EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
Products => Test Equipment => Topic started by: RiRaRi on August 07, 2023, 11:26:54 pm
-
Hello. I have seen these testers for integrated circuits. Do they work and does anyone have experience with them? How simple are they to use?
https://a.aliexpress.com/_m0leWoW
-
What concerns me is no list of ICs programmed into the tester is given. I would not expect it to test just any IC, probably just a logic series. At least with the XGecu EPROM programmer series which also has a testing function, the list of ICs tested is listed.
-
I've actually been meaning to post a thread on these myself for the past few days.
I've had one of those for years and it's 50/50, so I've been wondering if they've improved in terms of recognised parts? Or if people make new parts libraries you can update them with, etc.
Mine is pretty good at testing logic chips, so that's something. Very limited with op amps etc though, which is what I'm usually wanting to test when I whip it out.
When it does recognise a particular type it can be really handy. My normal use for it is while working on mixing consoles, I'll often be trying to quickly troubleshoot multiple channels and it can be super quick for pulling and checking a bunch of suspect parts all in one go. It's always a crapshoot though whether or not it will recognise the particular op amp in use, a lot of super common parts just show up on mine as unknown/damaged parts
-
If you watch the lame little video on AliExpress, near the end, you can see them scrolling though 74HC, 74LS, & CD40... So I would guess that it's pretty limited.
According to the poorly translated description:
You can test 74ch series, 74ls series, CD4000 series, HEF400 series, 4500 series, operational amplifiers, interface class chip, optocouplers, transistors automatic identification, the regulator voltage value recognition.
Built-in data model all kinds of chips more than 1,300 species, more than 420 kinds of transistor data models, covering most common devices within 24 feet, and can greatly reduce the maintenance workload, improve maintenance efficiency.
The repair wizard 9v laminated battery, the same as with ordinary multimeter battery, power consumption is quite ordinary digital multimeter. Press the enter key can boot first boot automatically perform a self-test, self-test the battery voltage is detected and displayed on the screen after the passage of more than two seconds, when the battery voltage is below 7v replace the battery, in order to ensure measurement accuracy. If there is no alarm you can start measuring work. Native AD 10 AD, the theoretical resolution of 5v voltage is 0.0048v. Not suitable for measuring high power thyristor due to the use of battery-powered. Zener value should be subject to the measured, can not only look at the nominal value. Boot the default directory is search directory. An ordinary optocoupler optocoupler test up to a dozen parameters, a simple measurement optocoupler logic relationship has not much practical significance, the machine can test the secondary optocoupler saturation voltage, for reference. Test the ordinary 4 feet optocoupler.
:-DD
This YouTube guy reviewed one which looks the same as that one. (https://youtu.be/fnNjU7__STA?t=54) Haven't watched the entire thing. At the 10:50 mark he shows the IC list that came with it.
-
Probably more correctly described as a IC identifier rather than a tester, there are no pass/fail criteria or performance measurement as would be associated with testing.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66hPg_r4IOw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66hPg_r4IOw)
-
For a tester that makes analog measurements on the outputs, have a look at the Tauntek IC tester:
http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm (http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm)
It's just a pcb + pre-programmed microcontrollers. You'll have to supply some commonly available parts to build it.
List of supported devices: http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf (http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf)
A blog post about it:
https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/ (https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/)
-
Most universal programmers can id and test logic ic's
-
I bought a diy chip tester from 8bit-museum.de. It's called RCT, Retro Chip Tester
https://8bit-museum.de/sonstiges/hardware-projekte/hardware-projekte-chip-tester-english/
You can buy the PCB there and download the bom list. You have to self assemble the parts to the PCB. Firmware is under active development. Works well for a large list of IC and memory chips.
You can also programn some eproms, even very uncommon ones.
-
Probably more correctly described as a IC identifier rather than a tester, there are no pass/fail criteria or performance measurement as would be associated with testing.
