Poll

How many cycles will the KeySight U1281A's detent spring last?

0-2000
7 (17.5%)
2k-4k
5 (12.5%)
4k-8k
14 (35%)
8k-16k
8 (20%)
>16k (most rubust meter ever made)
6 (15%)

Total Members Voted: 37

Author Topic: Handheld meter robustness testing  (Read 1163694 times)

ploxiln, 4thDoctorWhoFan and 11 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline RobertoLG

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Country: br
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #800 on: April 05, 2016, 02:36:49 am »
are you going to try to find out what went wrong and fix it? just a question not a request
 

Online joeqsmithTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11740
  • Country: us
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #801 on: April 05, 2016, 03:01:04 am »
are you going to try to find out what went wrong and fix it? just a question not a request

No problem.  I am sure that you are not the only one wondering.   The video was released with Part 1 in the title.  There will be a part 2 but at this time is it way to premature to say what that is going to cover.  Worst case, there will not be ANY UNI-T products in the house once I am done.   Give me some time to figure out my next step.   

In the mean time, there is still a UT10A on it's way and the 20 is sitting here waiting for me to run it.   Then there's the 210 project.   Lot's to do.

Offline RobertoLG

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Country: br
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #802 on: April 05, 2016, 03:16:47 am »
yeah, I was wondering if it's even repairable, because it went total dead, no errors or anything, but I'll wait you to organise yourself there, and the other content to come   :-+
 

Online Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16648
  • Country: 00
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #803 on: April 05, 2016, 08:18:10 am »
Just an observation: The non-contact UNI-T clamp has more input protection than most UNI-T multimeters.

Does that make sense to anybody?  :-//

« Last Edit: April 05, 2016, 08:38:18 am by Fungus »
 

Online Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16648
  • Country: 00
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #804 on: April 05, 2016, 08:43:47 am »
This was a test I really thought was a waste of my time to even run as that starter is not much of a pulse.   

Do you think it's similar to the sort of sparks people can generate by walking on nylon carpet, etc?

 
The following users thanked this post: saturation

Offline Muttley Snickers

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2341
  • Country: au
  • Cursed: 679 times
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #805 on: April 05, 2016, 10:08:20 am »
Wow, that was a shocker and it didn't even get past a warm up.... :-BROKE :-+

Boot up times hardly count for much if shortly after you kick the bucket.... ::) :P
 

Online joeqsmithTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11740
  • Country: us
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #806 on: April 05, 2016, 12:20:26 pm »
Just an observation: The non-contact UNI-T clamp has more input protection than most UNI-T multimeters.

Does that make sense to anybody?  :-//

I really believe they are attempting to improve their products.   

This was a test I really thought was a waste of my time to even run as that starter is not much of a pulse.   
Do you think it's similar to the sort of sparks people can generate by walking on nylon carpet, etc?
Here, with carpet, during the winter the air can become very dry and I get get some pretty good static going.   If we use the human body as a means of measuring the energy (because that is very scientific), I will say I have had a lot more pain touching things with my finger from a normal discharge than I have with this starter.   In the end, I really don't know.  The one thing I do know is that the vast majority of meters handle this transient with no problems.   

Wow, that was a shocker and it didn't even get past a warm up.... :-BROKE :-+

Boot up times hardly count for much if shortly after you kick the bucket.... ::) :P

I agree.  The better display, better user interface, added temperature port and other features mean nothing if it's dead.   

I did write UNI-T a few days ago about the display update rate and was hoping that even though the meter is now damaged that we could at least open some sort of dialog.   It is very rare when a company will respond to my emails but you never know.   

Offline saturation

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4787
  • Country: us
  • Doveryai, no proveryai
    • NIST
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #807 on: April 05, 2016, 03:19:19 pm »
Yes, certainly can.

Quite shockingly poor protection, know one would know without this thread.  Uni-T can make good meters as its been the OEM for several Amprobe models, I have an older post on eevblog with copies of testing documents showing the OEM.

Joe, do you know the output voltage of your spark igniter?  Its really not supposed to kill the meter unless the input protection components didn't work for various reasons: counterfeit, wrong spec used, PCB defect etc.,.  The tear down you showed shows it should have worked.  It would be great for you to trace it out and zoom into the protection areas.

Too bad, it was even ETL certified and IP65.

The saga continues, no doubt. :popcorn:

This was a test I really thought was a waste of my time to even run as that starter is not much of a pulse.   

