EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread

[beanflying]

One of the realities of manuals in a modern environment is those that come from online sources how many ever get printed out?

Making the manual screen/computer compatible is in some ways more important than printed layout IMO. If I was to print manuals for the Test gear I have it would likely run to well over 1000 pages so unless it came with a manual I am unlikely to print them out much as I have a preference for printed manuals.

While that may seem contradictory to please the majority it needs to be considered when arriving at a layout and page sizing.

[Andre Gulbis]

Hey beanflying yeah I forgot to mention that.

Since it's in Indesign, and completely structured with a hierarchy of styles (It kinda has to be so you can produce the TOCs), you can map those styles to XML tags - and just export to XML/HTML or whatever you want - then just do CSS do XSL/XSTL etc.

I've done that before with other documents a client wanted online - so you get the nice printed version, and at the press of a button you get the fully published XML/HTML version.

So that option is there as well - I can do a demo with the incomplete version if you want.

Of course if you have it in MS Word there are third party products that can map Word Styles >> Intermediate Tag Map >> XML Tag Map.   Ive that before as well, and automatically with Tomcat on a server!  There was some free French authored Java app years ago that did it...

Anyways - yes that can be done.
Cheers!

Andre

[joeqsmith]

KainkaLabs released a few videos showing the 121GW.  While he mentions they are not a review, he does go into a more details than most.   

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCd8CdLp2bKP6Uv0jvdLdiRA

[joeqsmith]

Looked over the new manual.  I personally like the format.  After watching KainkaLabs Part 3 and reading the manual, I was reminded of a problem I came across when I looked at the prototype 121GW when measuring VA.  Those who caught that video may remember Dave suggesting that I had the meter incorrectly connected.  You may also remember I had been trying to see if the meter handled the burden voltage correctly which it seems like it was not included in the calculation.  Because KainkaLabs is the first person I have seen run this demo, I have asked them to repeat their test, changing the configuration as shown.   

KainkaLabs  If you make another video, it would be good to see you rerun the VA test as well. When I looked at the prototype meter, there was a problem when using this mode. I think your are the first person to demo it. Basically, how you have connected it is what they show in the manual. However, when I looked at it, it seemed that the firmware did not account for the burden voltage. To get around this, I placed the meter's common point to the low side of the load, Vin to the other side of the load and the current back to the supply. Basically removing the burden from the voltage calculation. After I did this, the numbers would come out correctly. I will post a picture on to the main page I linked if you are not understanding.

[joeqsmith]

Shown connected with the meters current in the source side of the load.  Again, the meter reading the voltage across the load without the effects of the burden. 

[joearkay]

Beginner question - I've been looking at the current measurement specs of the 121GW. The smallest DC A range is stated as 50uA^5.


What does this notation represent? I'm used to both engineering and scientific notation, but this stumped me a little. Does it literally mean 50^5uA = 312500000? I've never 'deep dived' into DMO specs before so it may be a common practise that I just haven't seen before. Thanks.

[ascomm]

Is it by design that the resistance measurement in auto range is quite slow?
At times it is pretty annoying to wait for the read out.

[exe]

Could someone please share calibration data? I lost it while messing up with the meter and not all ranges I can calibrate (like I don't have a high-voltage source for AC, for example). I know results won't be perfect, but it's fine

[Octane]

Hi joearkay,

Isn’t the ^5 a footnote? I didn’t check. Just an idea.

BR,
Michael

[IanB]

Beginner question - I've been looking at the current measurement specs of the 121GW. The smallest DC A range is stated as 50uA^5.


What does this notation represent? I'm used to both engineering and scientific notation, but this stumped me a little. Does it literally mean 50^5uA = 312500000? I've never 'deep dived' into DMO specs before so it may be a common practise that I just haven't seen before. Thanks.

Isn’t the ^5 a footnote? I didn’t check. Just an idea.

Exactly.

DC A    50 µA⁵
...
⁵ This mode will use the x10 amplifier and may have additional offset error that should be REL’d out before measurement.

[joeqsmith]

Looks like Rodger repeated the test I ran with the VA mode.  It's been almost two years since I posted the original video showing the problems and possible workarounds.  At the time it caused a lot of confusion.   Even Dave seemed lost and when the guy selling the product and testing the prototypes is not following, you have a problem.   Maybe Rodger's testing will be presented in such a way that will be easier to understand. 