I imagine a chip has to be working for it to be identified correctly.
-
I have a few different IC testers including the ones mentioned here, they seem to work fine, obviously they all cover different IC families or only partial families, but they do detect faulty devices a lot of the time, if you are ever not sure about a device, you can test a suspect device and then a known good device and check for the same result.
The RCT version is extremely comprehensive and has new chips added frequently, the only catch is you have t build it yourself and if you want to update it you need to use a programmer.
-
Probably more correctly described as a IC identifier rather than a tester, there are no pass/fail criteria or performance measurement as would be associated with testing.
I imagine a chip has to be working for it to be identified correctly.
"working" enough to match logic patterns does not say it is working to datasheet specifications. Limited leakage/pull-up/pull-down at logic pins is often required for correct circuit operation as one example of a parameter which would need to be tested to confirm a chip will work according to its specifications. An ok/identifcation from these widgets is only a cursory check of: pattern at io pins matches pattern in library.
Dictionary definition of test vs identification matches what I wrote. Or do you want to come up with your own new definitions of "test" and "identification".
-
Probably more correctly described as a IC identifier rather than a tester, there are no pass/fail criteria or performance measurement as would be associated with testing.
I imagine a chip has to be working for it to be identified correctly.
"working" enough to match logic patterns does not say it is working to datasheet specifications. Limited leakage/pull-up/pull-down at logic pins is often required for correct circuit operation as one example of a parameter which would need to be tested to confirm a chip will work according to its specifications. An ok/identifcation from these widgets is only a cursory check of: pattern at io pins matches pattern in library.
Dictionary definition of test vs identification matches what I wrote. Or do you want to come up with your own new definitions of "test" and "identification".
Nobody is actually using these for verifying specs. They are go/no testers. Almost like a diode test function on a meter- nobody is sweeping through semiconductors on a board with a diode test expecting to actually characterise things, it's a ballpark look for major issues. Same with these- if a supported chip fails, you know it's fucked and you bin it. If it passes then chances are high that it's not the droid you're looking for and you keep hunting.
-
Probably more correctly described as a IC identifier rather than a tester, there are no pass/fail criteria or performance measurement as would be associated with testing.
I imagine a chip has to be working for it to be identified correctly.
"working" enough to match logic patterns does not say it is working to datasheet specifications. Limited leakage/pull-up/pull-down at logic pins is often required for correct circuit operation as one example of a parameter which would need to be tested to confirm a chip will work according to its specifications. An ok/identifcation from these widgets is only a cursory check of: pattern at io pins matches pattern in library.
Dictionary definition of test vs identification matches what I wrote. Or do you want to come up with your own new definitions of "test" and "identification".
Nobody is actually using these for verifying specs. They are go/no testers. Almost like a diode test function on a meter- nobody is sweeping through semiconductors on a board with a diode test expecting to actually characterise things, it's a ballpark look for major issues. Same with these- if a supported chip fails, you know it's fucked and you bin it. If it passes then chances are high that it's not the droid you're looking for and you keep hunting.
Except it's not even a go/no-go as they dont specify what has been tested. A diode test on a multimeter generates some measurements which can be directly applied to the end use (screening for matched forward voltage or checking for excessive reverse leakage are both practical on a multimeter) but a widget that says "diode*"
* probably.
Is not a test. Look at the good link aboveFor a tester that makes analog measurements on the outputs, have a look at the Tauntek IC tester:
http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm (http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm)
It's just a pcb + pre-programmed microcontrollers. You'll have to supply some commonly available parts to build it.
List of supported devices: http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf (http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf)
A blog post about it:
https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/ (https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/)
A basic tester that has some limits etc, very different from a device which tells you what it thinks the chip is (identifies).
-
Probably more correctly described as a IC identifier rather than a tester, there are no pass/fail criteria or performance measurement as would be associated with testing.
I imagine a chip has to be working for it to be identified correctly.
"working" enough to match logic patterns does not say it is working to datasheet specifications. Limited leakage/pull-up/pull-down at logic pins is often required for correct circuit operation as one example of a parameter which would need to be tested to confirm a chip will work according to its specifications. An ok/identifcation from these widgets is only a cursory check of: pattern at io pins matches pattern in library.
Dictionary definition of test vs identification matches what I wrote. Or do you want to come up with your own new definitions of "test" and "identification".
Nobody is actually using these for verifying specs. They are go/no testers. Almost like a diode test function on a meter- nobody is sweeping through semiconductors on a board with a diode test expecting to actually characterise things, it's a ballpark look for major issues. Same with these- if a supported chip fails, you know it's fucked and you bin it. If it passes then chances are high that it's not the droid you're looking for and you keep hunting.
Except it's not even a go/no-go as they dont specify what has been tested. A diode test on a multimeter generates some measurements which can be directly applied to the end use (screening for matched forward voltage or checking for excessive reverse leakage are both practical on a multimeter) but a widget that says "diode*"
* probably.
Is not a test. Look at the good link aboveFor a tester that makes analog measurements on the outputs, have a look at the Tauntek IC tester:
http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm (http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm)
It's just a pcb + pre-programmed microcontrollers. You'll have to supply some commonly available parts to build it.
List of supported devices: http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf (http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf)
A blog post about it:
https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/ (https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/)
A basic tester that has some limits etc, very different from a device which tells you what it thinks the chip is (identifies).
Again, you're looking at this from an overly ambitious perspective. My analogy with the diode test was precisely that when you're quickly sweeping through with one as a go/no go test you AREN'T using it to match forward voltages and so on. It's just "Is it blatantly fucked? Yes? In the bin it goes". Same with these cheap IC testers.
As a quick example of both the analogy and the actual use case- on one job today a power supply board was shutting down. I had seen the exact same fault on another unit yesterday, so the first thing I did was probe the rectifier diodes I had seen fail before and found a shorted one as expected. I don't remotely care about the precise forward voltage when using the meter for this, all I want to know is if the diodes are basically OK or not. In the case of the IC tester, earlier tonight I had a channel strip from a mixing console up on the bench. On these particular strips I've seen one particular IC kill audio on a few of them, so if one goes down now I'll routinely pull that IC and throw it in the tester. If it fails I can replace it on the spot while I'm at the studio and the channel will likely spring back to life. No need to wire up the channel with a bench supply, set up a scope, etc., if it's as simple as a bad IC I know and it's sorted in a minute.
-
:popcorn:
-
Probably more correctly described as a IC identifier rather than a tester, there are no pass/fail criteria or performance measurement as would be associated with testing.
I imagine a chip has to be working for it to be identified correctly.
"working" enough to match logic patterns does not say it is working to datasheet specifications.
Dictionary definition of test vs identification matches what I wrote. Or do you want to come up with your own new definitions of "test" and "identification".
To "identify" a chip all you need to do is look at the number printed on the top.
These devices are doing much more than that.
-
Probably more correctly described as a IC identifier rather than a tester, there are no pass/fail criteria or performance measurement as would be associated with testing.
I imagine a chip has to be working for it to be identified correctly.
"working" enough to match logic patterns does not say it is working to datasheet specifications.
Dictionary definition of test vs identification matches what I wrote. Or do you want to come up with your own new definitions of "test" and "identification".
To "identify" a chip all you need to do is look at the number printed on the top.
These devices are doing much more than that.
Watch the video above, presenter said all quad input FET opamps were simply identified as "TL084". Most of those devices are not doing more than a cursory low speed functional match.
Can they cycle through some states and guess what sort of device is attached? yes. Can they cycle some states and check pass/fail against a specific pattern? yes. But thats about it.
ledtester liked out to a "fancy" example which explains the methods behind it and documents the details. You're just posting inflammatory crap.
-
I have a Retro Chip Tester Pro too and it's great.