Do you think it's similar to the sort of sparks people can generate by walking on nylon carpet, etc?


Best Wishes,

 Saturation
 

Online Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16648
  • Country: 00
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #808 on: April 05, 2016, 05:43:22 pm »
I did write UNI-T a few days ago about the display update rate and was hoping that even though the meter is now damaged that we could at least open some sort of dialog.   It is very rare when a company will respond to my emails but you never know.

Did you send them a link to this video?

 

Offline rsjsouza

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5986
  • Country: us
  • Eternally curious
    • Vbe - vídeo blog eletrônico
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #809 on: April 05, 2016, 07:47:30 pm »
joeqsmith, that was an excellent video! Nowadays anyone can slap a powerful Cortex A processor to handle a beautiful GUI, but the appalling susceptibility to transients only shows UNI-T is blatantly lying on their CAT Ratings.  :--

I would completely understand if they had marked this meter as a portable "lab meter" where you are not really required to have any ratings... Their webpage does not mention any CAT ratings, but its manual does.

I suspect they will eventually do the same releases as the UT-61: UT-181A, UT-181B, C, D... until it gets somewhere close to its alleged safety.
Vbe - vídeo blog eletrônico http://videos.vbeletronico.com

Oh, the "whys" of the datasheets... The information is there not to be an axiomatic truth, but instead each speck of data must be slowly inhaled while carefully performing a deep search inside oneself to find the true metaphysical sense...
 

Offline Lightages

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 4314
  • Country: ca
  • Canadian po
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #810 on: April 05, 2016, 10:19:51 pm »
The CAT rating has nothing to do with being able to function after being hit with a high voltage. The CAT rating is for the safety of the user, not the meter.
 

Offline RobertoLG

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Country: br
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #811 on: April 05, 2016, 10:36:53 pm »
and end up with a $300+ brick...is kinda ouch!
 

Online joeqsmithTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11740
  • Country: us
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #812 on: April 06, 2016, 12:08:30 am »
Quite shockingly poor protection, know one would know without this thread.  Uni-T can make good meters as its been the OEM for several Amprobe models, I have an older post on eevblog with copies of testing documents showing the OEM.

Joe, do you know the output voltage of your spark igniter?  Its really not supposed to kill the meter unless the input protection components didn't work for various reasons: counterfeit, wrong spec used, PCB defect etc.,.  The tear down you showed shows it should have worked.  It would be great for you to trace it out and zoom into the protection areas.

When you look at how many meters survived this with no problems,  they certainly have a few examples they could have copied from.

I posted my homemade targets a page back and had looked for the data I took but looks like I did not save anything. 

Keep in mind, I am not sure that a hand held meter is even required to pass any sort of ESD event.   What I can tell you is looking at a manual from Fluke and Hioki, they both call out EN61326, which references 61000-4-2.  My guess is that the meters would fall under Annex A, criteria B.   Looking at the manual for the UNI-T,  I do not see a reference to an EMC standard, only for the safety.   The basic current wave shape for the -4-2 standard should be on-line.

I did write UNI-T a few days ago about the display update rate and was hoping that even though the meter is now damaged that we could at least open some sort of dialog.   It is very rare when a company will respond to my emails but you never know.
Did you send them a link to this video?

I wrote them a day before I posted the video, so no. 

joeqsmith, that was an excellent video! Nowadays anyone can slap a powerful Cortex A processor to handle a beautiful GUI, but the appalling susceptibility to transients only shows UNI-T is blatantly lying on their CAT Ratings.  :--

I would completely understand if they had marked this meter as a portable "lab meter" where you are not really required to have any ratings... Their webpage does not mention any CAT ratings, but its manual does.

I suspect they will eventually do the same releases as the UT-61: UT-181A, UT-181B, C, D... until it gets somewhere close to its alleged safety.
Thanks.  Glad you enjoyed it.  I really have no idea if any of the meters I have looked at would be considered safe or not.  Certainly, I have never thought of an ESD test as being safety related.

and end up with a $300+ brick...is kinda ouch!
Agree.  But maybe that grill starter test is just too harsh of an environment.


I thought someone would have ran these test and while searching, came across this:
http://www.bartek.com/Bartek/ESD.html

Offline PedroDaGr8

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1283
  • Country: us
  • A sociable geek chemist
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #813 on: April 06, 2016, 01:08:02 am »


I thought someone would have ran these test and while searching, came across this:
http://www.bartek.com/Bartek/ESD.html

That Uni-T is pathetic, your tests has made me much less likely to recommend Uni-T.

