Author Topic: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread  (Read 247989 times)

Hydron and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline amspire

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3784
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1600 on: September 15, 2019, 09:58:45 am »

I have to say that I was a bit surprised at the official support for this meter when I came looking. Dave being Dave, I assumed that he would've been fairly thorough in providing this (official updates, notifications etc). There isn't even a readme file attached to the firmware zip.
The manual has instructions for the firmware. The most recent manual is on the Meter's page on EEVBlog.com (https://www.eevblog.com/wp-content/plugins/download-attachments/includes/download.php?id=30207)
Quote


Also I just discovered that there is hardware (pcb?) upgrade to fix (I assume) the rotary dial issue? Has this change been rolled out to for sale units?

Anyhow perhaps I'm being a bit too critical as I don't know the history behind the meter.
Dave did send out the updated rotary switch hardware to people who had received the original dial. If you need it and did not receive it, I guess you need to contact EEVBlog.
 

Offline Bobo666

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 8
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1601 on: September 15, 2019, 10:06:43 am »
Ok, so the firmware changes are explained in the manual. What about existing bugs? I don't think it is unreasonable to have a list of those. And I mean a concise list on the product page, not 50 pages of threads with people saying "I can't get this to work" ...

I realise that a fix was released but I understood there was also a pcb upgrade as well?

I don't own a meter (yet), hence the questions.
 

Offline amspire

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3784
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1602 on: September 15, 2019, 10:28:51 am »
Ok, so the firmware changes are explained in the manual. What about existing bugs? I don't think it is unreasonable to have a list of those. And I mean a concise list on the product page, not 50 pages of threads with people saying "I can't get this to work" ...

I realise that a fix was released but I understood there was also a pcb upgrade as well?

I don't own a meter (yet), hence the questions.
If you do not own a meter, then you may not realize that it is actually a very good meter. It had some unique features such as a very low burden voltage for the current ranges.

The Bluetooth capability was added late in the design, I believe. It was not one of the primary design goals. It works, but not as robustly as some people would like. I have not used the logging myself yet - I use it as an accurate multimeter for the purpose of talking live readings. For me, it works great.

Lots of test hardware has bugs when you dig deep enough. You will see it all the time in Dave's reviews of new test and lab instruments.

What you have to understand with Dave's multimeter is it is not a multimeter made in the millions with a massive R&D budget. The reality is it would be totally amazing if Dave's meters would be totally flawless. If you want a meter that is totally flawless - good luck. I do not know how you are going to find one even from the biggest manufacturers. I never expected absolute perfection from Dave's meter.

Richard
 

Offline Bobo666

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 8
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1603 on: September 15, 2019, 10:44:30 am »

The Bluetooth capability was added late in the design, I believe. It was not one of the primary design goals. It works, but not as robustly as some people would like. I have not used the logging myself yet - I use it as an accurate multimeter for the purpose of talking live readings. For me, it works great.

Lots of test hardware has bugs when you dig deep enough. You will see it all the time in Dave's reviews of new test and lab instruments.

What you have to understand with Dave's multimeter is it is not a multimeter made in the millions with a massive R&D budget.

Richard

It is the BLE feature that got me very interested in this device to begin with.

You seem to think I am berating the product for having bugs. I can assure you I am not. But that doesn't mean to say I don't care what they are. In fact the whole point of me posting is to try to find out, but that is proving quite a challenge.

And while I know the history of EEVBlog I don't know the history of the meter. Dave has surely raised the bar with this product, but unfortunately that also means raising the expectations too.
 

Offline amspire

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3784
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1604 on: September 15, 2019, 11:00:08 am »

It is the BLE feature that got me very interested in this device to begin with.

It is just exceptionally boring to hear disappointment at the BLE endlessly. Dave and the meter company put a design together with BLE hardware as a late addition, and it turns out it doesn't work as well as some people want. It is not possible for Dave to wave a magic wand and have the BLE magically turned into a non-BLE Bluetooth interface.

