Author Topic: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread  (Read 202037 times)

Dreamster and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 1anX

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 170
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1500 on: May 29, 2019, 10:18:55 am »
The new firmware will come one day or another  :)

It will probably arrive along with revised hardware in the form of a new version of the meter.
Dave will probably regain his interest in a new meter, as its required to promote sales.
 

Offline lowimpedance

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1057
  • Country: au
  • Watts in an ohm?
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1501 on: May 29, 2019, 10:26:37 am »
My guess is that there is a problem with V2.0 otherwise it would be released!
Why withhold an improvement that would benefit users? Can only be a problem was found and its pointless releasing a buggy version.

That is a very doubtful explanation, new meters has for some time been delivered with newer software than is available on the website.

 That being so, then wouldn't the other meters 'out there' also benefit from having access to the same firmware revision ?.
The odd multimeter or 2 or 3 or 4...or........can't remember !.
 

Offline e0ne199

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 37
  • Country: id
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1502 on: May 31, 2019, 05:07:50 am »
so that means the hardware i have bought yesterday is buggy???  |O
it was expensive for my budget though, i bought it for 300AUD  :horse:
 

Offline Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 9064
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1503 on: May 31, 2019, 05:47:40 am »
Don't panic.

The first consideration is just what might be affected by the version of firmware supplied.  From what I can glean here, it seems to be working fairly well for most users.

Check the firmware version it has when you get it.  Also, this meter has the ability to update the firmware - so you're ahead with that feature!
« Last Edit: May 31, 2019, 05:49:41 am by Brumby »
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 29260
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1504 on: May 31, 2019, 06:50:03 am »
Sorry I thought David had put v2.00 on the website, I've just added it now.
Improvements include improved resistance autoranging speed, and update speed on higher resistance ranges. Plus various capacitance range improvements.

Offline darik

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 46
  • Country: ca
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1505 on: May 31, 2019, 07:01:50 am »
Wow, the improvement in ohms autorange is _huge_.
 

Offline J-R

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 17
  • Country: us
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1506 on: May 31, 2019, 08:15:10 am »
I ran some resistance tests on 1.58 and 2.00 and my opinion is that the new firmware has improved speeds.  My informal test process used to take ~15 seconds on 1.58 (if I moved crazy fast it sometimes was as low as ~10 seconds), but now is ~9 seconds on 2.00 (normal pace).  Unfortunately for the 121GW, the same test is only ~5 seconds on the BM235 and many of my other meters.
 

Offline chronos42

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 78
  • Country: de
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1507 on: May 31, 2019, 08:15:44 am »
Hi,
the ohm autorange is faster now, still not my fastest multimeter, but it is ok.
The "low capacitance bug" seems still present, a 220pF NP0 ceramic capacitor is shown as 0.160nF at the first time, then as 0.180nF after that as 0.200nF... The more often I switch the meter off and on, the closer the reading comes to the actual value. Also if I first use a small capacity, then a bigger one (e.g. several hundred nF) and then again the small capacity, the 121GW every time shows a different reading. I am not able to get a steady reading of small capacities with the 121GW. Can other users reproduce this behavior?  This is really odd.  For higher capacitances the meter shows correct values and the autorange speed seems also faster in capacitance mode now.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2019, 07:21:36 pm by chronos42 »
 

Offline bitwelder

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 799
  • Country: fi
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1508 on: May 31, 2019, 09:29:56 am »
Sorry I thought David had put v2.00 on the website, I've just added it now.
Improvements include improved resistance autoranging speed, and update speed on higher resistance ranges. Plus various capacitance range improvements.
Thanks!
Hopefully also the manual changelog will be soon updated with the recent f/w history changes.
 
The following users thanked this post: Roelof

Offline CDaniel

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 190
  • Country: ro
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1509 on: May 31, 2019, 02:39:58 pm »
Hi,
the ohm autorange is faster now, still not my fastest multimeter, but it is ok.
The "low capacitance bug" seems still present, a 220pF NP0 ceramic capacitor is shown as 0.160nF at the first time, then as 0.180nF after that as 0.200nF... The more often I switch the meter off and on, the closer the reading comes to the actual value. Also if I first read the small capacity, then a bigger one (e.g. several hundred nF) and then again the small capacity, the 121GW every time shows a different reading. I am not able to get a steady reading of small capacities with the 121GW. Can other users reproduce this behavior?  This is really odd.  For higher capacitances the meter shows correct values and the autorange speed seems also faster in capacitance mode now.