Occasionally I find a chip that is not supported, but so far it does the job without any fuss.
-
Except it's not even a go/no-go as they dont specify what has been tested. A diode test on a multimeter generates some measurements which can be directly applied to the end use (screening for matched forward voltage or checking for excessive reverse leakage are both practical on a multimeter) but a widget that says "diode*"
* probably.
Is not a test. Look at the good link aboveFor a tester that makes analog measurements on the outputs, have a look at the Tauntek IC tester:
http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm (http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm)
It's just a pcb + pre-programmed microcontrollers. You'll have to supply some commonly available parts to build it.
List of supported devices: http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf (http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf)
A blog post about it:
https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/ (https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/)
A basic tester that has some limits etc, very different from a device which tells you what it thinks the chip is (identifies).
Again, you're looking at this from an overly ambitious perspective. My analogy with the diode test was precisely that when you're quickly sweeping through with one as a go/no go test you AREN'T using it to match forward voltages and so on. It's just "Is it blatantly fucked? Yes? In the bin it goes". Same with these cheap IC testers.
As a quick example of both the analogy and the actual use case- on one job today a power supply board was shutting down. I had seen the exact same fault on another unit yesterday, so the first thing I did was probe the rectifier diodes I had seen fail before and found a shorted one as expected. I don't remotely care about the precise forward voltage when using the meter for this, all I want to know is if the diodes are basically OK or not. In the case of the IC tester, earlier tonight I had a channel strip from a mixing console up on the bench. On these particular strips I've seen one particular IC kill audio on a few of them, so if one goes down now I'll routinely pull that IC and throw it in the tester. If it fails I can replace it on the spot while I'm at the studio and the channel will likely spring back to life. No need to wire up the channel with a bench supply, set up a scope, etc., if it's as simple as a bad IC I know and it's sorted in a minute.
If you are looking for shorts, why bother with diode test? Just use continuity mode and listen for beep. You framed the discussion around diode test.... which is not comparable to these automated IC "testers". I'll suggest they're much closer to continuity beepers in information content than a diode test mode.
So when you say a "tester" which model/style are you referring to? what information does it provide? is its documentation available online?
There are a range of products out there with wildly different capabilities, the device you refer to may well have much more intelligence than the example the OP is asking about. What passes as "ok" in these cheap testers doesnt always function in real circuits, thats the biggest problem as it provides a false sense of security/validation.
-
Can they cycle through some states and guess what sort of device is attached? yes. Can they cycle some states and check pass/fail against a specific pattern? yes. But thats about it.
Right, so imagine I have a box full of used 74-series logic chips to repair old arcade machines.
I pull out one that identifies as a "7400 Quad 2‑input NAND Gate" and it says "74LS00" on the back then there's a good chance it's a working chip. If it doesn't identify the chip then it gets binned and I look for another one.
ie. This device is doing some level of "testing", not just identifying chips, hence then word "tester" printed on the front of it.
Is it guaranteeing the outer limits of the datasheet specifications? No of course not, but I don't think there's any gadget for that. These are cheap, they're fast, they can save a lot of wasted time, they're testers.
(And OP can be confident they're not a scam or complete waste of money, which is what he was asking).
-
So when you say a "tester" which model/style are you referring to? what information does it provide? is its documentation available online?
There are a range of products out there with wildly different capabilities, the device you refer to may well have much more intelligence than the example the OP is asking about. What passes as "ok" in these cheap testers doesnt always function in real circuits, thats the biggest problem as it provides a false sense of security/validation.
Here in the video I linked previously, you can see it fail a very basic test on a LM339 (https://youtu.be/fnNjU7__STA?t=1098) when the guy lifts a pin.
I've seen many techs be led astray with diode check. One example was a 1n4007 diode. Looked great on diode check, but as soon as a bit of current was passed through it (300mA) it's forward voltage drop would increase to 3-5V...