As with all hardware, it is what it is. Just accept it. If it is not good enough for you, find another meter. If the primary feature you want from a meter is its data logging capability, buy a meter that is designed primarily for data logging.
 

Offline CDaniel

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 273
  • Country: ro
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1605 on: September 15, 2019, 12:18:08 pm »
For people to find another meter we must tell here its fauts and bugs , so you are contradicting yourself like a fanboy .
After all we don't care how and when the logging was added , just if it is working like it supose or not .
Of course there are another bugs , just the discusion is now shifted to logging .
« Last Edit: September 15, 2019, 12:28:52 pm by CDaniel »
 

Offline amspire

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3784
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1606 on: September 15, 2019, 12:39:00 pm »
For people to find another meter we must tell here the meter fauts and bugs , so you are contradicting yourself like a fanboy .
After all we don't care how and when the logging was added , just if it is working like it supose or not .
Of course there are another bugs , just the discusion is now shifted to logging .
Name calling is a great way to end a conversation.
 

Offline beanflying

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3960
  • Country: au
  • Toys so very many Toys.
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1607 on: September 15, 2019, 01:05:48 pm »
For people to find another meter we must tell here its fauts and bugs , so you are contradicting yourself like a fanboy .
After all we don't care how and when the logging was added , just if it is working like it supose or not .
Of course there are another bugs , just the discusion is now shifted to logging .

YAWN another WOFTAM post from trollboy. Show us some DATA and EVIDENCE to back your persistent sledging and bitching about unspecific ambit claims!  :palm:
Coffee, Food, R/C and electronics nerd in no particular order :)
 

Offline CDaniel

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 273
  • Country: ro
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1608 on: September 15, 2019, 03:55:36 pm »
Is posted enough evidence not to trust in logging , of course for fanboys never will be suficient . He made a 30min , one time logging ( I supose his only logging ever with this meter ) , and he thinks is "proving " that is ok  ;D ;D ;D
 

Offline beanflying

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3960
  • Country: au
  • Toys so very many Toys.
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1609 on: September 15, 2019, 05:32:20 pm »
Is posted enough evidence not to trust in logging , of course for fanboys never will be suficient . He made a 30min , one time logging ( I supose his only logging ever with this meter ) , and he thinks is "proving " that is ok  ;D ;D ;D

Refer to post #11, 12, 24 and others numbnuts and there is even a youtube video using the BT logging on software 1.02 about the same time. You are not so much smart as a smart ass!
« Last Edit: September 15, 2019, 05:34:42 pm by beanflying »
Coffee, Food, R/C and electronics nerd in no particular order :)
 

Online J-R

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 29
  • Country: us
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1610 on: September 16, 2019, 12:12:57 am »
I need to call out some of you for not being precise about the topics being discussed:

- Bluetooth connection difficulties between the meter and your device

- Logging via Bluetooth to the Android or Windows application

- Logging to the SD card


User reports:

- Android app needs the location permission.

- Logging using SD card and Bluetooth does not generate consistent timestamp intervals or absolute timestamps.

- Logging to SD card sometimes stalls and generates the same value over and over.


My comments:

- Wireless logging inherently has the potential to be unstable since you are subject to changing conditions (latency, re-transmissions, etc.).

- There are no logging settings in the Android/Windows apps (time interval, absolute time stamps, etc.)

- SD card logging is currently not practical for regular daily use because you must remove the outer case, back cover and SD card to download the data.

- Long term logging is not practical for continual use because this is a battery powered device.
 

Offline tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16329
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. NZ Siglent Distributor
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1611 on: September 16, 2019, 02:04:12 am »
I feel sorry for someone trying to research this meter for purchase. There is too much back and forth and these threads are ridiculous for trying to find the current status of the meter.  I suppose an official page with all the firmware versions and known and fixed "concerns" listed out would be too much to ask for???  There really should be one page that lists out everything a 121GW owner (or potential owner) needs to know.  For example, there are different hardware versions/updates, a recall of specific serial numbers, troubleshooting suggestions, etc....
Yep, 121GW threads could be much better managed which should be a breeze as Dave and Seppy are administrators.
Quote
How about a new pinned thread with strict rules on new posts?
Nope, they just need to clean up existing threads and lock one in which to make announcements and post links to all resources for 121GW.
This would be a good one in which to do this with just an edit of the title and a bit of a cleanup dropping OT posts into one of the other threads:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/eevblog-121gw-multimeter-firmware-details/

And while at it even setup 121GW daughter/Child board to the TE board for all 121GW threads and stick this one there too:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/re-eevblog-121gw-discussion-thread/

« Last Edit: September 16, 2019, 02:11:18 am by tautech »
Avid Rabid Hobbyist
 

Offline Bobo666

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 8
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1612 on: September 16, 2019, 02:47:39 am »

It is just exceptionally boring to hear disappointment at the BLE endlessly.
As with all hardware, it is what it is. Just accept it. If it is not good enough for you, find another meter.

Well, if you find it exceptionally boring, can't you do what any other normal person would do, and just not read/reply?

And I find your stating the bleeding obvious quite puerile. I am trying to determine whether the meter will fit my needs by asking questions about the product, otherwise YES, I will find another meter.

Thank you for your contribution.
 
The following users thanked this post: LauraW

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30091
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1613 on: September 16, 2019, 04:35:44 am »
It is just exceptionally boring to hear disappointment at the BLE endlessly. Dave and the meter company put a design together with BLE hardware as a late addition, and it turns out it doesn't work as well as some people want. It is not possible for Dave to wave a magic wand and have the BLE magically turned into a non-BLE Bluetooth interface.

Correct. BLE was with hindsight a troublesome choice for some things. Full bluetooth would have been better, but unfortunately we are stuck with BLE and have to make do with the capabilities of that.
 

Offline hammy

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
  • Country: 00
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1614 on: September 16, 2019, 10:32:02 am »
... and have to make do with the capabilities of that.

@Dave: There are sometimes reports from other buyers about newer firmware versions. Do you get the newest firmware in parallel from the manufacturer after they send it out? Why is there a gap between the shipped version and the download version on your homepage?

 

Offline joeqsmith

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5906
  • Country: us
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1615 on: September 16, 2019, 11:14:59 am »
It is just exceptionally boring to hear disappointment at the BLE endlessly. Dave and the meter company put a design together with BLE hardware as a late addition, and it turns out it doesn't work as well as some people want. It is not possible for Dave to wave a magic wand and have the BLE magically turned into a non-BLE Bluetooth interface.

Correct. BLE was with hindsight a troublesome choice for some things. Full bluetooth would have been better, but unfortunately we are stuck with BLE and have to make do with the capabilities of that.

I ran fair number of tests using the proto's BLE interface with LabView.  While the radio seems a bit weaker than the other two BLE meters I have looked at, it seemed to work alright with the firmware I was using.   It doesn't seem to be a bad choice for hardware.  Maybe if they remove that 1-Byte packet and leverage the hardware's built-in error checking/correction it may help improve it.   
How electrically robust is your meter?? https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsK99WXk9VhcghnAauTBsbg
 
The following users thanked this post: Andrew McNamara, genghisnico13

Offline Bobo666

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 8
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1616 on: September 17, 2019, 01:23:44 am »

I ran fair number of tests using the proto's BLE interface with LabView.  While the radio seems a bit weaker than the other two BLE meters I have looked at, it seemed to work alright with the firmware I was using.     

Which I assume is v2.00?
 

Offline joeqsmith

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5906
  • Country: us
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1617 on: September 17, 2019, 03:11:57 am »

I ran fair number of tests using the proto's BLE interface with LabView.  While the radio seems a bit weaker than the other two BLE meters I have looked at, it seemed to work alright with the firmware I was using.     

