief, and the central wire in the coax is pretty stiff. I ended up making another set using Pomona 4555 minigrabbers which also don't have strain relief, but they have less play in them, and the wire insertion is at a better angle. M3 was very helpful in assisting me with that. I also ended up building their Kelvin leads (what a time saver!). But you still need 4 leads for transformer measurements.You need a separate power supply. I would really love if it could run on internal batteries.I bought mine about 2 years ago for $175. The Kelvin lead kit was about $40. If you're mostly interested in RF inductors, then you might be able to go with the AADE, which is only $100 for the kit.Cheers.

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2011, 01:53:56 am
content: Quote from: grenert on January 21, 2011, 02:11:02 amfrom specs point of view look nice, but for me no go. These guys are living still in the 80's :Upgrades from earlier versions are provided free to the original purchaser.To receive the latest revisionyou must sendyour LCRZ meter to M-Cubed Electronix for reprogramming

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 22, 2011, 02:23:38 am
content: Quote from: tinhead on January 22, 2011, 01:53:56 amIf they released firmware files for those that have the equipment to program the processor their product would be cloned and on sale in China in a couple of weeks. In the 80's it would have been less of an issue.

author: DJPhil
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2011, 06:29:32 am
content: Quote from: grenert on January 21, 2011, 06:17:01 pmThanks for all the info!Sounds like the M3 kit is perfect for me, so I sent an email.I'd seen the AADE kit as well, and it too looks good. It'll be my fallback if the M3 guys don't respond, as I really like the extra features (and range) in the M3.The drawbacks seem easily tolerable to my temperament. I'm even likely to try to make a membrane to go over the buttons, just for fun.It'll be nice to have a proper tool for the job instead of trying to get things measured with a multimeter and a 555 circuit all the time.Thanks again for helping fill in the blanks.

author: grenert
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2011, 08:22:06 am
content: Quote from: tinhead on January 22, 2011, 01:53:56 amWell, the current firmware is the same as when I bought mine 2 years ago, so it's plenty mature. If it makes you feel any better, just pretend it's not upgradeable at all, like most meters

author: DJPhil
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2011, 06:01:00 pm
content: Sad news from M3:Quote from: Mike - KC8WRLooks like I missed the boat on this one. I'll be keeping an eye on them though, as I'd love to see their meter go back into production.

author: V42bis
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: March 03, 2023, 09:56:23 am
content: i also have one but now i need to repair it and have lost the construction and alignment manual, do you still have one?thankssteve