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCd8CdLp2bKP6Uv0jvdLdiRA

[GeoffreyF]

Is it by design that the resistance measurement in auto range is quite slow?
At times it is pretty annoying to wait for the read out.

In this or any other meter, I don't use auto range unless I have absolutely no idea what range the expected value is in.   I set the range to what my expectations are.  If it goes out of range, I revert to auto range.   If one is debugging something - there is not such a thing as autorange that is fast enough though some are faster than others.  ALSO - if you are measuring without a really good contact on what you are testing (this is what the sharp plated probes are for) OR there are charges in capacitors or the circuit is energized in some way, then it could autorange forever because the circuit is changing.   That's why oscilloscopes are useful.   Keep in mind that for any number of reasons, the meter might be seeing different values from moment to moment.

[CDaniel]

Please stop defending this slow firmware , everybody ( including Dave ) knows that it must be improved .
People don't buy a pretty expensive meter to use it in manual range ... this is a bad joke  . You can use it as you want but keep your precious advices for yourself .

[joeqsmith]

Please stop defending this slow firmware , everybody ( including Dave ) knows that it must be improved .
People don't buy a pretty expensive meter to use it in manual range ... this is a bad joke  . You can use it as you want but keep your precious advices for yourself .

You havn't been around for a while.  Now that you have returned, perhaps check out my post #1344 along with others.  We did a fair amount of testing to try and find a meter that behaves as you implied they all do.   Perhaps I misunderstood your original post or you have no clue what you are posting about.   Please take the time to explain your original post. 

[gnavigator1007]

Looks like Rodger repeated the test I ran with the VA mode.  It's been almost two years since I posted the original video showing the problems and possible workarounds.  At the time it caused a lot of confusion.   Even Dave seemed lost and when the guy selling the product and testing the prototypes is not following, you have a problem.   Maybe Rodger's testing will be presented in such a way that will be easier to understand. 

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCd8CdLp2bKP6Uv0jvdLdiRA

Video is up
https://youtu.be/FNsPr1OEq7c

[HKJ]

I think this is a bit silly discussion. Of course the meter would have the common input as voltage reference and you have to decide if you want to measure power from the supply or power delivered to the load and connect accordingly.

[beanflying]

Please stop defending this slow firmware , everybody ( including Dave ) knows that it must be improved .
People don't buy a pretty expensive meter to use it in manual range ... this is a bad joke  . You can use it as you want but keep your precious advices for yourself .

Wow we all just got just so burned by you throwing that Iced Soy 1/2 shot decaff Latte at us

[chronos42]

Wow we all just got just so burned by you throwing that Iced Soy 1/2 shot decaff Latte at us

But he is right in this point. There is also no actual progress in the 1.58 beta firmware, Ohm measurements are still a pain with this meter.

[beanflying]

Wow we all just got just so burned by you throwing that Iced Soy 1/2 shot decaff Latte at us

But he is right in this point. There is also no actual progress in the 1.58 beta firmware, Ohm measurements are still a pain with this meter.

Not everything can be fixed by firmware!

[GeoffreyF]

Please stop defending this slow firmware , everybody ( including Dave ) knows that it must be improved .
People don't buy a pretty expensive meter to use it in manual range ... this is a bad joke  . You can use it as you want but keep your precious advices for yourself .

Here is an idea - please stop going on and on making the same point over and over and over - without anything actually useful.   If you stop why would anyone respond to your junk if you are not writing it?  Everybody does not know it must be improved - so don't write what actually is false.   It's not "pretty expensive". It's actually about average.   It's not a bad joke - your posts are.   Practice What you preach except your "advices" are not precious, useful or wanted - so keep them to yourself.

[J-R]

Is it by design that the resistance measurement in auto range is quite slow?
At times it is pretty annoying to wait for the read out.

In this or any other meter, I don't use auto range unless I have absolutely no idea what range the expected value is in.   I set the range to what my expectations are.  If it goes out of range, I revert to auto range.   If one is debugging something - there is not such a thing as autorange that is fast enough though some are faster than others.  ALSO - if you are measuring without a really good contact on what you are testing (this is what the sharp plated probes are for) OR there are charges in capacitors or the circuit is energized in some way, then it could autorange forever because the circuit is changing.   That's why oscilloscopes are useful.   Keep in mind that for any number of reasons, the meter might be seeing different values from moment to moment.

