Not checked manuall, they for sure described this, but I noticed that 60000 counts is not a full '60000'.
And ... yet more confirmation that Brymen is the new king of multimeter manufacturers.
Fluke should bring back 189 to make market position harder to Brymen. That old 189 is still better than this new Brymen (neglecting the price)
Not checked manuall, they for sure described this, but I noticed that 60000 counts is not a full '60000'.
AC is cut to two digits after dot, the same for resistance, same for current , that looks sometimes more like 6000 than 60000.
Actually e.g. 1mOhm resolution would be really very usefull.
But can you explain what are you talking about 6000 digits?
Interesting to see the Fluke 87V falling apart in tests where even a Uni-T keeps on going.
But can you explain what are you talking about 6000 digits?
All is about resolution e.g. for AC this will be 39.95 , but not 39.954V, e.g. for resistance it will be 28.04, but not 28.041 Ohms, e.g. for current 50.02 but not 50.025mA so really not different to a 6000 count multimeter.
I would not cry for AC volts , but actually 1mOhm resistance would be really very usefull.The same for AC current (10A socket).
No it is not like that. It is 60000 counts, BUT, for some reasons, on some measurements it didn't autorange to 60V AC range for 32V measurement, but stayed on 600V range, so it reads 032.00 V.
Fluke should bring back 189 to make market position harder to Brymen. That old 189 is still better than this new Brymen (neglecting the price)
But can you explain what are you talking about 6000 digits?
All is about resolution e.g. for AC this will be 39.95 , but not 39.954V, e.g. for resistance it will be 28.04, but not 28.041 Ohms, e.g. for current 50.02 but not 50.025mA so really not different to a 6000 count multimeter.
I would not cry for AC volts , but actually 1mOhm resistance would be really very usefull.The same for AC current (10A socket).
No it is not like that. It is 60000 counts, BUT, for some reasons, on some measurements it didn't autorange to 60V AC range for 32V measurement, but stayed on 600V range, so it reads 032.00 V.
But can you explain what are you talking about 6000 digits?
All is about resolution e.g. for AC this will be 39.95 , but not 39.954V, e.g. for resistance it will be 28.04, but not 28.041 Ohms, e.g. for current 50.02 but not 50.025mA so really not different to a 6000 count multimeter.
I would not cry for AC volts , but actually 1mOhm resistance would be really very usefull.The same for AC current (10A socket).
No it is not like that. It is 60000 counts, BUT, for some reasons, on some measurements it didn't autorange to 60V AC range for 32V measurement, but stayed on 600V range, so it reads 032.00 V.S
MiroS, Sinisa, indeed this is a weird behaviour and to me a bug. Sure, while Joe had the waveform with plenty of DC offset, I imagine there was a chance the autorange could be confused in ranges, but not after wards, where a pure AC was applied.
Again, during the last test where the DC had been removed, the meter was set to VFD. The bargraph will be disabled, the filter will be active causing a bit of an voltage difference for the higher frequency content waveforms and yes, it only displays two places past the decimal point. We can see this on page 24.
Is it worth repeating this test with the VFD disabled? I could also just run two meter and remove the DSO, maybe slow it down a bit further to make it easier to track. We could also increase the number of waveforms. This test requires little effort to setup so if you feel it's worth it, let me know.
I am still not sure what the comment was about UNI-T not having a problem. I could toss the 87V into the mix as well if this is what you want to see. It just gets more difficult for me anyway, to follow what is going on with so many devices active at once.
Again, during the last test where the DC had been removed, the meter was set to VFD. The bargraph will be disabled, the filter will be active causing a bit of an voltage difference for the higher frequency content waveforms and yes, it only displays two places past the decimal point. We can see this on page 24.
Is it worth repeating this test with the VFD disabled? I could also just run two meter and remove the DSO, maybe slow it down a bit further to make it easier to track. We could also increase the number of waveforms. This test requires little effort to setup so if you feel it's worth it, let me know.
I am still not sure what the comment was about UNI-T not having a problem. I could toss the 87V into the mix as well if this is what you want to see. It just gets more difficult for me anyway, to follow what is going on with so many devices active at once.
Hi Joe,
If it is not big effort and you're willing to do it, sure, it would be nice.
It would be nice to see limits of this, and maybe with what waveforms it will happen. I doubt autoranging will have problem with standard waveforms...
Maybe see it through full range (6V, 60V, 600V) ... Definitely check whether it is VFD related.
...
There was a comment on YT that BM869s has a problem with 560kOhm resistance measurement if it is performed close to power cord. I would propose to add this to the list of tests if you will decide to make next tests with BM786.
... Definitely check whether it is VFD related.
...
But sure, if it can be fixed, it will be "betterer".
The BM786 Bar-graph does seems to have a strange behavior. Here it seems to be in 600.00V DC range but bar-graph would then correspond to 200 volts or so. Also note the DC is low but the BM786 seems to stay in the 600V DC as long as the overlayed AC is preset - it does not shift the range down to DC 5.0000V like the left Fluke 189.
To me a standard waveform would be something like IEC413.
There's nothing to fix. Again it's documented in the manual. Yes, it is all to do with the VFD mode. No big deal though to show it. Give me a while to repeat it.
Interestingly the BM786 LCD does seem to have a High Voltage warning symbol - but it's not mentioned in the manual and does never seem to be displayed either. Any particular reason for that? I think it's the same on BM869.
That warning symbol probably isn’t a requirement by any safety standard. And I’m not suggesting Brymen is less safe or anything like that - I just noticed the BM786 LCD has a symbol for it - so perhaps Brymen has planes to implement it in the future.
Again, during the last test where the DC had been removed, the meter was set to VFD. The bargraph will be disabled, the filter will be active causing a bit of an voltage difference for the higher frequency content waveforms and yes, it only displays two places past the decimal point. We can see this on page 24.
Is it worth repeating this test with the VFD disabled? I could also just run two meter and remove the DSO, maybe slow it down a bit further to make it easier to track. We could also increase the number of waveforms. This test requires little effort to setup so if you feel it's worth it, let me know.
I am still not sure what the comment was about UNI-T not having a problem. I could toss the 87V into the mix as well if this is what you want to see. It just gets more difficult for me anyway, to follow what is going on with so many devices active at once.
Hi Joe,
If it is not big effort and you're willing to do it, sure, it would be nice.
It would be nice to see limits of this, and maybe with what waveforms it will happen. I doubt autoranging will have problem with standard waveforms...
Maybe see it through full range (6V, 60V, 600V) ... Definitely check whether it is VFD related.
...
There was a comment on YT that BM869s has a problem with 560kOhm resistance measurement if it is performed close to power cord. I would propose to add this to the list of tests if you will decide to make next tests with BM786.