The gun looks like a modified vinyl anti-static gun.
The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done." -George Carlin
 

Offline RobertoLG

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Country: br
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #814 on: April 06, 2016, 01:28:30 am »


I thought someone would have ran these test and while searching, came across this:
http://www.bartek.com/Bartek/ESD.html

That Uni-T is pathetic, your tests has made me much less likely to recommend Uni-T.

The gun looks like a modified vinyl anti-static gun.

yeah, I have an old eletronics magazine that shows one of these for vinyl, if I find it I'll post a pic
 

Offline PedroDaGr8

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1283
  • Country: us
  • A sociable geek chemist
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #815 on: April 06, 2016, 01:42:47 am »


I thought someone would have ran these test and while searching, came across this:
http://www.bartek.com/Bartek/ESD.html

That Uni-T is pathetic, your tests has made me much less likely to recommend Uni-T.

The gun looks like a modified vinyl anti-static gun.

yeah, I have an old eletronics magazine that shows one of these for vinyl, if I find it I'll post a pic
We still use them in the lab for getting powders in the tube in hyper dry environments.
The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done." -George Carlin
 

Online joeqsmithTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11740
  • Country: us
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #816 on: April 06, 2016, 01:47:17 am »
That Uni-T is pathetic, your tests has made me much less likely to recommend Uni-T.
The gun looks like a modified vinyl anti-static gun.

Vinyl? Post a little more info. 




Offline PedroDaGr8

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1283
  • Country: us
  • A sociable geek chemist
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #817 on: April 06, 2016, 01:52:29 am »
That Uni-T is pathetic, your tests has made me much less likely to recommend Uni-T.
The gun looks like a modified vinyl anti-static gun.

Vinyl? Post a little more info.

VInyl as in vinyl records:





Also a video of one being used to break-up static charge.
The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done." -George Carlin
 

Offline RobertoLG

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Country: br
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #818 on: April 06, 2016, 02:04:29 am »
found it! and got some info too, the pic isn't great but...

the voltage output should be from 15 to 20.000 volts, it produces it by torsion of the piezo element
I think that's more stuff there, I need to dig deeper at my magazines, if I find some more usefull info I'll post it later
« Last Edit: April 06, 2016, 03:11:31 am by RobertoLG »
 

Online joeqsmithTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11740
  • Country: us
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #819 on: April 06, 2016, 02:23:58 am »
Quite shockingly poor protection, know one would know without this thread.  Uni-T can make good meters as its been the OEM for several Amprobe models, I have an older post on eevblog with copies of testing documents showing the OEM.

Joe, do you know the output voltage of your spark igniter?  Its really not supposed to kill the meter unless the input protection components didn't work for various reasons: counterfeit, wrong spec used, PCB defect etc.,.  The tear down you showed shows it should have worked.  It would be great for you to trace it out and zoom into the protection areas.

When you look at how many meters survived this with no problems,  they certainly have a few examples they could have copied from.

I posted my homemade targets a page back and had looked for the data I took but looks like I did not save anything. 

Keep in mind, I am not sure that a hand held meter is even required to pass any sort of ESD event.   What I can tell you is looking at a manual from Fluke and Hioki, they both call out EN61326, which references 61000-4-2.  My guess is that the meters would fall under Annex A, criteria B.   Looking at the manual for the UNI-T,  I do not see a reference to an EMC standard, only for the safety.   The basic current wave shape for the -4-2 standard should be on-line.

Let me start with again, I have no idea what the meter are required to pass, if anything for ESD.   And again,  EN6132601:2013 Annex A calls for an 4KV contact, 8KV air criterion B.   Looking at 61000-4-2:2009, 4KV contact is level 2 and 8KV air is level 3. 

Taking the grill starter and roughly measuring the air gap when it will arc, assuming 33KV/cm.  Of course, we all know this is a swag.  I would estimate the peak is about 15KV.    :wtf:

OK, I know, the meters only rated to  :blah: :blah: :blah: and your hitting it with  :blah: :blah: :blah:, why would you ever think it would survive.....     Keep in mind, the product is not supposed to be damaged during this test.

Well, while everyone who asked, asked about the peak voltage.  Not one person asked me about the current.   Level 2, contact is 4KV and requires a first peak of 15A with a rise time of 0.8ns.  At 30ns it decays to 8A.  At 60ns it decays to 4A.

Measuring this is normally done with a target.  This is called out in the standards.  Of course, as a hobbyist I built my own.  So keep this in mind...  The target is 2 ohms and you follow this with a 20dB attenuator then less than 1 meter of good coax. The standard recommends RG400.  Then into the DSO.   Of course, you need a fast DSO to look at this.   

What I have is my homemade target.  I think this is 1206's or 0805s placed inside the PCB.   All in parallel to reduce the inductance.   As you can see from the picture, I use an SMA to couple to target to the attenuators.   In my case rather than 20dB (10x) I use 26dB.  Why?  Because as much fun as I am having destroying meters, I have no desire to damage my best DSO.   The is also a very fast clamp in-line with the DSO, just in case.  The attenuators are all Mini-Circuits and are rated to 6GHz.   I am using roughly 0.5 meters of RG400 cable terminated with SMAs.   This mess then connects to the 5GHz LeCroy 8500A, set to 20GS/s.   

Next, I hold the grill starter to the target and push the button.  That's it.   

Looking at the attached screen shot (which I just took so ignore that fact I am too lazy to set the clock) the peak is roughly 100mV.   So 0.1 * 19.19 = 2 Volts across our 2 ohm target or 1Amp peak.   Even a level 1 requires 7.5A!!   We can see at 30ns we are supposed to be at 8A but our signal is fully settled out by then as we only have a width of about 5ns!!

Now sure, we can say the peak, open circuit voltage is about double but the energy is not even in the ballpark.  Hope this helps answer anyone who has a question about this test.

I have added a picture of the test setup.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2016, 02:45:19 am by joeqsmith »
 
The following users thanked this post: saturation

Online joeqsmithTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11740
  • Country: us
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #820 on: April 06, 2016, 02:54:45 am »
Interesting product.  I am old enough that I should have seen one, but never have. 

found it! and got some info too, the pic isn't great but...

the voltage output should be from 15 to 20.000 volts
I think that's more stuff there, I need to dig deeper at my magazines, if I find some more usefull info I'll post it later

 
The following users thanked this post: saturation

Offline rsjsouza

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5986
  • Country: us
  • Eternally curious
    • Vbe - vídeo blog eletrônico
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #821 on: April 06, 2016, 02:56:28 am »
The CAT rating has nothing to do with being able to function after being hit with a high voltage. The CAT rating is for the safety of the user, not the meter.
Lightages, you are right. Despite this, it does not inspire much confidence if the meter does not survive in an extremely low energy scenario...
Vbe - vídeo blog eletrônico http://videos.vbeletronico.com

Oh, the "whys" of the datasheets... The information is there not to be an axiomatic truth, but instead each speck of data must be slowly inhaled while carefully performing a deep search inside oneself to find the true metaphysical sense...
 

Online joeqsmithTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11740
  • Country: us
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #822 on: April 06, 2016, 03:05:14 am »
The CAT rating has nothing to do with being able to function after being hit with a high voltage. The CAT rating is for the safety of the user, not the meter.
Lightages, you are right. Despite this, it does not inspire much confidence if the meter does not survive in an extremely low energy scenario...
Oh come on, after watching three UNI-T meters fail this test including their top of the line one, I have the highest confidence that this brand will continue to fail these tests!   :-DD



Offline RobertoLG

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 361
  • Country: br
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #823 on: April 06, 2016, 03:14:07 am »
I'm in doubt now, but I think even the Digitek survived the test or not? need to see the video again lol

yep  :-DD it did survive  :-DD

https://youtu.be/Ohk2dqsq7dM?t=6m23s

« Last Edit: April 06, 2016, 03:21:32 am by RobertoLG »
 

Offline rsjsouza

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5986
  • Country: us
  • Eternally curious
    • Vbe - vídeo blog eletrônico
Re: Handheld meter electrical robustness testing.
« Reply #824 on: April 06, 2016, 04:30:20 pm »
I am starting to suspect that even the Harbor freight stuff would fare better than these Uni-T meters...
Vbe - vídeo blog eletrônico http://videos.vbeletronico.com

Oh, the "whys" of the datasheets... The information is there not to be an axiomatic truth, but instead each speck of data must be slowly inhaled while carefully performing a deep search inside oneself to find the true metaphysical sense...
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf