I overlooked the UNI-T UT805A, which has a respectable 200,000 count.
Here is the updated spreadsheet:
This is a fantastic resource! I really appreciate all that it takes to compile and maintain a list like this. As I zero in on my decision, I want to be sure that I truly have this correct...
I get the difference between Accuracy and Precision, so we don't need to go there. But I notice on some of the higher end units (50,000 counts at .02% + 2 digits), it seems like the precision exceeds the accuracy.
So if I measure 5 volts, it should show as 5.0000 (that would be th 50,000 counts of precision - correct?) .02% would then be +/- .001 V (ignoring the +2 digits for now). If I am correct to this point, then the last digit exceeds the accuracy of the device. Am I thinking of this correctly?
I'm not sure I understand your post. Accuracy is never better than resolution. In your 50,000 resolution example, the accuracy of 0.02%+2, means that your 5V reading could be anywhere between 5.0012V and 4.9988V and still be within specs.
I'm not sure I understand your post. Accuracy is never better than resolution. In your 50,000 resolution example, the accuracy of 0.02%+2, means that your 5V reading could be anywhere between 5.0012V and 4.9988V and still be within specs.
[/quote]
Thanks for that. I expected (naively...) that the last digit would be where the uncertainty would lie. I am not an engineer, so I often make assumptions that are not correct. Your answer confirms my statement that the last digit of precision exceeds the accuracy. That is probably not the right way to say it, but now I understand what I am looking at when given the resolution and accuracy specs.
I don't really need .02% for the hobbyist things that I do, but it would be orders of magnitude better than anything I have ever owned, and for my purposes, would act like a standard against which to check my other gear.
Accuracy is never better than resolution.
resolution is cheaper than accuracy.
I had an old fluke kelvin varley vacuum tube volt meter with its 49,999 count resistor divider..
interesting.. for certain. but i can measure microvolts with a 4$ digital scale today.
but can i do better than a weston cell voltage standard?
really good question. i was able to measure my weston cell (my version of the fluke differential vacuum tube volt meter came with it internally) back in 2010 to a 1.0186mV with +/- .1mV but that's not really a sufficiently solid datapoint is it...
The GW Instek GDM-461 look very similar and has very similar (identical?) specs to the UNI-T UT61E but has 1000V fuses according to the manual.
Costs ~$100. Might be a good buy to get those specs with better input protection?
Nice work and this is a nit: HP 3478a has GPIB, I have two; HP 3468a doesn't.
Correct, the HP3468A/B has a HP-IL interface instead of HP-IB. Database will be corrected accordingly.
Yes, you're right. Probably confused with the 5 volt range while reading in a hurry. Will be corrected in the next edition. Thanks.
The table shows UT139C voltage bandwidth as 10kHz, the manuals say 1kHz. Did someone confirm it to work higher?
Haven't updated the spreadsheet on page 1 for a while.
Check the latest one:
Yeah, was meant to do that. Anyway, it's done now. Thanks for the reminder. Still need to update the front tables (Done).
Few small corrections: Keithley 2001 and 2002 do not have RS232. DB9 is digital portm not serial
Indeed. Will correct database in next edition. Thanks.
gotta tag this thread to view in more detail later.. looks very interesting. thanks for sharing.
@Wytnucls
The spreadsheet is far from being easy to read. The 'legend' on top is very ambiguous. For instance, what is the difference between "Important missing feature" and "Essential missing feature" ?? Just semantics. What objective criteria used to separate them? 10000 counts is an " Essential missing feature"? According to who? According to what?
A beginner trying to choose a multimeter will have a hard time deciphering the abbreviations in the table header (Count AC+ BW DUT Volt Accuracy uA A bw m? nS/M? pF mF Dio ?Hz % W T° PC Kit Int Log Clock Disp Light 'I'''I' M/m Peak Hld dB LoZ VFD Evt Batt Life F G E Pwr Jack Fuse P/F 4-20 NCV Price). You should insert comments to all of them on every sheet.
The colors: What objective criteria is used to differentiate it from a white cell?The stars: Very generic classification, based only on brand.The spreadsheet might have a meaning to you, but you don't seem to know how to make it easy to understand at a glance and useful to somebody other than you.
Like Dave says often, it is hard to please everybody. I spent a lot of time putting all this together. Initially, it was for my own use. I decided to publish it when I realized it could be useful to someone else too.
Of course, the listing is biased to reflect my preferences for an ideal multimeter, based on my experience. It may not always coincide with your desires. Just ignore all the cell coloring in that case.
Unfortunately, there is no other free database that I'm aware of, unless you decide to make a better one, with your own biases.
I'll answer some of your criticisms for the benefit of all users:
'The spreadsheet is far from being easy to read. The 'legend' on top is very ambiguous. For instance, what is the difference between "Important missing feature" and "Essential missing feature" ?? Just semantics. What objective criteria used to separate them? 10000 counts is an " Essential missing feature"? According to who? According to what?'
[/i]
There is a difference between important (really nice to have) and essential (show stopper).
The database is slanted towards electronic work, not electrical chores. A high count and accuracy is desirable for at least one meter, if you have several, like you should have. For the simple reason, that it can serve as a good reference for the others, since calibration is so expensive and often out of reach for hobbyists. Those meters are usually better made, have larger AC bandwidth, are built with proper external voltage references and have little drift.
10,000 count is not highlighted amber per se, unless the count falls below 7,000 for other functions. It doesn't mean that those meters are useless, just that they are not ideal for electronics, but could be used as secondary meters.
A beginner trying to choose a multimeter will have a hard time deciphering the abbreviations in the table header
Every one of them is well explained in the first row, with annotations. These annotations change regularly and are not repeated for each brand, to limit database maintenance time.
The stars: Very generic classification, based only on brand.
The stars are based on brands only, for a general guideline. I don't own enough of the meters in the database for objective individual assessments. Look for independent reviews on this site for any particular meter.
Like Dave says often, it is hard to please everybody.
Unfortunately, there is no other free database that I'm aware of, unless you decide to make a better one, with your own biases.
+1
There's more than enough info and what is missing....fill it in for oneself from the available info elsewhere.
As
Wytnucls says, it is a
living document and change is never ending.
The biggest worry is WHO will pick it up and continue when Wytnucls can no more.
Hats off to you, it's a great piece of work.
Hi,
first of all a warm welcome from Poland to all EEVblog forum users.
I have a question regarding the Kyoritsu products.
In the filter section of this magnificent xls document, all of the Kyoritsu product get 5 Stars just like Fluke, Gossen etc - do I get it right that their products are, on average top quality or safe in their price range just like Gossen or Fluke?
Tried to find some in depth reviews or teardowns of the KEW1012 (or any Kyoritsu) that sparked my interest and there is little to no info...
Thanks.
So how am I to understand those 5 Stars in the filter section?
