New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510

[Mr. Scram]

Also, some praise for Tek/Keithley:

You get a free Kickstart license after registering your product. The software is good and also frequently updated/improved.

Not only did I get licenses for two DMMs, I also can claim Kickstart licenses for old equipment I bought used: one 2400 SMU, 2 x 2602A SMUs and one 2612A SMU - a total of four unclaimed licenses for which I have no use right now. So, free licenses for 15-20 yr old stuff - very generous.

My opinion on BenchVue and it's licensing model should not derail this thread, let's just say Keithley have much better S/W and a more generous licensing model. IMHO.

How'd you get those licenses? Just register it? I have some kit that sounds it may be eligible.

[Mr. Scram]

hwj-d
I've bought number of items, DMMs, PSUs, etc from Keysight and other vendors before, and most of it comes without uncertainty data in calibration report, and such data not available even after request without ordering calibration service with data.
Black 3458A that came also did not have data in the 1 page calibration certificate and I was not able to get that.

Thinking that it cost nothing for factory to print few pages of paper with numbers is not right. That's what triggered me, not the lack of data points in report. Not denying need in numbers, just the expectation of it for free.  Try to get a piece of paper from PTB for your 10V reference for example. 1 page with a number will likely cost about four DMM6500s combined. Calibration is a business on its own, I've spent 3 years already on writing own software to do automated reports for my gear. Commercial MET/CAL software license cost tens of thousands a year too, so that fancy manufacturer lab gotta pay for it's maintenance somehow, unless we just accept increased cost for ALL products if the factory just include cost of callab into price of every bit sold. That will make everyone to pay to ensure few customers who actually value data are happy.

My point was that I was not expecting it anyway. If you get instrument with calibration report + data, that is more of a welcome bonus. But you right, no point to discuss this, as what I get or you get does not mean what everybody who buys an insturment gets, as it can vary a lot from your distributor, geo and options you order with instrument.

Calibration is a business on its own but they're already doing it. At least, I sure hope they do. Making the data you already have available does represent a cost but that should be very minor once set up. While I get it's a cost saving measure it's pushing it too far if you ask me. It seems a bit silly to sell a precision instrument, only to go "lol dunno" when people ask about that.

[eplpwr]

How'd you get those licenses? Just register it? I have some kit that sounds it may be eligible.

I did just register and get the licenses.

It may have been a time limited promo, though - I had not registered the latest 2602A so I did it right now. There was no license showing up.  OTOH, during registration it said something like "your serial # may not be valid", there seems to be a missing live connection with their mfg database since I got the same message when registering a 2002 DMM minutes before. Probably the serial # is verified manually or with a batch job, only after that I can say with certainty if they still give away free licenses. The license part # is KSPROMONL-BASE, which kind of indicates that it is related to a promotion and may be time limited.

I've got some 2001 DMMs that were registered at the same time as the other equipment like the 2400, and those got no free licenses. 2001 (and 2002) DMMs are not supported by Kickstart, which simply explains that. Thus, as a minimum, the equipment needs to be supported.

[Neuromodulator]

After updating the to latest firmware I began having a problem (which might or might not me related to the update). When I press the power button when the instrument is powered on very often it just restarts the DMM, kinda like if no debouncing was performed. Have anyone else experienced this?

[eplpwr]

... Try to get a piece of paper from PTB for your 10V reference for example. 1 page with a number will likely cost about four DMM6500s combined. ...

That seems a little out of line, even if different markets have different pricing.

Price to calibrate Fluke 732A at ri.se (equivalent of PTB, NIST, et al): 13.750 SEK+VAT (148 measurements, 1 month, k=2, 0.3 µV/V. All outputs measured: 1V, 1.018V and 10V. Not using their JJA directly but accuracy is their top offering.)

Price for new DMM6500: 10.555 SEK+VAT

Awful VAT of 25% don't change comparison; deductible for companies, not for private citizens.

The DMM6500 had a long running 15% discount that has now ended, SEK currency has taken a hit with central bank negative interest rate experiment and so forth. Still, it is very far away from 4 DMM6500's.

[JxR]

hwj-d
I've bought number of items, DMMs, PSUs, etc from Keysight and other vendors before, and most of it comes without uncertainty data in calibration report, and such data not available even after request without ordering calibration service with data.
Black 3458A that came also did not have data in the 1 page calibration certificate and I was not able to get that.

Thinking that it cost nothing for factory to print few pages of paper with numbers is not right. That's what triggered me, not the lack of data points in report. Not denying need in numbers, just the expectation of it for free.  Try to get a piece of paper from PTB for your 10V reference for example. 1 page with a number will likely cost about four DMM6500s combined. Calibration is a business on its own, I've spent 3 years already on writing own software to do automated reports for my gear. Commercial MET/CAL software license cost tens of thousands a year too, so that fancy manufacturer lab gotta pay for it's maintenance somehow, unless we just accept increased cost for ALL products if the factory just include cost of callab into price of every bit sold. That will make everyone to pay to ensure few customers who actually value data are happy.

My point was that I was not expecting it anyway. If you get instrument with calibration report + data, that is more of a welcome bonus. But you right, no point to discuss this, as what I get or you get does not mean what everybody who buys an insturment gets, as it can vary a lot from your distributor, geo and options you order with instrument.

Calibration is a business on its own but they're already doing it. At least, I sure hope they do. Making the data you already have available does represent a cost but that should be very minor once set up. While I get it's a cost saving measure it's pushing it too far if you ask me. It seems a bit silly to sell a precision instrument, only to go "lol dunno" when people ask about that.

They absolutely are already doing it, since E-Design is able to look up the data.  That really was my whole point with my above comment.

1. The document already exists
2. You have already paid to have this calibration done, since it is baked into the retail price of the instrument.
3. Printing out these already EXISTING pages (or better yet just having it available online) certainly isn't costing 4x DMM6500 per unit.  No company is going to sale a product for long that cost them 4x more to produce than they can sale it for.

Regardless, from a business perspective it does make absolute sense to withhold the document and charge for its access.

[hwj-d]

...
Regardless, from a business perspective it does make absolute sense to withhold the document and charge for its access.

Unless the customer notices this "fraud" on him, which it is, if this data exists and is already automatically priced in by the non-existent effort.

So here it's all about the balance of power between customer vs. marketing. And on which side do we as consumers really stand?

[JxR]

Unless the customer notices this "fraud" on him, which it is, if this data exists and is already automatically priced in by the non-existent effort.

So here it's all about the balance of power between customer vs. marketing. And on which side do we as consumers really stand?

Typically we fall somewhere on the loosing side.  As to which side I really fall on in this particular argument?

Well...I certainly don't feel as strongly as you do about getting this document.  Although, I will admit I would have found it useful. 

I do expect what E-Design is saying is true, in that many people don't care about having this data.  From that perspective,  it does make sense to save a bit on "actual" printing cost.  I can imagine expense of running a calibration lab is a beyond ridiculous as TiN attempted to explain.  Margins are not great on T&M gear, calibration is expensive, so why not help try and recoup some of those cost by withholding this data from the customer?  It makes sense from the business end.  I do feel like we have paid for this calibration (although I expect the cost factored into final price of the DMM6500 would be much less than a typical calibration would cost you). 

Regardless, it makes no difference if the document is not as important to me as it is to you.  I'm not arrogant enough to come in here and say your opinion doesn't matter because my opinion is different than yours. 

So, if you want a document you already paid for (imho), I'm on your side and hope you get it!  I will always be on the side of the consumer having more options, and more protections.

[hwj-d]

...
Margins are not great on T&M gear, calibration is expensive, so why not help try and recoup some of those cost by withholding this data from the customer?  It makes sense from the business end.

No. Either or not. Either the data are absolutely necessary for the function of the device ready for sale, in which case they are of course already priced in, or one buys an incomplete, non-functional device, which provokes a considerable price reduction. Both together is not possible.

I do feel like we have paid for this calibration (although I expect the cost factored into final price of the DMM6500 would be much less than a typical calibration would cost you). 

Regardless, it makes no difference if the document is not as important to me as it is to you.  I'm not arrogant enough to come in here and say your opinion doesn't matter because my opinion is different than yours. 

So, if you want a document you already paid for (imho), I'm on your side and hope you get it!  I will always be on the side of the consumer having more options, and more protections.

The argumentation front is not differentiated according to the different needs of individual persons (you and me), or groups of persons (power users or not), which I consider a rather obfuscating proxy argument.

A business model always arises when there is a supply gap, i.e. a lack of services or goods. If you have a monopoly, or there is agreement on the suppliers side, you can create the shortage artificially. In this way, for example, large parts of the food are destroyed after the harvest, although there is hunger in the world. Not to even think about medicines. It is always the same method.

[TiN]

Last bit of offtopic here from me.

1. The document already exists

Not always. Calibration certificate is somewhat more of a legal document, rather than technical. Yes, manufacturer usually have calibration results as part of their QA system when instrument is manufactured/verified. It may not be a report per ce though. Calibration certificate issued by lab have to be in line with release procedures and may be subject for audit, so for a fab it's not just a piece of paper with some numbers given by some fancy calibrator. If I connect DMM6500 to my calibrator, do bunch of tests, I still cannot provide legal calibration certificate, so me telling "this unit have 2 ppm error on 10V range" is just chit-chat and not a legal certification.

2. You have already paid to have this calibration done, since it is baked into the retail price of the instrument.

There are different levels of calibration too. Factory calibration may not include as much points as top tier 17025 service. It is not limited to T&M gear. Components have same process - you can buy opamp which will most likely be in spec, but it will not have calibration report with measurement results for your particular piece. Most parts sold usually are not even tested to all datasheet specs, but rather window pass/fail criteria. If you want, you can pay more, and get calibration report or test data from your specific opamp/batch. It will not be $3 anymore, but you can do it.

Different fabs have different capabilities/accreditations, etc. Lot of variables in play. Also instruments may be tested/adjusted at the time of manufacture, but if customer buys a unit with calibration data request, it could be recalibrated prior to shipping. In case of hwj-d, providing him calibration data from 2 years ago would be only historical value and would not mean that instrument now is still in spec (it's most likely is, but you never know until you do lot of calibrations to characterize it over time).

3. Printing out these already EXISTING pages (or better yet just having it available online) certainly isn't costing 4x DMM6500 per unit.  No company is going to sale a product for long that cost them 4x more to produce than they can sale it for.

I've included 3458A calibration report that was included. There are no existing pages with data for it.

I perhaps confused a bit, didn't mean that calibrating DMM6500 is 4 times the cost, but calibrating voltage standard in Tek/Keithley lab against top tier NMI can cost like that. NIST service listed for $2727 for voltage comparison against saturated cells. Canada's NRC bit less, $1840. Great that RISE is much cheaper, so was Taiwan's CMS even against PJVS. Add calibrators, resistance standards, capacitance, etc then all man-hours to maintain gear in cal, and that will make additional time spend to cook more detailed reports cost more.

There is always more to the story, rather than evil corporations keeping customers in the dark , just because they are evil.
For clarity: I don't defend vendor on not including data for every single sold instrument, I'd be first to cheer if we always get data with every single piece of equipment we buy, no matter simple 4.5-digit handheld or 8.5-digit 20K$ DMM. Another more worrysome thing - calibration labs will not provide you method they used to calibrate your instrument. So even when you do get data in report, how can you know how to reproduce it on your side, if method/settings are not even known to you?

[hwj-d]

There is always more to the story, rather than evil corporations keeping customers in the dark , just because they are evil.

interesting option. How do one come up with that?

[hwj-d]

Last bit of offtopic here from me.

1. The document already exists

Not always. Calibration certificate is somewhat more of a legal document, rather than technical. Yes, manufacturer usually have calibration results as part of their QA system when instrument is manufactured/verified. It may not be a report per ce though. Calibration certificate issued by lab have to be in line with release procedures and may be subject for audit, so for a fab it's not just a piece of paper with some numbers given by some fancy calibrator. If I connect DMM6500 to my calibrator, do bunch of tests, I still cannot provide legal calibration certificate, so me telling "this unit have 2 ppm error on 10V range" is just chit-chat and not a legal certification.
...

So they sell us unapproved equipment?
Either, or not. See above.
After all, this affects the entire product line. In my opinion, an impossible argument. Imagine that being communicated as fact.

[hwj-d]

@TiN
I understand your argument, and how you feel. You're describing the "as is" state. That's good, you're by far the more experienced one.
But you also defend it. Your boundaries are quite fluid, if I may say so.   

[JxR]

Last bit of offtopic here from me.

1. The document already exists

Not always.

1. The document (or numbers) exists because E-Design said the document exists.  That is the only reason I made that statement.  If he can offer to look up the info for you by serial number...then the data exists.

2. The calibration or check has already been done, because the document/data exists.

My entire argument is really only dealing specifically with the DMM6500.  I make zero claims about any other instrument.  I'm sure many of your points are completely valid, but we are having two separate conversations here.

[eplpwr]

How'd you get those licenses? Just register it? I have some kit that sounds it may be eligible.

I did just register and get the licenses.

It may have been a time limited promo, though - I had not registered the latest 2602A so I did it right now. There was no license showing up.  ... The license part # is KSPROMONL-BASE, which kind of indicates that it is related to a promotion and may be time limited.

Well, after some time has passed there is still no license for the newly registered 2602A - I guess the time limited promotion is over. Note that for brand new meters there should still be a license included - during the promo period some users reported getting two licenses when buying a new meter; one included in the purchase, one from the (seemingly automatic) web-promo when registering the meter at tek.com.

[thm_w]

Unless the customer notices this "fraud" on him, which it is, if this data exists and is already automatically priced in by the non-existent effort.

So here it's all about the balance of power between customer vs. marketing. And on which side do we as consumers really stand?

This is not fraud . 99% of customers have no care about the specific uncertainties measured. If they did they would be buying higher end gear or sending out the instrument to their own preferred cal-lab. Giving marketing crap for not catering to the 1% of hobbyist customers is fine, but ultimately a waste of breath.

Start a new thread to move this discussion somewhere else, not receiving a full call report is not specific to the DMM6500, it affects hundreds of brands and instruments.

[hwj-d]

@thm_w

• I'll let you have your "opinion", I've reasoned mine logically, which you don't, so please don't ridicule it.
• This is still about the DMM6500, even if it affects whole generations of DMM's in the background, so there is no reason to outsource this discourse about the DMM.
• But, the discourse has been sufficiently illuminated from all sides by now, so there is no further reason to let it flare up again through you.
• If you need to discuss this further, please open your own thread. I'll see if I can meet your need to let the endless thought continue.

[Mr. Scram]

Unless the customer notices this "fraud" on him, which it is, if this data exists and is already automatically priced in by the non-existent effort.

So here it's all about the balance of power between customer vs. marketing. And on which side do we as consumers really stand?

We need to understand that we're probably not typical customers. Most of these will be bought with someone else's money. The hobbyist market is just a nice extra. I just don't think Danaher gives a crap about it.

[KedasProbe]

I didn't go to the office yet to compare to the other DMM6500.
But in the meantime I can give this picture of an 1 year after calibration DMM6500.
Obviously the cheap verify device is just there to give me a nice stable 10V but since they were that close I thought I will share the picture.   (I'm pretty sure it drifted more than that in the last year)

[Neuromodulator]

hwj-d, I was wondering why the specs are not enough for you. Could you give concrete/practical examples of what kind of analyses you want to do where specs are not enough and you require cal data? Or is this discussion more about the policies of test equipment companies?

[E-Design]

Unless the customer notices this "fraud" on him, which it is, if this data exists and is already automatically priced in by the non-existent effort.

So here it's all about the balance of power between customer vs. marketing. And on which side do we as consumers really stand?

We need to understand that we're probably not typical customers. Most of these will be bought with someone else's money. The hobbyist market is just a nice extra. I just don't think Danaher gives a crap about it.

I have come to learn that its not that the big Corp doesn't care... They do care! Everyone who has purchased a product is an important customer. In my experience that includes everybody - no exceptions. The issue is that big corp is running a business and Hobby market is not where the money is at. Therefore, many resources cant be spent on it - it doesn't make financial sense. Of course hobbyists don't agree with this for obvious reasons. But its not the whole story to say they don't care.

BTW, big corp isnt some evil marketer or manager... those people are NOT the ones who are interacting with customers generally! So its a fictitious entity really. If you as a hobbyist, interact with a big corp, you are dealing with real people who actually support your cause and work in service because they like helping people (big or small) - its just that there is no way anybody has enough time or resources (money) to spend on the smaller markets like hobby. If the company was bigger, then perhaps.. anyways it shouldn't be viewed as some personal thing like companies don't care about the little guy / hobbyist - its just a financial and resource limitation.

I myself, am a huge electronics hobbyist as well so I have a bias toward the hobby market. In my experience the lack of support or not getting help is strictly a financial issue.

In an ideal world, there would be enough people and money to go around and spend on all the markets big and small.
BTW, Danaher split off a couple years ago.. Now "Fortive" has the T&M companies including Fluke.

[MegaVolt]

hwj-d, I was wondering why the specs are not enough for you. Could you give concrete/practical examples of what kind of analyses you want to do where specs are not enough and you require cal data? Or is this discussion more about the policies of test equipment companies?

I can tell you why this is necessary.
For example, I measured + 10V and -10V on my DMM7510. And I find that these two values are not equal. And the differences are noticeable. More than 1 ppm. And linearity is declared 2 ppm. And I'm scared. Is everything all right with the device. I open the report and see that there is a difference both in the report and in the same direction. Hooray. So the device has not deteriorated. He was like that. I became calmer.

[hwj-d]

That this discussion has to be held at all is a joke, isn't it? I mean, "the helping hand" has already failed at the crucial point of withholding the crucial documentation.

[maginnovision]

That this discussion has to be held at all is a joke, isn't it? I mean, "the helping hand" has already failed at the crucial point of withholding the crucial documentation.

You're right, some people feel one way, some feel the others. It doesn't really matter since if you want the data you can demand it and if you can't get it don't buy it. Find a manufacturer that gives you what you want.

[hwj-d]

Anyone else without a ticket?