Brymen BM869(867) alternative software.

[raptor1956]

I have not bought a DMM in many years and still own a Fluke 85 that's over 25 years old and a Fluke 27 that's over 30 years old, but I think I may add the BM869 in the near future.  Neither of my Fluke's have more than 3200 counts

Just some corrections.

Your Fluke 85 is a 4000 count meter.

And at 0.02% it's better than the 0.05% of the Fluke 87V.

The Brymen BM869 is (wrt to DCV)

http://www.brymen.com.tw/product-html/cata860/Bm860L4.htm

0.02% +/- 2d at 5V range and below
0.03% +/- 2d at 50V range
0.04% +/- 2d at 500V range
0.15% +/-2d at 1000V range

Fluke 87V is 0.05% +/- 1d in all ranges.

I say it too close to call between the 87V and BM869 depending on the range and when you consider the +/- 1d vs 2d without doing a spreadsheet or calculation.

Well, if you stay below 500V you are still better off with the BM869 than the Fluke 87V and in the voltage range where I'm more likely to be, below 50V, quite a bit better.  But, beyond that, the resolution makes for better relative measurements.  All in all the BM869 is the better choice IF you have other DMM's you can use that have the Fluke safety and reputation -- I have two such Flukes.

I've done some experiments recently where I used my Rigol as one of the DMM's but the Fluke's were a couple digits behind -- it would have been nice to have at least one more digit and even better two more and the DM869 gives you that.

The Brymen listing with 2d is 2d of a much higher resolution unit to begin with so you can't really make an apples to apples comparison just on the 2d versus 1d thing -- the Brymen is much higher resolution so the 2d at 500,000 counts is less than 1d at 19,999 counts.


Brian

[IanB]

Well, if you stay below 500V you are still better off with the BM869 than the Fluke 87V and in the voltage range where I'm more likely to be, below 50V, quite a bit better.  But, beyond that, the resolution makes for better relative measurements.  All in all the BM869 is the better choice IF you have other DMM's you can use that have the Fluke safety and reputation -- I have two such Flukes.

In Joe's multimeter destructive testing here, the BM869S withstood much more abuse than the 87V before failing. In fact the 87V failed surprisingly early.

[evava]

the Brymen is much higher resolution so the 2d at 500,000 counts is less than 1d at 19,999 counts.

Brian

But, Brymen 2d is valid only for 50,000 count, so...

87V is better! 

[2N3055]

It has 500000 hi res mode...

[JackM]

This thread is going quite off topic now...
It's supposed to be about the custom Brymen serial comms software, not about the Fluke vs Brymen debate.

[Lightages]

Hi everyone.
I want to share my software it created to communicate with Brymen BM869 (probably it will work with BM867). It good alternative of BU-86X because you can create your own cable and spend around 5$ for it (it cheaper than brymen cable). So maybe for owners of BM869(867) that topic will be helpful.

Thank you very much for sharing your work here.

[SkyMaster]

Hi,

This is to let a little bit of steam out... 

You have the OP, who developed his own alternative software for the Brymen BN869/867. As I understood, one of the reasons to develop this software was to use his own custom made cable (he explains how to assemble one), instead of having to purchase the official cable. Building a custom made cable has the issue, that one lacks the official software - hence why he made his own.

Now pay attention: he offers his software for FREE. A non-intrusive Paypal add is decently asking for any donation.

And what is the general tone in this thread? People say it is not secure to run executables of the internet!!! WTF??? This is a known user of EEVblog! I cannot imagine anyone here using Windows who NEVER downloaded any software and installed it! It's not like he is offering an obscure link to some cracking/keygen site!

And then people say "oh, yeah, all nice, bla bla bla, how about you share the SOURCE CODE, so we can check the software is clean...".

If I was the OP, I would close this thread and not even reply.

It's not just that people want things for free - now they want the source of other people's work, too. Just because.

 

When I read stuff like this, I really wonder what goes on in people's head.

SNIP

I fully agree with Bicurico.

 

[SkyMaster]

Hi everyone.
I want to share my software it created to communicate with Brymen BM869 (probably it will work with BM867). It good alternative of BU-86X because you can create your own cable and spend around 5$ for it (it cheaper than brymen cable). So maybe for owners of BM869(867) that topic will be helpful.

Sairus, this is excellent, thank you for sharing your work with us

And do not be sorry for your english; your english is 97% perfect 

[_Wim_]

Excellent work! Please don't get put off by some of the more negative comments here, I think most of us really appreciate efforts like this!

[Sairus]

Sairus, this is excellent, thank you for sharing your work with us

I got to my goal so is no point to hide software on my HDD.

I think about malware threat and about code sharing so after some time i made conclusion: I am create code and i responsible for it (i mean that i guarantee that it not contain any destructive code and any BSOD or damage of OS is not targeted feature of software but bad combination of different factors).So it i start sharing sourse code  i cant guaranty saifty of all copies from all sources (there is a probability  that someone use sourse to add distructive codes).
My decision for now i will not share code for security reason.
But if you need add new features or adapt software for your purposes or maybe you need algorithm feel free to contact with me.

will be nice to hear if any people try my software,i open for feedback.

are sketch for arduino is needed? (software for cable to try on breadboard)

[nugglix]

 

This is laughable at best.
You can't guarantee anything.
You can't be held responsible if something goes wrong,
you're still just a random guy on the internets.
We (I) don't know who you are or where...

If you don't want to publish your code, fine.
But to claim you're can guarantee safety by hiding the source
is something different. We heard this from other closed
source providers, a decade or more ago.


That post does not help you.

[PedroDaGr8]

This is laughable at best.
You can't guarantee anything.
You can't be held responsible if something goes wrong,
you're still just a random guy on the internets.
We (I) don't know who you are or where...

If you don't want to publish your code, fine.
But to claim you're can guarantee safety by hiding the source
is something different. We heard this from other closed
source providers, a decade or more ago.


That post does not help you.

His code, his choice. He owes you nothing. As I much as I enjoy and respect the concept of FOSS, FOSS zealots are freaking unbearable. If you don't like his decision, go elsewhere.

[nugglix]

Learn to read.
It might help you in the future.

[Sairus]

You can't guarantee anything.
You can't be held responsible if something goes wrong,
you're still just a random guy on the internets.

It all true but

I wrote software and share it
people ask: can we get source code?
I ask: do you run it and you want change something?
they say: no we will not run unknown executable share code we will analyse it.
OK do you have IDE,do you have skills to analyse and will you spend your time for analysis?
No we show your code to peoples who can do that but you give your code to us(share it).
 

So to foolish questions i give foolish answers ("i will not share code because IGIL can use it" or "sharing code cause climate changing" and so on )
I just don't want waste my time for work which no one need (i.e. registering on share sites,making my code good readable and understandable for another peoples)

[Johnny Electron]

Great job!  Very interesting read and I look forward to trying it out.

Thanks!

[nour]

Cable connection schematic, diagram, circuit, anything !!

[joeqsmith]

people ask: can we get source code?
I ask: do you run it and you want change something?
they say: no we will not run unknown executable share code we will analyse it.

If it was not clear, I would want the source or just documentation in order to write a library for their adapter to support LabVIEW.

OK do you have IDE,do you have skills to analyse and will you spend your time for analysis?

This is why I felt a document detailing the interface would be best.  I had been using the free tools from MS but this last go around I converted everything to native LabVIEW.  Again, I have not looked into it at all.  I did not purchase the OEM interface because the lack of LabVIEW support.   A standalone application would typically be of little value to me as normally when I collect data it is just part of a bigger test.   

If you wanted to support LabVIEW with a closed source, well documented library, that would be great!

[Sairus]

Cable connection schematic, diagram, circuit, anything !!

This is why I felt a document detailing the interface would be best.

Here some useful information.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/jzyh571ened24df/ENG.pdf?dl=0

[joeqsmith]

This is why I felt a document detailing the interface would be best.

Here some useful information.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/jzyh571ened24df/ENG.pdf?dl=0

Thanks! That doc was just what I was after. 

Did you do the conversion from the LCD to ASCII in the PIC or is it just being used to handle the serial communications with the meter?   Just curious if you are doing the conversion in your software.   

[JackM]

Did you do the conversion from the LCD to ASCII in the PIC or is it just being used to handle the serial communications with the meter?   Just curious if you are doing the conversion in your software.

I'm pretty sure that's done in the PC software side. The PIC likely just sends the raw data packets over serial comms, then it gets decoded on the PC side according to Brymen's protocol.

[nour]

If you don't wish to share the code, that's fine, but you should know unless your executable have been tested by people and no one reported any issue, no one will trust it. sharing the source code means there is nothing you are hiding and everyone can see what is under the hood!!
I am a professional software engineer and my main field is Microsoft tech.

I have downloaded the file but I will not be able to use it because it is not from well known entity nor being digitally signed and acknowledged by the OS that no one altered the exe by any possible mean

This is how software being treated in the real world!
And BTW you will not go to social media to give a bunch of people interested in electronics and test gear an infected file, you will simply come here 

Nice document by the way.

[nour]

Hi,

This is to let a little bit of steam out... 

You have the OP, who developed his own alternative software for the Brymen BN869/867. As I understood, one of the reasons to develop this software was to use his own custom made cable (he explains how to assemble one), instead of having to purchase the official cable. Building a custom made cable has the issue, that one lacks the official software - hence why he made his own.

Now pay attention: he offers his software for FREE. A non-intrusive Paypal add is decently asking for any donation.

And what is the general tone in this thread? People say it is not secure to run executables of the internet!!! WTF??? This is a known user of EEVblog! I cannot imagine anyone here using Windows who NEVER downloaded any software and installed it! It's not like he is offering an obscure link to some cracking/keygen site!

And then people say "oh, yeah, all nice, bla bla bla, how about you share the SOURCE CODE, so we can check the software is clean...".

If I was the OP, I would close this thread and not even reply.

It's not just that people want things for free - now they want the source of other people's work, too. Just because.

And what would stop people from doing exactly the very same thing that you are describing, unless this person is a well known entity or his software being tested by others to make sure it is not malicious

This is a known procedure that everyone should go through if they would like there software to be spreaded between people, upload it on repeatable repository if he wants the thing to go free.

The policy of free closed source software is not accepted from the majority of the experienced windows users. because anyone that have been using windows long enough would know that free software\closed source is the NO.1 source of viruses.

We are not saying that his software is malicious or contains something, the fact that "it is very easy to infect someone's pc by .exe from someone on the on internet" makes people simply suspect any executable they see floating around.

If I will ever do a software for personal use and would like to share it I will never dare to share the .exe only !! because I know that people will immediately suspect it the moment they see it!

[Sairus]

Ok i spend some time and write arduino sketch. It all about IR transistor position and pullup resistors value (in case of my setup is 69K tolerance ~ 1K).If you have bad alignment or wrong value you will receive crap signal and software will not react or start show weird stuff (weird reading mean that you on right way). In ajusting  may be helpful port debug line to view recived data (in GUI port>port debug line).

[JackM]

Did you have to shield either the LED or phototransistor from external light at all? Or did that not really affect the readings?

[Sairus]

Did you have to shield either the LED or phototransistor from external light at all? Or did that not really affect the readings?

In case of LED good resistance value it enough (to obtain decent brightness) no shielding required.

In case of IR phototransistor all complicated i have cheap one from ebay (no datasheet,no info about type). It has black not transparent body but it react on light (~up to 10-15% of signal) so cover is recomended. To get good signal from DMM you need good alignment of DMM IR LED and your IR transistor.As i said before you need correct pullup resistors value.