Fluke 87V Robustness Tests, Part 5 Transient Testing

[@billywhizzy]

When I saw a 44 mins video, I knew that it would fail and there would be a repair. But not at 12kV! Well done for a great test!

[@joesmith-je3tq]

I was thinking I would post the video next week with the remaining tests but it ended up taking a lot more time to run the transients than I had expected. Who knew.

[@zemlickapetr]

What a great birthday present this video is. You set the bar for handheld multimeter testing high.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

Happy Birthday!

[@DonDenaBrenna]

shocked but pleased all at the same time! Glad to see it finally lives up to its expectations! Till the next one then :)

[@joesmith-je3tq]

We are not done. Wait for part 6....

[@RiyadhElalami]

I have been refreshing youtube waiting for this. For some reason I was very eager to see it.

[@derektodd4126]

Great video Joe. Alot of time and effort in these videos that many people just don't comprehend. Hats off, keep up the good work. I'll stick with my version 1-01 87V and UT181A but plan to add the 869S to my arsenal. Now I'm of to watch Ireland beat England in rugby 6nations fot the Grandslam.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

Thanks. I'm glad you enjoyed it.

[@derektodd4126]

Just to clarify, I'm a weighbridge engineer for over 25 years and so use these meters in a less stressful environment. However it it is important to have good quality equipment.

[@SIXSTRING63]

Excellent test Joe. Quite surprised as you were. I'm thinking Fluke might be watching these tests in the shadows and making some improvements. I can imagine you've boosted Brymen sales by a good margin with the tests you've shown on how well they fared. I know I helped that cause buying 2 Brymens. Fluke might be seeing the forest through the trees to make their flagship meter as robust as their budget models.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

They never chime in on the forums or here. Agree, it was good to see it in the same territory as the other Fluke meters I have looked at.

[@SIXSTRING63]

They may not chime in, but I'll bet they have people in marketing watching and reading social media, blogs and video reviews. In this era of internet media, the word spreads fast on good or bad products and they know this can hit them where it hurts in sales. As for your reply below about Brymen ever asking about the improvements you've made to better their BM869s, they might not have contacted you but I bet they did watch and learn. I had an old tech who is 70 yo help me out this week on a project I was having issues figuring out, I turned him on to your channel. You've got a new fan in him. Can't wait for the next episode of "While the Meter Burns" :-)

[@joesmith-je3tq]

While the meter burns... lol. I've had fairly open communications with Brymen. The BM869s was already in that upper class of meters. It's the meters that fail with the new generator that I am weeding out. AMPROBE, being the runner up, really set the threshold for what I consider robust. Of course, people can argue how the 87V never failed and how UNI-T are great meters. But check the forums and see how some are damaged. Again, I'm not suggesting that any of the meters I have looked at are not safe. They may not survive some low level transients in the lab is all.

[@cluca1969]

But Fluke has the model on 101 they could start from here with improvements to 87V.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

They are totally different designs.

[@avejst]

Wow, a bit surprised Thanks for sharing 😀👍

[@DaruoshAghajaney]

Hey, i'm quite surprised. Thanks for the video.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

No problem. Glad you enjoyed it.

[@DaruoshAghajaney]

I know you have tested the UNI-T 181A against the Fluke 289, but was wondering have you any plans to run the transient tests on the fluke 289 and compare it with other flukes?

[@joesmith-je3tq]

You are the first person that has asked. To be clear, they are all tested the same so it's more how they compare with every other meter I have looked at, not just Fluke on Fluke. I would not be apposed to looking at one but I don't think its a very popular meter. Now if UNI-T makes a 181B and claim they have improved it, I would be all over that. That 181A is like a modern version of the 289. IMO, it's the next best meter UNI-T had made next to the UT210E.

[@DaruoshAghajaney]

Yes, 181A is nice, but what keeps me away from it is its Li-io battery. Sooner or later the battery will die and finding a "safe and genuine" battery will be disaster. Other than that, it's a great meter.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

I agree about the battery. Also, the charger comes with no adapters. You can't use the meter when charging. It really needs to just use standard batteries. I also don't like that it has a very sensitive front end, like many UNI-T products I have looked at. The quality is a bit lacking. I hardly used mine and managed to scratch up the lens. I was able to clean it up and then added a lens protector to it.

[@robber576]

Well so far so good i would say, i was pessimistic but this seems ok. Joe: (or any other 87v owner) can you verify one very annoying thing i have with my 87v is that on mA and uA in AC it takes forever for the meter to settle to zero, once it has settled if i change range,go back to autorange or switch the whole settling down process starts again beginning at 0.030 A and taking about a minute to settle to 0.001 AmpIs my meter broken or what?

[@joesmith-je3tq]

I believe what you are describing is normal for this meter.

[@robber576]

Hm, thats a bummer, i sorta hoped my meter was broken as its really annoying. I can rel to zero but that still doesnt prevent the meter from wondering off. It sorta makes the last digit useless. Thanks for all the work you put in these test, and doing a excellent job.

[@carstenhiller5613]

Damage in standby-mode: The Fluke 70 series would show a hard to read display after measuring a current on mains (230V) for to long a time and it had gone into standby-mode. Some segments of the display had no contrast at all after this. I had two examples of this behavior, one Fluke 75 and one Fluke 77. They never got their good display back. Thanks for your videos.

[@aulles8576]

As someone who also has a Lecroy 7200, I wonder if you know a source for a Timebase switch for the 7242 plugin. Like others, this one has decided to give up the ghost just as it's being restored.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

I think those were made in Germany. I had called the OEM, said "english" to their operator and told them what I was trying to do restoring them and they sent me a couple to repair mine. Guessing now, you may be better off buyin a used plugin for parts. Good luck.

[@error079]

That meter should have a new name. How am I as a customer so posed to know witch revision I'm getting?

[@joesmith-je3tq]

I doubt Fluke is going to sell you an old meter so I don't think that's a concern.

[@Basement-Science]

Great video as always Joe! For some time now I´ve been wondering about something else though: Some multimeters seem to go into some kind of low-ish resistance state when they are switched off. Since you never run your transient tests while the meters are switched off, I wonder how some of them might fare in that case. (I suspect they could also enter this state in current measurement mode) I´m especially curious about this with some of the cheaper meters, including Uni-T and the really bad ones.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

You know, you do bring up a good point but you are pretty late to the ball game. I have pointed this out with a few meters during my tests but I have never transient tested them in the off. The only thing I have done was applied that rectified 220V line signal when they were off. Most of the UNI-T meters I looked at were damaged from the small ESD event with the grill starter so they wouldn't make it to the transient testing.

[@Basement-Science]

I think I remember you talking about this concern. That´s part of the reason why I´m asking. I imagine the Grill starter will damage the Uni-T meters mostly because they just don´t have any input protection at all. But the grill starter clearly puts out more than a few hundred volts. So it is a bit of a different test. So maybe a first way to test this on the bad meters would be to just apply some high constant DC voltages while also monitoring the current. I´m not necessarily just worried about the meters dieing to a transient when off. My concern is more about a (catastrophic) failure when the meter should measure something it would normally be OK with. Say, if I´m measuring a 1kV DC low impedance source while the meter is off. Some people will definitely do that at some point with one of those meters.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

How do you make a measurement with the meter off? You mean you have the meter connected to a KV source and turn it off when the power is still applied? I could run them up to a KV with the HV test were I apply the AC and DC when the meter is off. You are correct about the grill starter putting out more than a few hundred volts. If you watched the videos were I hardened the front end of the UT61E, I dove into the basic problems with the design after several people were posting how MOVs were the answer. ESD is not part of the safety standards. It falls under EMC 61326. It's possible that some UNI-T products may be certified for safety and can handle those transients but fail ESD. Consider the rising edge on the surge is in the us, where the ESD reaches its peak current in sub 1 ns. It requires different considerations. I run EDS before any of the higher energy transient tests. If a meter made it to the higher transients, I would just cycle it with the meter in the off state. All of that said, wait until this coming weekend when I release part 6. You may find it of interest.

[@Basement-Science]

Yes, I was thinking of attaching the probes to a KV source while it was still off. Your videos about the UT61E are among those I wanted to watch at some point. I can certainly imagine the rise time of a transient having a big effect on a meter´s sensitivity. I certainly look forward to your next video.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

Wait, you want to discuss the UNI-T but havn't seen the videos? You know the old saying, you can lead a horse to water......

[@johncherry108]

Joe, according to Wikipedia, the unit of conductance is the siemens. The unit is named after Ernst Werner von Siemens. In English, the same form siemens is used both for the singular and plural. So you're measuring 'nanoseimens'

[@TheAmmoniacal]

That's the unit of conductance.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

The units are nano because I am looking at Giga ohms. Conductance is the reciprocal of resistance. Yes you have caught me on my incorrect terms in singular form. There are more nuggets in these videos if that's what you are after.

[@rb6725]

Enjoying your videos thankyou. Obviously Fluke multimeters are good quality hence their high price but I’ve got to wonder how much more are we paying since the average American production line employee needs to get paid more than double than their Chinese counterpart.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

Most PCB assembly work is done with machines.

[@rb6725]

@@joesmith-je3tqTrue, but its still cheaper to operate a factory in China and it still has employees that get paid less by far.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

@@rb6725 I doubt the labor rates have much to do with it.

[@1pcfred]

No more smack talking about the Fluke 87V it hung tough. Still, this coupled with the last results all does seem a bit like Flukian roulette to me. Will it blow, or won't it? Is any redemption absolute? Does later good erase all previous bad? Should we just forgive and forget? I remain somewhat conflicted here.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

Hard to say. I think the last one was PCB revision 10. I'm not sure what was changed or even if they attempted to improve this area. But the 87V is not out of the woods yet. There's another week of testing to go..

[@1pcfred]

It has already failed. You fixed it easily enough. But that's just you. That doesn't mean Joe Blow on the job can fix it. That Joe is just going to have a wonky meter from here on out. Which he's going to fleabay down the road so he can buy a new meter. Yeah sure it works. I'm just selling it for reasons. Uh huh.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

Yes it was damaged. No need to state the obvious but that doesn't prevent me from running the remaining tests. I havn't had a need to buy a used meter. Buyer beware. Can I interest you in a one month old Fluke 87V? lol.

[@1pcfred]

I almost bought a used Fluke meter once. It was in the world greatest thrift store in Boaz Alabama. They get all of the unclaimed luggage from airlines and sell it off. So it's chock full of undistressed merchandise. Imagine a thrift store that doesn't even have the classic BO smell of unwashed clothing. Amazing!

[@joesmith-je3tq]

I bought those used Fluke/Phillips 97 scopemeters. I took some probes and parts to test them out before I bought them. Not a bad deal and low risk. You just can't get parts for them.

[@sepertude]

No analog ohm meter to test diodes? :)

[@Gooberslot]

Did Brymen ever contact you about your modifications to the BM869s?

[@joesmith-je3tq]

They never asked.

[@simoneguggiari8676]

Decano 14elion-t , zuker sanassor?

[@simoneguggiari8676]

Pane italiano 4htto grammi x 1kilogrammo

[@simoneguggiari8676]

Test penoxidi, 5'kell

[@fieldsofomagh]

The people at Fluke are on the ball as regards improving their product. 12Kv is no mean feat and then only leaky diodes. The accuracy was also maintained from the beginning.They are ,for me a bit pricey, but as an industrial meter, can't see that being a problem.Their flag has'nt been lowered

[@joesmith-je3tq]

Agree

[@javierpallalorden]

Joe did you replace the BAV199 with BAV199 or an improved (or better) version?

[@joesmith-je3tq]

I used the same parts. I have not looked to see if there is something else I could use. If the meter is still usable at the end of the testing, I may look into it.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

Just looking at SOT23 parts, nothing pops out as being a good upgrade.

[@javierpallalorden]

Thank you Joe for looking into it! My thoughts where to use the same diodes from a meter that survived the higher transient voltages to upgrade the 87V diodes. But probably they would not be compatible.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

Did you watch where I took it apart and traced out some of the design? Have you watch other videos where I have done the same? If so, do you see a major difference in the basic designs? I assume you have downloaded the datasheets on your own for the BAV199 already. This is what we are after. It would take some effort to work around it but could be done. It would not be very clean. The fact this one survived past 10KV, I am less motivated to go after it. It's not like taking the 121GW that failed at 2KV then beefing it up. Improving on the lower end meters has a certain fun factor. lol. If I find a part that I could just drop in and keep the 87V clean, I will give it a try.

[@simonspeaker]

i have a 2016 one... do its ok?

[@joesmith-je3tq]

I suggest you keep watching....

[@simonspeaker]

sorry i don't understand everything 😕 im french... soo... i want to know if its a good year... and also in fact, if i have understand good, if i test tube amp on 450v on the wrong mode, my fluke 87V will survive with no matter?

[@joesmith-je3tq]

@@simonspeaker Again, there are other videos on this meter. I suggest you watch them.

[@joesmith-je3tq]

Specifically, watch this one: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fZnWnZSCgLSjgac

[@SirBunghole]

What revision is the board?

[@joesmith-je3tq]

Watch and learn

[@zemlickapetr]

Sir Bunghole, see Part 3. But you should watch the whole thing from the beginning.

[@Coolkeys2009]

This video might have been great for Fluke if some famous electronics blogger out there handn't said that your testing was irrelevant :-)

[@joesmith-je3tq]

It's good to see him cycle testing the switch before I run one. They appear to have really improved that part. Based on his comments, I doubt they will try to improve the input protection.

[@mikeadler434]

👍👍

[@stevefeldman6486]

Hey Joe, I imagine you've probably had enough of torture testing these meters, you've been doing it for such a long time... I was watching another channel a while back, and if I recall, it was a guy doing a simple review on a meter, and before the video was over, the meter was cooked. It was a simple mistake, I suppose it could happen to anyone, maybe twice for those cats that like to measure across mains with their meters configured to measure current or ohms... The guy simply, inadvertently reversed the polarity for the meter's power, then turned it on. The meter was done. I don't have any expensive meters, but still can't stand the thought of destroying anything I've paid money for, so I tried it out on one of those great Harbor Freight freebies. Since they take a 9volt battery, I had to hold the terminals on the battery backwards while I powered it up. It didn't take long before all I had on the display was a single dot. I plugged the battery in properly and now it just reads "-1" across all ranges. I was wondering if you've considered putting the batteries in backwards for one of your tests. I know it seems like a stretch, but really. I think anybody who is capable of hurting himself with a meter through improper use is certainly capable of putting the batteries in backwards, even if it takes a little bit of finesse... :) Great video's BTW. Keep up the good work! Steve

[@joesmith-je3tq]

Steve, Many of the meters use 9V batteries with a clip. I won't say it's impossible in those cases to reverse the polarity but it would certainly be difficult. I have a UT61E that also uses a 9V and I have read where people have damaged them. The case was designed so the battery would only fit one way. Again, it's not impossible to put one in backwards. With the UT181, you never remove the battery and again it is keyed. The remaining all use some number of AA or AAAs. Normally there is a spring and plate, plus they are marked. Some will not use a spring and just have the metal clips (still a spring). Even in this case, if you flipped one battery of the set, worst case you will get a lower voltage and the meter may not power up. In the cases where someone manages to put all of the batteries backwards, or flip the 9V clip as you have tried, holding it in place and powering it up just to see what happens, some of the meters I have looked at are protected against this.

[@stevefeldman6486]

I only suggested it because it seemed a likely scenario for somebody to do such a thing. These are strange and different times we live in... Back in the 20th century, all of your electronics courses would harp on proper and safe meter use before ever placing one in the hands of a student. The Simpson 260's were reasonably robust, yet, none the less, it was ingrained into all students to first test the meter, leads, and batteries in ohms mode, and to then set the meter to whatever setting and range was about to be probed. So long as meters of today are expected to auto range, and protect us from stupid, I would think that protecting the meter from improper bias should be an engineering consideration for all manufacturers. Having seen it happen on another video, then duplicating it for myself with the HF freebie, it made me curious. Like I said, I can't stand the thought of paying for something I may blow up by intentionally doing something wrong, but I am curious what meters are protected from such an event. BTW, I can easily see many contemporary "so called" technicians inserting 4 AA batteries in a meter backwards. It's just the world we live in. Nothing surprises me these days. :) Steve

[@wouter_scholten]

The results are interesting, and yet I don't see the point in buying a 87v. You mentioned in a video once that the only Fluke you'd buy for yourself would be the 289 and I agree. I see not much value in any of the others in their lineup. I'd prefer a Keysight 1242C or U1272A or U1273A, for example though the prices are not competitive any more (since a few years prices have risen a lot, at least in NL). The Brymen meters look good but, in reality it's easy to find the 289 for good prices on ebay about 350 euro or so, so that made the 869s less attractive to me than the 289. I don't think the 289 is unpopular, in lots of videos of enthusiasts you can make one out (or perhaps a 287, btw. I don't see the point of that meter in Fluke's lineup) and I prefer the matrix display over the 7 segment displays of most other multimeters. It's good enough,there is no need for a high power display which would give the need to recharge your batteries all the time as with phones...

[@joesmith-je3tq]

Yes, if I were forced into buying a Fluke that I had to use, it would be the 289. But lucky for me, we still have choices.

[@tomki6asp]

Ozone