So you're saying if you had a meter that could auto range nearly instantly, you still wouldn't use it that way?  I find that hard to believe.  It's going to be slower to have to constantly cycle through the ranges especially if there is only one button to do so.

You state that the meter could see different values.  Isn't that the entire point of having the auto range feature?  It seems like you are hurting your argument.  Auto ranging was a great advancement along with DMMs.

Please stop defending this slow firmware , everybody ( including Dave ) knows that it must be improved .
People don't buy a pretty expensive meter to use it in manual range ... this is a bad joke  . You can use it as you want but keep your precious advices for yourself .

Here is an idea - please stop going on and on making the same point over and over and over - without anything actually useful.   If you stop why would anyone respond to your junk if you are not writing it?  Everybody does not know it must be improved - so don't write what actually is false.   It's not "pretty expensive". It's actually about average.   It's not a bad joke - your posts are.   Practice What you preach except your "advices" are not precious, useful or wanted - so keep them to yourself.

I don't condone his constant pointing out of the slowness either, because we can watch any number of Youtube videos and see some other meters that are "slow" as well.  But when you suggest that we use manual ranges as a fix I can see why it would get a reaction.   I just ran a test in manual range of a 6800uF capacitor and the 121GW takes 9 seconds to display the value, the ESR70 was 5.5 seconds, the BM235 was 5 seconds and a capacitance meter my grandfather (rest in peace) designed and built from scratch 30 years ago can do it in under 1.5 seconds, and that includes powering it on.

I'm going to assume that after all this time if the speed of the 121GW could be drastically improved, they would have done it already.  There are hints of this being the case in some other forum posts I found.  Maybe someone could make an official statement and clear the air...

[IanB]

I'm going to assume that after all this time if the speed of the 121GW could be drastically improved, they would have done it already.  There are hints of this being the case in some other forum posts I found.  Maybe someone could make an official statement and clear the air...

I have a problem that when attempts were made to speed up the resistance range the auto-ranging become less reliable. Therefore if fast and reliable is not to be achieved, I prefer slow and reliable over fast and unreliable.

I would rather the developers ignore the shouts of "Faster! Faster!" and try to make the thing actually work...

[J-R]

I'm going to assume that after all this time if the speed of the 121GW could be drastically improved, they would have done it already.  There are hints of this being the case in some other forum posts I found.  Maybe someone could make an official statement and clear the air...

I have a problem that when attempts were made to speed up the resistance range the auto-ranging become less reliable. Therefore if fast and reliable is not to be achieved, I prefer slow and reliable over fast and unreliable.

I would rather the developers ignore the shouts of "Faster! Faster!" and try to make the thing actually work...

The ideal solution would be to have an option for the end user to make the choice himself if those goals are mutually exclusive.

[GeoffreyF]

So you're saying if you had a meter that could auto range nearly instantly, you still wouldn't use it that way?  I find that hard to believe.  It's going to be slower to have to constantly cycle through the ranges especially if there is only one button to do so.

You state that the meter could see different values.  Isn't that the entire point of having the auto range feature?  It seems like you are hurting your argument.  Auto ranging was a great advancement along with DMMs.

No I am not "saying" or writing that.  If I was even thinking it, I would have written it and I didn't. So why did you speculate?   Do you know of an "instant auto ranging meter" with the price and other features?  - I don't.  If you did, you would have commented.  So why don't you explain why an "instant auto range" meter would have range selection?   Also, since you think you can read minds, or speculate, explain how "Instant autorange" would work with an accurate wide ranging meter.   Next time you try to speculate on what another said or write - TAKE THE TIME TO CONSIDER IF YOU ARE BEING SILLY. (you  were, as I outlined quite specifically).

[chronos42]

Thanks for showing the video from Kainka Labs and also joeqsmith for his suggestion how to connect the 121GW in VA mode to avoid the problem of wrong VA readings.

Just for fun I did the same test with the Gossen Metrahit Energy. Same setup as in the video, 1V source, resistor 22 Ohm. The Gossen is connected as it should, gnd to gnd, voltage input to the +1V output of the source and the current input is connected to the resistor, the resistor is connected to 1V source.

The result is shown at picture 1   

Then I changed GND and current input at the Gossen. Result is picture 2. 

That means that the Gossen meter uses the same wiring in the power mode which joeqsmith suggested for the 121GW.