We talked about this issue and was confirmed , but ...  probably they don't care or can't fix it .
It seems to me that only the comunity will solve all the issues ... when someone pissed off will write a better firmware .
 

Offline 1anX

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 170
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1510 on: May 31, 2019, 09:11:22 pm »
Anyone wondering if they should bother to update firmware to V2.0?
My advice for what its worth is to do it! The update certainly speeds up the meter's responsiveness for resistance and gives it a faster feel all round.
 
The following users thanked this post: Marco1971

Offline BrianG61UK

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 48
  • Country: gb
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1511 on: May 31, 2019, 10:05:02 pm »
Anyone wondering if they should bother to update firmware to V2.0?
My advice for what its worth is to do it! The update certainly speeds up the meter's responsiveness for resistance and gives it a faster feel all round.
Indeed. I agree.
 

Offline GeoffreyF

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 233
  • Country: us
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1512 on: June 01, 2019, 04:16:33 pm »
I did it successfully but there is a "Gotcha" in this.  The .bin file is named EEVBlog2_00.bin.  That name will not upload into the meter.  Rename it to EEVBlog.bin, as it has been in the past and the upload will work.   I will also remind people that the Analog bar will show the progress of the upload.   If it does not move, it's not doing anything.

I can also confirm (though do not recommend) that after a couple minutes, of "Douun" ... turning the meter off caused no harm.  If you are sitting there and the download to the meter is not working, despite cautions in the instructions, I did turn if off (and did this twice) without ill effect.  Then I just renamed the file name as explained above and all was well.

EEVBlog folks may wish to repost the 2.0  zip with the .bin file name modified to avoid confusion and match past releases.  Suggestion for 2.0+ is to not display "Douun" if the meter could not find a file to load, either because it was not the correct name (as here) or some other reason.  It should post something like "Err" and then restart after a few seconds.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2019, 05:02:11 pm by GeoffreyF »
US Amateur Extra W1GCF.
 

Offline CDaniel

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 190
  • Country: ro
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1513 on: June 01, 2019, 06:02:28 pm »
Now the ranges for voltage switch at 55000 counts up and 50000 counts down ( before was at 45000 down) , this is fairly normal and the switching is faster ... so it could be done , why took so long it's a interesting question .
« Last Edit: June 01, 2019, 06:08:25 pm by CDaniel »
 

Offline Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 9064
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1514 on: June 02, 2019, 01:46:18 am »
I did it successfully but there is a "Gotcha" in this.  The .bin file is named EEVBlog2_00.bin.  That name will not upload into the meter.  Rename it to EEVBlog.bin, as it has been in the past and the upload will work.   

I wouldn't call this a "Gotcha".  This has been a requirement from the very beginning.

I would strongly suggest that you always keep the firmware showing the version number in the filename and ONLY change it when copied to the card for uploading.

My recommendation: NEVER, EVER, EVER put up a file named EEVBlog.bin here or anywhere else - because you won't know what version it is.
 

Offline Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 9064
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1515 on: June 02, 2019, 01:50:22 am »
EEVBlog folks may wish to repost the 2.0  zip with the .bin file name modified to avoid confusion and match past releases.
Please, no.

Quote
  Suggestion for 2.0+ is to not display "Douun" if the meter could not find a file to load, either because it was not the correct name (as here) or some other reason.  It should post something like "Err" and then restart after a few seconds.
That's not a bad idea.
 

Offline BrianG61UK

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 48
  • Country: gb
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1516 on: June 02, 2019, 02:01:51 am »


I did it successfully but there is a "Gotcha" in this.  The .bin file is named EEVBlog2_00.bin.  That name will not upload into the meter.  Rename it to EEVBlog.bin, as it has been in the past and the upload will work.   

