Electronics > Metrology

2002 Vs 3458a Vs 8588A?

(1/3) > >>

I'm fortunate enough to be working in an engineering research group that is looking to buy a 8.5 digit meter. I was hoping I could ask for advice on what to buy. I'm sure I'd be happy with any of them, but want to be sure. I love the form factor of the 2002, hear the linearity of the 3458a is unmatched (plus it is "the one to have"), however I really appreciate the modern interface on my Keithley equipment and the 8588a is the only one that comes close.

Now, about the use case:
 We have a range of devices (DMM/SMU) we use in physical measurement, including DMM7510, several DMM6500, 2450, 2461 etc. We build devices to measure things like thermal conductivity, so we measure transient pulses through platinum wires. I lead the group, but also have a side hobby in volt/time nuttery. I've repaired some old Fluke DCV/I calibrators, but also have a Datron 4708, fully optioned, waiting for repair.
My plan was to get the 8.5 digit DMM annually calibrated, use it to verify the 4708 performance, then calibrate everything else as/when needed from there. I do not need professional certification of calibration for any legal/business reason, I just need to believe in my equipment for my research.

What would you choose and why? Thanks in advance for your help.

Yet, you didn't list what requirements you have for DMM. And price budget as 8588 is double the price of 2002, while 3458 is halfway in middle. If you need speed and best DCV performance its the 3458. If compact size and scanner options its 2002. If need good resistance capability or high currents or just one of those folk who want latest and shiniest then its 8588.

3458 also have advanced digitize capability, and 8588 has high speed digitizer. There is also crappier 8558 which is same price as 3458.


Hello toastedcrumpets - our club member e61_Phil also posted a way to add extra computational horsepower and USB/LAN to GPIB IF using one (or two)
Rapsberry Pi 4 (RPI400) boards this is both useful for 3458A (and 2002/8558). It is rather low cost and works reliably.


As TIN explained both the 3458A and 8588A/8558A will shatter in performance in a certain domain - though the 2002 might have a lower accuracy on its 20V DCV range. First make up a list what's most important for you ...

Best regards

Hi TiN,
Apologies for not giving strict specifications but the truth is we don't need the 8.5 DMM for our immediate research. Typically it's cycles of feast and famine in research funding, right now it's good, so we want to buy capability while we can. The main capability we want is calibration/verification of our existing equipment. I didn't mention the 8558a as the 8588a is in budget, but it's an option.

The DMM would sit and verify the performance of the repaired 4708. It will probably stay as part of the lab calibration setup, we'd probably offer it as a service to other labs in the university, most of who are happy with 5.5 digits of accuracy at DC.

Our current research needs resistance accuracy, DCV accuracy around 10V, and digitisers, but we're happy with the ones in the DMM7510 and the dual digitisers in the 2461 for most purposes and would not need one in the DMM.

Size isn't really that important, so I guess it's between 3458a and 85X8a.

Thanks ScoobyDoo for the link, I spend a lot of time writing test automation so that's very interesting. I guess this means interface isn't massively important either, as we would script must stuff anyway for repeatability and long term measurements.

So, in short, if you were setting up a DCV and resistance calibration lab, would you get a 8588a or a 3458a?


Hello toastedcrumpets,

                                 Well it all depends upon available budget - for accurate DCV and resistive measurements you will also need a Metron/Wavetek/Fluke 7000 10V DCV source or Fluke 732C 10V DCV source and at least a 10kohm 4-wire Kaliber (F742-10k) to start your metrology Cal Lab.

If such RaspberryPi 4 (RPI400) USB/LAN-to-GPIB bridge is acceptable than the lack of an USB/LAN IF on 3458A is no longer an issue - the RPI 4 will do all this work and computational MATH for you. Both Fluke and Keysight should be considered ... - maybe TCO is also important for your R&D rganisation.

Best regards


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

There was an error while thanking
Go to full version