Which I assume is v2.00?
I am not sure if I did much testing beyond 1.26, if at all.  They were making changes to the filters during that time and I was running tests to evaluate them.  The BLE interface wasn't working originally on the prototype meter, so I was using the card to log the data.  Using the firmware supplied (pre 1.0 really early stuff), logging to the card would hang but once I had 1.0 loaded, it seemed fine.    When I first started working with the BLE, I had some problems but discovered this was with my code, not the 121. 

I had several posts in the Issues area documenting my findings but it seems it was getting a bit too cluttered for Dave so I cleaned them out to help them with their bug tracking.   These were fairly long tests I was running and I don't recall having problems outside the range being less than expected.     

I didn't want to invest more time until at least the hardware had settled.  Dave had mentioned some of the changes they were making beyond addressing the shim.  It seemed like they were moving in the right direction.   It's been a while since I have seen him post any more about it.  Maybe next year... 

If you do have problems and decide to roll the firmware back, just keep in mind the changes to the filter I mentioned.  You can see from the attached plot how they were playing with the roll off.   
How electrically robust is your meter?? https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsK99WXk9VhcghnAauTBsbg
 

Offline beanflying

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3960
  • Country: au
  • Toys so very many Toys.
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1618 on: September 17, 2019, 11:47:54 am »
I had given this magnet up for dead but it turned up yesterday packed well inside styrofoam so it wouldn't stick to all and sundry but seriously 3 months since ordered  :wtf: :horse: eBay auction: #183364882157 Apparently Chinese but shipped from Singapore so who knows.

That said printed the file as per last page in this thread and the 20x10 has plenty of stick plus some to spare. Just pick another source for the magnet. https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/eevblog-121gw-discussion-thread/msg2479518/#msg2479518

edit just added an extra side on photo. Sits level on the probe holders and magnet to help grip on shiny surfaces and pushing buttons or range changing.

« Last Edit: September 17, 2019, 01:48:32 pm by beanflying »
Coffee, Food, R/C and electronics nerd in no particular order :)
 

Offline Blue_Alien

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 18
  • Country: us
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1619 on: September 20, 2019, 04:00:06 pm »
I just ran into a bug with the Max hold function not displaying the correct range. Meter was displaying A, but the units were displaying as mA. I had to change the mode from DC -> AC -> DC to get it to resolve the problem.
 

Offline 1anX

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 187
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1620 on: September 21, 2019, 10:15:43 am »
I just ran into a bug with the Max hold function not displaying the correct range. Meter was displaying A, but the units were displaying as mA. I had to change the mode from DC -> AC -> DC to get it to resolve the problem.
Probably best to copy this over to the EEVBLog 121GW Issues thread as its an issue worth reporting!
 

Offline 1anX

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 187
  • Country: au
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1621 on: September 28, 2019, 07:10:09 am »
I see firmware V2.02 is available from Dave's website https://www.eevblog.com/product/121gw/
 

Offline e0ne199

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 57
  • Country: id
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1622 on: September 28, 2019, 02:09:50 pm »
anyone has tested this new firmware?? what are the changes after installing it?
 

Offline beanflying

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3960
  • Country: au
  • Toys so very many Toys.
Re: EEVBlog 121GW Discussion thread
« Reply #1623 on: September 28, 2019, 02:29:44 pm »
At the risk of LMGTFY  ;) From the revised manual just a bug fix over 2.01 by the looks of it.

Coffee, Food, R/C and electronics nerd in no particular order :)
 

Offline Dr. Frank

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1723
  • Country: de
FW 2.02
« Reply #1624 on: October 02, 2019, 01:29:20 pm »
FW 2.02 solves the 550..600 Vdc unsteady ranging problem.
Instead, the 1000 Vdc range does not down-range any more  @ Uin < 500 V, but stays in this 1000 V range until Uin < 60.0 V, i.e. @ 59.9 V

Frank

As it's a new error, again, I will post this also in the Multimeter Issues thread
« Last Edit: October 02, 2019, 01:45:17 pm by Dr. Frank »
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf