Siglent Bench DMMs SDM3065X, SDM3055 and SDM3045X

[Performa01]

If I argued in front of our Q auditors like you did, they would rip the certificate off the wall and we would go broke.

Huh? I cannot think of anything I said that would make Q-auditors "rip certificates off the wall".

All I said is that you can make measurements with 35 ppm uncertainty when you have a DMM with a specified 1 year tolerance of 35 ppm that has a valid calibration. You cannot say that your measurements have much less uncertainty, just because you have a cal certificate with data much closer to the ideal value.

The fact that I was able to establish Siglent in our company at all is solely due to the fact that I am responsible for the measuring equipment and not others.
Otherwise the stuff wouldn't have been ordered in the first place.

I cannot see what this has to do with the topic of initial cal certificates (with or without data).

Now private is private and not commercial, you could say.
In the case of cheap products, I see it the same way, no question.
But 800€ is no longer cheap.

€800,- is relatively cheap for a 6.5 digit DMM. In any case significantly cheaper than a comparable Keysight.

[Martin72]

From my serious Siglent, I only have a sheet of paper....
I will write to them, the serial number is individual, maybe there is a database with values.

After a "conversation" this has settled for me, everything is fine. Now. 

[Martin72]

Martin, as mentioned much earlier in this thread I kept my new SDM3065 running for about 500 hours to settle down before I started some comparisons with my HP 34401A.

My shown measurement was done with a Kelvin clamp on a batterie and two leads went to the HP and the other two to the SDM.

I´ll make up my mind how to do this, maybe switching it on and leave it for a month in on-state.
Unfortunately not only the LM399 will be pre-aged, but also other components where I don't know if it will have the same positive effect as for the voltage reference.

[Kleinstein]

Aging of many parts gets slower over time. E.g. a square root of time shape is relatively common, but not the only observed form. AFAIK the LM399 drift is mainly from the on time and not much from cycles depite of the relatively high temperature. With resistors or similar parts that get hot one can also have drift caused by cycling.
A known candidate for "drift" is settling of humidity in the PCB. This can take weeks to settle but is more a delayed environmental thing, not actual drift.

[tomud]

If you have your gear calibrated by some independent cal lab, you'll have to pay more for a calibration certificate with data than one without.

This is not entirely true. We will only pay more for an ISO-compliant certificate. This is mainly needed for companies that have, for example, ISO 9001.
Calibration without it is cheaper and basically differs in that we get a slightly different document looking at the legal side - because from the technical side we get the same.
Although, of course, this may vary depending on the offer of a particular company providing such services.

[Martin72]

We are not allowed to use devices that are not calibrated at least according to ISO.
If, for example, I were to allow the SDM3045X to be used for measurement/adjustment after purchase, even though these multimeters did not have the appropriate documentation, this could result in the recall of devices already delivered and tested with them, with the corresponding costs.
Therefore, all new purchases without protocols are first calibrated externally before they are used even once here.
It is completely irrelevant whether this makes technical sense or not, it is about the complete traceability.
The seriousness behind this can best be understood by the following example:
Assuming a product is tested with a calibrated measuring device, the measuring device still has a valid calibration.
If, however, during the next calibration it is determined that the measuring device is out of tolerance, even if it is only in one range, then it is determined which products were tested during the time between the two calibrations.
And those would then have to be measured again.
If we are unlucky, they are already at the customer all over the world...
For private use, of course, this is irrelevant.

[tomud]

We are not allowed to use devices that are not calibrated at least according to ISO.

Yes, that's right, I write about private individuals or companies where it is not necessary - Then you can do it cheaper and there is no need to pay for documents for which additional fees are charged.

In the case of companies with ISO etc. there are clear procedures and here it does not matter what DMM you buy.

[Kleinstein]

AFAIK the calibration to ISO standards normally does not need a protocol with measured data and the other way around a cal. protocol with data may still not be ISO conform. The question here is if the new meter comes with a suitable (for the needs: some may need some ISO standard, others want numbers) calibration. With some meters you can get them with different cal paperwork, though technically likely the same.  With a lower grade calibration, you may not be part of a very unlikely recall in case they had a problem. 

[tautech]

2015 SDM3055 running the latest FW....where's the reference aging ? 

[alm]

2015 SDM3055 running the latest FW....where's the reference aging ? 

How would we tell from this single picture? We don't know the history of either meter. Maybe the difference was much larger in 2015 and they drifted closer to each other. Maybe one of the meters was adjusted in the mean time. Maybe the SDM was rarely powered on so won't drift as much. Maybe this is a lucky unit that performs better than average.

The effect of not binning references is that you get a larger spread than the more reputable manufacturers that do select their references for drift and noise. Not that there won't be any well performing units.

[Martin72]

From my serious Siglent, I only have a sheet of paper....
I will write to them, the serial number is individual, maybe there is a database with values.

After a "conversation" this has settled for me, everything is fine. Now. 

I was right, they have a database where the respective results are stored.
I will get the corresponding results for my SDM3065X soon(not for free).
And with the devices from the "Performance" series (the A models) are complete calibration documents with it.
So I take everything back, the "one sheet of paper" can be trusted.

[Performa01]

2015 SDM3055 running the latest FW....where's the reference aging ? 

How would we tell from this single picture? We don't know the history of either meter. Maybe the difference was much larger in 2015 and they drifted closer to each other. Maybe one of the meters was adjusted in the mean time. Maybe the SDM was rarely powered on so won't drift as much. Maybe this is a lucky unit that performs better than average.

The effect of not binning references is that you get a larger spread than the more reputable manufacturers that do select their references for drift and noise. Not that there won't be any well performing units.

In addition to that - when we're talking about quality lab grade bench meters, yet without selected and well aged reference, long term drift will eventually become a problem for the fairly accurate 6.5 digit meters with a specified tolerance <40 ppm, but much less so for a lower resolution meter with 5.5 digits that has a much higher tolerance of >120 ppm, where 10 ppm drift would only show as the LSD changing by a single count.

[Martin72]

I will get the corresponding results for my SDM3065X soon

Arrived today, "raw" in csv format, a protocol will follow.
And it´s "real fresh" calibrated..
If of interest I could upload the csv files (after erasing serial number).

[Martin72]

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1AZBLftXtG4UCRjvO2_OARdLLeN2LQhuZ?usp=sharing

(24hrs avaible)

[mastershake]

looks like a really nice unit ordered one in for a client since there was a pretty killer deal on them i found with a code and the sale price it was under 490 for the 3065x wish i could have ordered myself one and sold the hantek lol.

[Veteran68]

looks like a really nice unit ordered one in for a client since there was a pretty killer deal on them i found with a code and the sale price it was under 490 for the 3065x wish i could have ordered myself one and sold the hantek lol.

Would be really nice if you could share said deal?

[mastershake]

it was a one piece deal. there was only one left and they wanted to get rid of it they are not carrying siglent anymore. i got the other scope that way also. but there was a seller on ebay selling the 3065x for 549 free shipping i dont know if they still have any but thats still a fair but more then i paid. if this place had stock on them i would have been happy to to share. i actually wanted to buy 2 of them but he only had the one so i got a 3065x and the 3055 as just a backup unit for the price i couldnt pass it up. it appears brand new and said it has only 1 startup when i turned it on. for less then 700 for both units i couldnt sat now. and then i have the hantek 3065's i have working again. but those were gifts from friends and family so being gifts ill prob keep them around.

[Veteran68]

You definitely hit the jackpot.

I have seen the $549 eBay price before, and was REALLY close on pulling the trigger. After a couple days thinking it over, I went back later to reconsider and the listing was closed. I wasn't desperate for a new meter (I have a perfectly working Agilent 34401A) but had been wanting something newer with more features, plus I apparently have a deep-seated compulsion to acquire all the DMMs, lol. My handheld DMM count has to be somewhere around 30 at the moment. I've been meaning to line them all up on the bench ala Kiss Analog and take a picture for the TEA forum.

I'll get a 3065X eventually, but if I run across a deal like you did, I wouldn't think twice.

[Martin72]

When I recently looked around for a 6.5 digit meter, I was surprised to find that the Siglent is the cheapest of all.
Even the Hantek was more expensive (for buyers in Germany).
I paid under 800 including tax for my SDM3065X, which is very good.

[Mortymore]

From here https://siglentna.com/resources/documents/digital-multimeter/#sdm3065x-series I looked at the DMMs manuals to check if any of them reflected the recently added options in the temperature functions, "ref temp" and "custom sensor" like in the 3055, were addressed in some of the other DMMs manuals, but they're not.

The 3055 manual looks like it has almost 10 years. Sure that can't be reflecting the improvements/corrections made by the firmware releases during all this years.

Am I searching in the wrong place or updated manuals for the Siglent DMMs are due?

[tautech]

From here https://siglentna.com/resources/documents/digital-multimeter/#sdm3065x-series I looked at the DMMs manuals to check if any of them reflected the recently added options in the temperature functions, "ref temp" and "custom sensor" like in the 3055, were addressed in some of the other DMMs manuals, but they're not.

The 3055 manual looks like it has almost 10 years. Sure that can't be reflecting the improvements/corrections made by the firmware releases during all this years.

Am I searching in the wrong place or updated manuals for the Siglent DMMs are due?

I normally look here:
https://int.siglent.com/download/documents/?CateIdss=5

SDM3065X manual is from March 2022
https://int.siglent.com/u_file/download/22_03_29/SDM3065X_Usermanual_E02B.pdf

[Mortymore]

Thanks tautech

That's the same 3065 manual version I got from the other link, but it still does not say anything about "ref temp" and "custom sensor".
I was hoping that those functions were already addressed at least in one of the DMM manuals, since they were implemented in the 3045 and 3065 much earlier than in the 3055

[tomud]

Thanks tautech

That's the same 3065 manual version I got from the other link, but it still does not say anything about "ref temp" and "custom sensor".
I was hoping that those functions were already addressed at least in one of the DMM manuals, since they were implemented in the 3045 and 3065 much earlier than in the 3055

Unfortunately, you have to wait for a new user manual that takes into account major changes in the firmware. This is another thing that Siglent should improve because such shortcomings do not only apply to the instructions for multimeters. Alternatively, you can try to write to support for an explanation of how to use functions not included in the manual.

[Mortymore]

The user manuals of the rebranded DMMs for Teledyne Lecroy (T3DMMx-5's), are the same thing as the Siglent ones (given the necessary slight differences), so the manuals aren't being updated also.

https://www.teledynelecroy.com/digital-multimeters/default.aspx

In the Siglent DMMs firmware revise history, wile for the 3045 the "custom sensor" is mentioned (added in 5.01.01.07R1), for the 3055 it's not (added in 1.01.01.27R2). Another fail in documentation.

This guys don't like the paperwork 

PS: The info about rebranded RS PRO RSDM3055 was no good either, in that regard
https://my.rs-online.com/web/p/multimeters/1236465

[EEVblog]

I had forgotten that the Siglent meter has an optional scanner card. Seems to cost as much as the meter? 
Can you just design your own card and the software is already built in?

EDIT: Ah, seems it's only US$275
https://www.testequity.com/product/38941-1-SC1016
Still that could be cheaper with a DIY or 3rd party solution.