Products > Test Equipment

AN8008 US $19, 9999count, 1uV, 0.01uA, 0.01Ohm, 1pF resolution meter

<< < (101/172) > >>

rdl:

--- Quote from: Fungus on August 30, 2017, 07:34:55 am ---
--- Quote from: rdl on August 30, 2017, 06:44:43 am ---I actually considered hot gluing mine to the front of a shelf, but it would get in the way of other stuff too much I think.

--- End quote ---

How will you change the battery?

--- End quote ---

At the moment, it's been running non-stop (auto power off disabled) for over 10 days. I'd estimate that when used normally I could easily get 3-6 months before needing to recharge the batteries. While it wouldn't be much trouble to peel it off and re-glue it that infrequently, I decided it would be impractical for other reasons.

prof:

--- Quote from: Mark Hennessy on August 30, 2017, 07:32:53 pm ---
--- Quote from: prof on August 30, 2017, 06:33:52 pm ---Doesn't matter how they do it. My point is it's better than the Fluke despite operating under worse conditions.  ;)

--- End quote ---

Surely it's interesting to know what's happening?

--- End quote ---

Thanks for free education, I guess. But it's not like I haven't implemented my own LED testers before. ;) There was also a LED tester as a Boldport project a short while ago: https://www.boldport.com/products/ligemdio/


--- Quote ---Anyway, my point is that there is a misconception that the diode test voltage is equal to the battery voltage.

--- End quote ---

I never claimed that. I only said it works better than my Fluke (17B+) despite running on a lower input voltage.
Just FYI, I just measured the current (using a third DMM of course), the Fluke allows 0.165mA while the Aneng will supply 0.765mA; the Aneng also shows a higher Forward voltage of 1.95V which should be closer to reality than the Fluke which reads 1.83V but I'm too lazy to really measure that LED right now.

Anyway, I can't (easily) change the internal implementation so I have to accept it as it is.

So far I found the Aneng to be a remarkable device for what it is. I've also tested the speed of the continuity tester now and it is a lot quicker than the Fluke (using the same Brymen probes) as well; with this little device I can swipe swiftly over pads on the board without missing the connection(s) where the Fluke needs a much slower motion. It would be great if it would unlatch a bit quicker though...

kalel:

--- Quote from: prof ---Thanks for free education, I guess. But it's not like I haven't implemented my own LED testers before. ;) There was also a LED tester as a Boldport project a short while ago: https://www.boldport.com/products/ligemdio/

--- End quote ---

I like the project. Maybe you could implement a DIY continuity checker as well?

The "LED tester" I use is a 9v battery (improvised holder) with 2 resistors (one on positive and one negative which slightly distributes the minimal heating). That is the simplest to make, and works with "dead" 9v batteries well enough.

This limits the 'maximum current', but does not provide equal current at different forward voltage, so a constant current is always more optimal (but not always necessary to see if an LED works).

Fungus:

--- Quote from: kalel on August 30, 2017, 11:32:39 pm ---I like the project. Maybe you could implement a DIY continuity checker as well?

--- End quote ---

I've thought about this a few times. I'd want one with a light on the probe.

The multimeter seems like a fundamentally wrong way to test continuity IMHO. The only we do it that way is that there's already a battery powered device with two wires attached to it on our workbench.

I never bothered building one because I don't really spend much time swiping along rows of contacts.

Mark Hennessy:

--- Quote from: prof on August 30, 2017, 11:18:09 pm ---
--- Quote from: Mark Hennessy on August 30, 2017, 07:32:53 pm ---Anyway, my point is that there is a misconception that the diode test voltage is equal to the battery voltage.

--- End quote ---

I never claimed that. I only said it works better than my Fluke (17B+) despite running on a lower input voltage.

--- End quote ---

I thought it was clear enough from what I wrote, but for the sake of clarity, I never said that you made the claim, or even that you believed it. I simply said "there is a misconception", meaning that some people believe it, possibly as a result of watching Dave's review...

Thanks for telling us which Fluke you have. I don't have one of those, but have been considering picking one up to review for some time now. Or perhaps the 18B+, which has a dedicated LED test function that sources rather more than 3V, so will have an internal step-up converter of some type. Obviously, the 17B+ does not, though of course there will be something in there for the LED backlight, but they've obviously decided to keep that separate.

As for dedicated LED tester projects, I don't see any point upgrading from a resistor to a current source frankly. If you want to go beyond a simple resistor, then something like this is far more useful and interesting: http://robotroom.com/LED-Tester-Pro-1.html  :-+

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod