New ANENG multimeter

[kalel]

I'm thinking about one of those, hopefully not the wrong choice:



Even with 8008 out there, I think this one might be more beneficial as a general purpose electronics meter. Mostly those functions at the top (the 4 buttons), otherwise I see no difference from AN8002.

[ebastler]

I'm thinking about one of those, hopefully not the wrong choice:
...
Mostly those functions at the top (the 4 buttons), otherwise I see no difference from AN8002.

Looks like a rebadge of the AN860B+, discussed on the previous page of this thread.
When comparing it to the AN8002, you are aware of the size difference, right?

[kalel]

I'm thinking about one of those, hopefully not the wrong choice:
...
Mostly those functions at the top (the 4 buttons), otherwise I see no difference from AN8002.

Looks like a rebadge of the AN860B+, discussed on the previous page of this thread.
When comparing it to the AN8002, you are aware of the size difference, right?

Yes I think it is the same meter too, I just shared my thoughts vs the other models.
I don't know the exact sizes, but I do know that this one is larger than AN8002/AN8008.
I focus more on the features vs price, larger or smaller is not that important for me (unless it's so small that is difficult to use, or so large it takes too much space). Well, at least for right now as the main meter.
As I don't have any meter that offers min/max / rel, it might be good to have one that does.

Inside/PCB wise, I don't know which is better.

[Fungus]

I'm thinking about one of those, hopefully not the wrong choice:

Are they much cheaper? Why not get the original ANENG model?

Even with 8008 out there, I think this one might be more beneficial as a general purpose electronics meter.

Definitely a better all-round meter. The 8008's strong point is microvolts/nanoamps, the rest of the features are worse than this meter.

Mostly those functions at the top (the 4 buttons), otherwise I see no difference from AN8002.

It's a lot bigger.

[kalel]

Are they much cheaper? Why not get the original ANENG model?

I did find a better price, but do you think there is any difference?

[Fungus]

do you think there is any difference?

Probably not, just the big yellow logo. I'd pay an extra $1 for it, but... 

[kalel]

do you think there is any difference?

Probably not, just the big yellow logo. I'd pay an extra $1 for it, but... 

At least the model name is easier to remember. Should be the same meter inside.

[kalel]

I decided to get it. The price was good, and the meter seems possibly the best choice among AN8002/8008. It's to be my main meter, so I'm thinking differently than those buying a secondary meter, where maybe smaller is an extra advantage. Perhaps it is, but I prefer having the min/max/rel options.

[PA4TIM]

 I bought it (8002) only for fun. It is a nice toy and tuns out to be one of the better toy meters. It was spot-on but the question is, how much will it drift over short and long time.

A Aneng would not be usable for me as first meter, but maybe it is for you

[kalel]

I bought it (8002) only for fun. It is a nice toy and tuns out to be one of the better toy meters. It was spot-on but the question is, how much will it drift over short and long time.

A Aneng would not be usable for me as first meter, but maybe it is for you

It should serve my uses, I'm not an advanced user.

[Fungus]

I bought it (8002) only for fun. It is a nice toy and tuns out to be one of the better toy meters. It was spot-on but the question is, how much will it drift over short and long time.

Probably close to zero.

Drift happens to devices that get hot and bake the insides, devices where electrolytic capacitors can affect the readings, devices that use trimmer pots for calibration, etc.

None of that applies to an AN8002 used at home.

[rsjsouza]

A glance at the certificates of conformity do not reveal anything out of the ordinary for a meter (the 3V/400mA rating is for the meter's power supply, not the test voltages) but the remark on the EU cert is what differs this from a certification mark from Intertek/UL/TUV: the certificate does not imply continuous evaluation of the manufacturer - thus subsequent production runs will not be tested. Knowing how quality tends to be spotty among some manufacturers, this does not guarantee the meter you received is the same that was tested.

(edit) the FCC is only for non intentional irradiation emissions. It does not have anything to do with safety.

[floobydust]

A glance at the certificates of conformity do not reveal anything out of the ordinary for a meter ...

It is out of the ordinary, and a lie for the use-case scenario.
The DMM 61010 certificate is for a 3V appliance. Claiming overvoltage categories, adding a "double-insulated" mark on the back, its all bullshit.
A common way to fake regulatory is to omit the expected dangerous (situations) use of a product.

Fake FCC is a problem more so with products that generate RF i.e. Bluetooth or Wifi.
See the ESP8266 fiasco. US Customs will halt product entry. Not a safety thing, but we were talking fake approvals.

[rsjsouza]

A glance at the certificates of conformity do not reveal anything out of the ordinary for a meter ...

It is out of the ordinary, and a lie for the use-case scenario.
The DMM 61010 certificate is for a 3V appliance. Claiming overvoltage categories, adding a "double-insulated" mark on the back, its all bullshit.

The certificate shows the rating of the product in the "Identification" subsection, thus it will be the equipment power supply, not the conditions under test. The conditions under test are described below in the certificate (which are a bit scant, I must admit) but are better shown  in another document called the Technical File, but that is rarely disclosed publicly.

If you want to look at other examples of certificates just search around for Fluke compliance certificates and you will see some examples such as:

http://assets.fluke.com/manuals/28IIEx__1beng0000.pdf

[Mr. Scram]

why litter the sacred workbench and professional toolbox with these suss toys?   

Having more than one multimeter is obviously useful is you want to take simultaneous readings, or double check a strange reading.

Pretending that more expensive western products do not contribute to the exploitation of the Chinese work force seems, well, hopeful. We all remember the fairly recent story of the high suicide rates amongst Apple/Foxconn employees. If one buys devices built in a factory with safety netting around it, something might be up. Apple certainly is not the only guilty party here. We all like to soothe our conscience by paying more, but the reality is that any extra money is unlikely to reach the actual workers. Not to mention some resources upon which our devices depend which are almost exclusively mined in conflict areas, often in conflict because of that mining.

I would love to have the workers that build my devices live like kings by paying a premium of a few dollars for each product. The way the world is, that just doesn't work.

[tooki]

Pretending that more expensive western products do not contribute to the exploitation of the Chinese work force seems, well, hopeful. We all remember the fairly recent story of the high suicide rates amongst Apple/Foxconn employees. If one buys devices built in a factory with safety netting around it, something might be up. Apple certainly is not the only guilty party here.

Aside from not being "recent" at all -- the media hubbub was back in 2010 -- the facts of the situation are almost diametrically opposite of how the media portrayed it. It was reported as being a rash of suicides, but in fact, the suicide rate among Foxconn employees (none were Apple employees) was substantially lower than that of the Chinese population as a whole! (In its worst year, Foxconn's suicide rate was less than 2/3 that of the general population.)

In reality, the main reason that this non-story became a story was to bash Apple, which Apple haters love to do (since they don't understand why Apple is successful, and remain angry that they are proven wrong over and over again). The media knew that any story about Apple will get clicks, the more sensationalist the better.

Yet in the case of suppliers, Apple is by far the most responsible major company. It performs regular on-the-ground audits of its entire supply chain, and a common comment auditors hear from the suppliers' employees is "no other client does this". While there is undoubtedly room for improvement in working conditions at suppliers, no other major electronics company comes even close to Apple. (Look for Apple's annual supplier responsibility report, it's always a fascinating read.)

[Mr. Scram]

Aside from not being "recent" at all -- the media hubbub was back in 2010 -- the facts of the situation are almost diametrically opposite of how the media portrayed it. It was reported as being a rash of suicides, but in fact, the suicide rate among Foxconn employees (none were Apple employees) was substantially lower than that of the Chinese population as a whole! (In its worst year, Foxconn's suicide rate was less than 2/3 that of the general population.)

In reality, the main reason that this non-story became a story was to bash Apple, which Apple haters love to do (since they don't understand why Apple is successful, and remain angry that they are proven wrong over and over again). The media knew that any story about Apple will get clicks, the more sensationalist the better.

Yet in the case of suppliers, Apple is by far the most responsible major company. It performs regular on-the-ground audits of its entire supply chain, and a common comment auditors hear from the suppliers' employees is "no other client does this". While there is undoubtedly room for improvement in working conditions at suppliers, no other major electronics company comes even close to Apple. (Look for Apple's annual supplier responsibility report, it's always a fascinating read.)

Knee-jerk reaction ahoy! Let's not make this an Apple discussion. Foxconn assembles hardware for many large electronics companies, but is in turn part of a  much bigger story. Apple was merely used as an example due to the recent media attention. I call it recent, because it's recent enough to probably still be relevant to manufacturing conditions today.

I am not interested in discussing whether Apple or Foxconn treat their workers better or worse than other manufacturers. What I do know is that workers work long days of 12 hours, have mindless repetitive tasks to perform, work mandatory overtime if required, generally live on campus with 8 people to a room and do not have much of a life outside of their single repetitive task. Personally, I feel treating people as cheap meat robots is not ideal and how I would like the people making my hardware to be treated. It does, however, illustrate that spending a lot on a product does not necessarily mean that working conditions are what you'd hope.

Regardless, this is all hopelessly off-topic.

[bitseeker]

The best/worst thing (depending on your viewpoint) about the plethora of inexpensive DMMs with various features and colors is that they're hard to resist collecting just for fun (gotta catch 'em all). So far, I've been able to resist, but now I'm thinking about a use case for one.

The other day I was at a surplus components warehouse and happened upon some <5 Ohm power resistors that I wanted to check before buying. Unfortunately, the only thing I had in my pocket at the time was an el cheapo CEM DMM (a.k.a., free HF meter). Although the CEM is small and OK for quick low-power measurements, the low quality and high impedance of the probes/leads made it useless for measuring these resistors. Yeah, I know, but the U1252B, U1272A, and U1282A require much larger pockets.

How well do the small ANENG models (with either fixed or removable probes) perform at measuring single-digit resistances?

[mikeys]

[snip]

The other day I was at a surplus components warehouse and happened upon some <5 Ohm power resistors that I wanted to check before buying. Unfortunately, the only thing I had in my pocket at the time was an el cheapo CEM DMM (a.k.a., free HF meter). Although the CEM is small and OK for quick low-power measurements, the low quality and high impedance of the probes/leads made it useless for measuring these resistors.

I've got an amprobe PM55 that sits in my bag for the odd use. Got it pretty cheap, would probably buy the 53 or 51 if I was going to do it again 'cos I'm never going to use the amps range on a little meter like this. UL listed, cat 2 600v cat 3 300v, Brymen OEM. Brymen are selling them under their own brand now aswell but I'm not sure of the model numbers. In the pouch it's about the size of an iphone 5 but a touch wider. Out of the case it's significantly smaller. I'll check single digits resistance for you tomorrow, but if you're gunna drop ~£20 on a portable meter I'd recommend one of the lower end models than an aneng, simply for UL listing.

[evava]

The other day I was at a surplus components warehouse and happened upon some <5 Ohm power resistors that I wanted to check before buying. Unfortunately, the only thing I had in my pocket at the time was an el cheapo CEM DMM (a.k.a., free HF meter). Although the CEM is small and OK for quick low-power measurements, the low quality and high impedance of the probes/leads made it useless for measuring these resistors. Yeah, I know, but the U1252B, U1272A, and U1282A require much larger pockets.

How well do the small ANENG models (with either fixed or removable probes) perform at measuring single-digit resistances?

Yes, as you can see in the picture, small Aneng AN8008 is very usable in this regard.
Result:
( 1 ohm 5% 1% (bought cheaply from ebay) metallic resistor )
Fluke 289:  0.985 Ohm
Fluke 87V:  1.00 Ohm
UT61e: 0.98 Ohm
AN8008: 0.98 Ohm

Very happy with small Aneng in this regard!

Notes:
Meters after REL (except of AN8008 - does not have that button, you have to deduct for yourself), all measurements were performed deliberately with AN8008 leads.
REL was checked even after measurement for sure.
Fluke 289: needs at least 1 minute settling on LowOhm range, then stable reading, seldom jumps 1count.
Fluke 87V (HiRes): very unstable, jumps +- 2 counts, I chose the smallest value, LSD never gets still.
UT61e: very fast, no need to wait long for settling, then stable reading, seldom jumps 1count.
AN8008: need to wait half minute for settling, then little bit unstable LSD jumps +-1count, but much better than Fluke 87V.

[mikeys]

My Aneng arrived in the post today so here's a quick test

With two 10ohm in parallel,

Aneng 8008: 5.07
Amprobe PM55: 3.01
Brymen BM233: 5.1

With three,

Aneng 8008: 3.40
Amprobe PM55: 1.40
Brymen BM233: 3.4

Well, turns out my meter is crap at this particular task 

Get the aneng. I had to suck up a few solder balls and rework a couple of joints but it seems like a pretty good meter for low resistance measurements

[Fungus]

Get the aneng. I had to suck up a few solder balls and rework a couple of joints but it seems like a pretty good meter for low resistance measurements

Don't you need a 'REL' button for low resistance measurements? 

[ebastler]

Notes:
Meters after REL (except of AN8008 - does not have that button, you have to deduct for yourself

Don't you need a 'REL' button for low resistance measurements? 

 

As pointed out (and illustrated photographically) by evava, you need to be able to perform a subtraction if you do not have a REL button. Just two posts above yours.

[bitseeker]

Thank you for the test results, evava and mikeys. I'm pleasantly surprised that the 8008 was even doing well at 1 Ohm. That's good enough for my use. The REL function isn't critical since shorting the leads to see how much offset to compensate for takes just a moment.

[bitseeker]

Don't you need a 'REL' button for low resistance measurements? 

The REL function just subtracts the offset on your behalf. When measuring many high-resolution values that can be convenient. Otherwise, the same process can be done in your head.

e.g.,

Probes shorted = 0.34 Ohms
Measured resistance = 1.47 Ohms
Net resistance = 1.13 Ohms

As a quick measurement, 1.something - 0.something = approximately 1