I wouldn't call this a "Gotcha".  This has been a requirement from the very beginning.

I would strongly suggest that you always keep the firmware showing the version number in the filename and ONLY change it when copied to the card for uploading.

My recommendation: NEVER, EVER, EVER put up a file named EEVBlog.bin here or anywhere else - because you won't know what version it is.

No. Keep it in the zip file where it's protected from accidental corruption until you need it. The zip file can have the version number in the name but the bin file inside should be the correct name to just extract it on to the microSD without any messing about renaming it.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

 
The following users thanked this post: 3db

Offline Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 9064
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1517 on: June 02, 2019, 02:06:14 am »
That's not unreasonable, but it does put a greater risk of getting it wrong when the firmware is zipped by Dave/David.

I'm happier with the fail safe method currently in use.  When things go wrong now - no damage is done and is fixed by a simple rename.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2019, 02:10:22 am by Brumby »
 

Offline BrianG61UK

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 48
  • Country: gb
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1518 on: June 02, 2019, 02:20:35 am »
That's not unreasonable, but it does put a greater risk of getting it wrong when the firmware is zipped by Dave/David.

I'm happier with the fail safe method currently in use.  When things go wrong now - no damage is done and is fixed by a simple rename.

Whoever zips the firmware is welcome to call it whatever they want until they zip it. (Hopefully it's arriving from UEI already in a zip file and not just as an unprotected email attachment)
But please after zipping it in an appropriately named zip file rename it so it's ready to use when I extract it to the microSD card.
 

Offline Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 9064
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1519 on: June 02, 2019, 02:58:47 am »
I still don't like the idea.

I can see why you are asking - but is a simple rename too much to ask?

Edit: I say this because after more years than I care to remember in the software development game, version control is extremely important and easily stuffed up.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2019, 03:01:17 am by Brumby »
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 29260
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1520 on: June 02, 2019, 03:21:58 am »
Quote
  Suggestion for 2.0+ is to not display "Douun" if the meter could not find a file to load, either because it was not the correct name (as here) or some other reason.  It should post something like "Err" and then restart after a few seconds.
That's not a bad idea.

I don't think that change is possible, as that code would be in the fixed protected bootloader code.
 

Offline joeqsmith

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5565
  • Country: us
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1521 on: June 02, 2019, 03:25:37 am »
They have no way to reprogram the boot loader?   Even if they create an application to reprogram the boot?  Seem odd they wouldn't have considered that. 
How electrically robust is your meter?? https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsK99WXk9VhcghnAauTBsbg
 
The following users thanked this post: Marco1971

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 29260
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1522 on: June 02, 2019, 03:39:25 am »
They have no way to reprogram the boot loader?

Of course there is, but it requires a programmer and a special cable. Not something you'd ordinarily instruct or encourage customers to do unless the circumstances were dire.
Countless products follow this exact principle.
The factory can certainly update the bootloader for new units shipped.
BTW, I don't know how they actually do it at the factory, but they could buy the ARM chips pre-programmed with the bootloader and so wouldn't ordinarily program the bootloader at the factory.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2019, 03:41:49 am by EEVblog »
 
The following users thanked this post: Marco1971

Offline Muttley Snickers

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 1952
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1523 on: June 02, 2019, 06:18:25 am »
It would be good if somebody could do another side by side comparison video to show how much better this meter performs now with the new firmware.

 

Offline e0ne199

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 37
  • Country: id
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1524 on: June 02, 2019, 06:52:42 am »
Hi,
the ohm autorange is faster now, still not my fastest multimeter, but it is ok.
The "low capacitance bug" seems still present, a 220pF NP0 ceramic capacitor is shown as 0.160nF at the first time, then as 0.180nF after that as 0.200nF... The more often I switch the meter off and on, the closer the reading comes to the actual value. Also if I first use a small capacity, then a bigger one (e.g. several hundred nF) and then again the small capacity, the 121GW every time shows a different reading. I am not able to get a steady reading of small capacities with the 121GW. Can other users reproduce this behavior?  This is really odd.  For higher capacitances the meter shows correct values and the autorange speed seems also faster in capacitance mode now.

does anyone care about this problem?
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf