Keysight 34460A/34461A/34465A/34470A Maximum Allowable Voltage change notice.

[LabSpokane]

Hello - it would be better for most people their night rest if Keysight would make an official communication & statement here and not a Keysight Rep. - that would be more reassuring for most of us. As most of audience here has at least an engineering degree in electronics
some technical explanation would also help to return to business as usual with these cherished 34465A/34470A DMMs.

Thanks

Yabba Dabba Doo !

Flinstone
55 Cobblestone Road
Bedrock

The official conduit will likely be Keysight.com. Regardless, the person posting here is likely a direct, KS employee. If someone really has an issue that is shutting them down, pick up the phone. KS is here as a courtesy.

[djnz]

The official conduit will likely be Keysight.com. Regardless, the person posting here is likely a direct, KS employee. If someone really has an issue that is shutting them down, pick up the phone. KS is here as a courtesy.

And yet while the specs were downgraded, Keysight did not bother to inform any people who had those meters registered in their name. It was a simple matter of sending out an email to people whose email addresses they already had and yet that did not happen. Saying "KS is here as a courtesy" would be too generous, I wouldn't let them off the hook so easily.

[Robaroni]

The official conduit will likely be Keysight.com. Regardless, the person posting here is likely a direct, KS employee. If someone really has an issue that is shutting them down, pick up the phone. KS is here as a courtesy.

And yet while the specs were downgraded, Keysight did not bother to inform any people who had those meters registered in their name. It was a simple matter of sending out an email to people whose email addresses they already had and yet that did not happen. Saying "KS is here as a courtesy" would be too generous, I wouldn't let them off the hook so easily.

I agree, we never got notice on our 65A, I'll bet this wouldn't happen with Fluke. They're here backtracking and who knows the real bottom line, did they get a pile of blown up meters in for repair?

[cjm]

I see the official service note on this issue has now been updated to reinstate the original 1000V rating : https://servicenotes.literature.keysight.com/litapp/SearchSN.do?method=openExternalSNSearch&prodNum=34461A
 

[PA0PBZ]

Confidence in product reliability
These products continue to be covered by Keysight’s three-year standard warranty, and effective immediately, we will provide an additional one-year warranty extension to ensure customers can depend on our products.

So whatever happened to this promise, did it disappear together with the service note? I don't see any additional warranty on the My Keysight page... 

[HighVoltage]

The service note 34461A-04A clearly states the additional 1 year warranty.

Just today I wrote a request to Keysight to update the warranty expiration date of my 34470A to reflect this additional 1 year.
Will see, what Keysight will answer / do.

May be they will only honor this on each individual case, if a claim should be filed.

[EEVblog]

Straight from the horses mouth!

[HighVoltage]

Thank you so much for this short video.
And thank you to John Kenny for explaining it.

That is exactly what we here at the forum suspected, that there never was a problem.
 

[Cerebus]

That is exactly what we here at the forum suspected, that there never was a problem.

It might have been what you expected, but it's a tad presumptuous to speak for everybody, i.e. "we here at the forum".

[HighVoltage]

True, it was only my personal expectation, after I did my own tests.

[mikeselectricstuff]

He wouldn't say which part, but later let slip that it was something in the PSU

[gwideman]

He wouldn't say which part, but later let slip that it was something in the PSU

Or he might have been following on from earlier in the conversation where perhaps he mentioned that he works on Keysight's high voltage power supplies, and is thus familiar with components (or PCB layout etc) used in high voltage situations.

[wraper]

He wouldn't say which part, but later let slip that it was something in the PSU

IMO it was implied he is a PSU guy, so he knows a lot about safety. Not that it was in PSU.

[wraper]

It could be, say, relay. They might notice that insulation between coil and contacts in not good for 1000V insulation. However that would be true only if that was between live and chassis. But in this case it was between live and live, so completely OK.
Relays used http://www.mouser.com/ds/2/315/mech_eng_ds-1075856.pdf

Max. switching voltage 220 V DC, 250 V AC

[EEVblog]

He wouldn't say which part, but later let slip that it was something in the PSU

Or he might have been following on from earlier in the conversation where perhaps he mentioned that he works on Keysight's high voltage power supplies, and is thus familiar with components (or PCB layout etc) used in high voltage situations.

Yes, John is a PSU guy.

[HighVoltage]

It looks like John Kenny is the Technology Manager for Keysight's Power and Energy division.
He introduced the new E36100 PSU in 2015 in this video:

[fonograph]

I dont like that video,not that its Dave fault,I found it to be waste of time,I didnt really learn anything new from it.

Its irritating that he dont want to tell witch part it is.I would be happier if he never went to Dave to make that video,so this thread will just collect dust and it will be forgoten.The fact that Keysight decided to go back to this whole thing yet not reveal what is the suspected part is making me angry.

Either tell exactly what it was,or be quiet.I am not interested in any half arsed public relations damage control bs.

[_Wim_]

I dont like that video,not that its Dave fault,I found it to be waste of time,I didnt really learn anything new from it.

Its irritating that he dont want to tell witch part it is.I would be happier if he never went to Dave to make that video,so this thread will just collect dust and it will be forgoten.The fact that Keysight decided to go back to this whole thing yet not reveal what is the suspected part is making me angry.

Either tell exactly what it was,or be quiet.I am not interested in any half arsed public relations damage control bs.

As he stated in the video, they are using “this” part always like that (so based on experience), but probably the numbers do not exactly match (but it is a common practice to use the part like that). Making the exact part number known will trigger a whole new discussion if it is allowed to use this part or not. If even at Keysight it causes big discussion and disagreement, imagine what would happen on a forum like this and others...
I concluded from this video that Keysight has a company structure where QA/Safety is independent from engineering and sales (as it should), and this assures that products are always closely reviewed, and this ensures we get a better/safer product.

[wraper]

Either tell exactly what it was,or be quiet.I am not interested in any half arsed public relations damage control bs.

Why should they? There was no actual problem to start with.

As he stated in the video, they are using “this” part always like that (so based on experience), but probably the numbers do not exactly match (but it is a common practice to use the part like that). Making the exact part number known will trigger a whole new discussion if it is allowed to use this part or not. If even at Keysight it causes big discussion and disagreement, imagine what would happen on a forum like this and others...

exactly

[fonograph]

Just becose they said there is no problem doesnt make it a truth.Fact is they are using 600V rated part in 1000V circuit to save money and refuse to tell which part it is.

Ofcourse they are going to say its "no problem",their profits could suffer,they have been probably cutting cost by using this under spec part for long time,its probably in multiple of their products,if people found out that this was going so long and is so widespread it will severly damage peoples opinion on the company.


Someone who is not from Keysight found out about it and was of opinion that this is problem.They lowered the rating,no matter what they claim,if it was really no problem and they were confident in it,the engineers who designed it would instantly confirm that indeed its not a problem and the ratings would be never lowered.The fact that they lowered it shows us that they arent as confident as they pretend to be when it comes to safety of this severly underspeced part.

"But competitors do it too" so what? I dont care,show me the part! What are you trying to hide? We only heard this from Keysight point of view,they have profits at stake,they have motive to be dishonest and contrary to their no problem narative the fact that they are hiding it from public,that fact that they arent confident in the part as they shown by lowering the spec,the fact that someone neutral who doesnt have horse in race was worried,the fact that they admited to use severly underspeced part makes me skeptical of their claims.

If you want to believe them,fine.To me this all seems suspicious and I wont be satisfied with anything they say until they reveal what part it is,if its really ok,then show it if you have nothing to hide.

[EEVblog]

Its irritating that he dont want to tell witch part it is.I would be happier if he never went to Dave to make that video,so this thread will just collect dust and it will be forgoten.The fact that Keysight decided to go back to this whole thing yet not reveal what is the suspected part is making me angry.

Keysight did not come to me to do this video, John came to do the 2 1/2 hour video interview I'm slowly releasing. He had no idea I would even ask that question, I only asked it because someone in the forum suggested it.

Either tell exactly what it was,or be quiet.I am not interested in any half arsed public relations damage control bs.

Sorry to tell you, but they very likely don't care what you think. You are welcome to protest by taking your T&M business elsewhere.

[EEVblog]

Just becose they said there is no problem doesnt make it a truth.Fact is they are using 600V rated part in 1000V circuit to save money and refuse to tell which part it is.

Do you have proof it's "to save money"? or, as I suspect, you are just speculating.
They said all the other manufacturers do the same thing, and they have done it for so long that people have forgotten why exactly.
This is clearly not a cost cutting method. For all we know there is only one part that does the job and everyone uses it.

Ofcourse they are going to say its "no problem",their profits could suffer,they have been probably cutting cost by using this under spec part for long time

And the evidence of them cost cutting anywhere else in the product is were exactly? That kinda makes your suspicion almost certainly wrong.

"But competitors do it too" so what?

So what? That actually tell you quite a lot from an engineering point of view.

I dont care,show me the part! What are you trying to hide?

They are likely trying to stop people like you from going ape over a single spec sheet figure that may not be relevant without a ton of other engineering test and historical data that would likely be difficult to comprehend to Joe Average.

[fonograph]

"""Do you have proof it's "to save money"? or, as I suspect, you are just speculating.
They said all the other manufacturers do the same thing, and they have done it for so long that people have forgotten why exactly.
This is clearly not a cost cutting method. For all we know there is only one part that does the job and everyone uses it."""


You ask me for proof if using 600V spec part in 1000V circuit is to "save money?"That is common sense! Higher spec parts cost significantly more,all companies use cheapest parts possible to maximize profit. 99% of the time there is under spec part used anywhere,be it electronics,or mechanical maschines,constructing house or anywhere really,it is to spend less money.

What proof you have that its not to save money? I dont claim it is to save money,I do claim thats much more likely than opposite and there is no proof that it isnt to save money. Proof that could be easily made if they revelead the part.




"""They are likely trying to stop people like you from going ape over a single spec sheet figure that may not be relevant without a ton of other engineering test and historical data that would likely be difficult to comprehend to Joe Average."""



I cant believe you are blaming general public for being too inexperienced to deserve answer.Average Joe doesnt buy 1200 dollar multimeter.I think the idea that engineering community on average is too inexperienced and hysterical as warranty to hide important facts about use  of underspec part is not right.

I am noob,I admit it,but I dont go ape for irrational reasons when I discover some product uses under spec parts in it.For example Rigol uses under spec ADCs in their scopes,I didnt go "ooo!!! Rigol uses under spec ADCs ooOH my god WORST T&M MANUFACTURER EVER NEVER GOING TO BUY FROM THEM AGAIN OOOOOOO!",I was more like "k lol".Using underspec parts alone doesnt concern me at all,hiding the part despite many people wanting to know what it was,that raises all kinds of red flags for me.

And yes yes,Keysight doesnt care about what I think,but I am not alone who is curious what part it is.

[rodpp]

It seems like Keysight knows from experience that there is no problem with that part (or parts) but is afraid to unveil it. Could be because there is no data to support their position or that their data (part specs, test results, etc) could be questionable.

Or maybe there is enough data to technically prove that everything is ok and Keysight just decided not show it, even it being a security related issue. If they did that, I can't understand their behavior.

Certainly if there is a part with questionable specs, soon or later it will become public, Keysight wanting or not.

My personal opinion is that there is nothing wrong and Keysight is sure about that. If they have data to support it, or if they are sure only from experience, I don't have a clue. I really don't believe that Keysight would occult a potential security flaw after issued a spec change and reverted it, if they reverted it is because they are sure there is no problem. Other than that could be too much risky.

[razberik]

Calm down fonograph. Soon or later, community will discover which part it is.
When this generation of DMM is available to hobbysts, persons like TiN would evaluate it.

There are so many information about other equipment which are not directly from manufacturer.