As long as the tech knows the limitations of the tools he's using, then it's OK. I don't think the IC checker that the OP linked is worth getting since the tests & devices are so limited. Besides, most parts I want to check are soldered in. Usually I've figured out that it's bad by how it performs in circuit before I remove it.
-
After reading this, if anything, I'd consider the Retro Chip Tester Pro if you're into retro computing because of its breadth in support for forms of memory, or the Tauntek tester ledtester linked to because of its more thorough analog DC tests. The Aliexpress ones don't seem worth it.
-
We had a old PC with a EPROM programmer built into it at work, I was not impressed by the logic IC test function, more a quick check, it could not identify between types with same pinout, with slightly different function, output type, speed etc.. The logic ICs were ex ICL and marked with in-house letters instead of the 74xx number.
David
-
Is it guaranteeing the outer limits of the datasheet specifications? No of course not, but I don't think there's any gadget for that. These are cheap, they're fast, they can save a lot of wasted time, they're testers.
If they cant say what was tested then its just a black box, I don't put any trust in a low cost widget that calls its self a tester yet provides zero information on what that test is or what the pass/fail criteria are. Hence calling it more appropriate to be described an an identification device.
-
I forgot to mention, i need it for testing ic in solid state radios, tape players etc
-
I forgot to mention, i need it for testing ic in solid state radios, tape players etc
So mostly analog ICs like opamps? Then no, I don't think any of these cheap IC testers are going to be of any value. I'd focus on in-circuit trouble shooting and if necessary a simple test setup on a breadboard to test the basic operation of an op-amp for example.
-
Except it's not even a go/no-go as they dont specify what has been tested. A diode test on a multimeter generates some measurements which can be directly applied to the end use (screening for matched forward voltage or checking for excessive reverse leakage are both practical on a multimeter) but a widget that says "diode*"
* probably.
Is not a test. Look at the good link aboveFor a tester that makes analog measurements on the outputs, have a look at the Tauntek IC tester:
http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm (http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm)
It's just a pcb + pre-programmed microcontrollers. You'll have to supply some commonly available parts to build it.
List of supported devices: http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf (http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf)
A blog post about it:
https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/ (https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/)
A basic tester that has some limits etc, very different from a device which tells you what it thinks the chip is (identifies).
Again, you're looking at this from an overly ambitious perspective. My analogy with the diode test was precisely that when you're quickly sweeping through with one as a go/no go test you AREN'T using it to match forward voltages and so on. It's just "Is it blatantly fucked? Yes? In the bin it goes". Same with these cheap IC testers.
As a quick example of both the analogy and the actual use case- on one job today a power supply board was shutting down. I had seen the exact same fault on another unit yesterday, so the first thing I did was probe the rectifier diodes I had seen fail before and found a shorted one as expected. I don't remotely care about the precise forward voltage when using the meter for this, all I want to know is if the diodes are basically OK or not. In the case of the IC tester, earlier tonight I had a channel strip from a mixing console up on the bench. On these particular strips I've seen one particular IC kill audio on a few of them, so if one goes down now I'll routinely pull that IC and throw it in the tester. If it fails I can replace it on the spot while I'm at the studio and the channel will likely spring back to life. No need to wire up the channel with a bench supply, set up a scope, etc., if it's as simple as a bad IC I know and it's sorted in a minute.
If you are looking for shorts, why bother with diode test? Just use continuity mode and listen for beep. You framed the discussion around diode test.... which is not comparable to these automated IC "testers". I'll suggest they're much closer to continuity beepers in information content than a diode test mode.
So when you say a "tester" which model/style are you referring to? what information does it provide? is its documentation available online?
There are a range of products out there with wildly different capabilities, the device you refer to may well have much more intelligence than the example the OP is asking about. What passes as "ok" in these cheap testers doesnt always function in real circuits, thats the biggest problem as it provides a false sense of security/validation.
This is the weirdest hill to die on.
First off, about your great advice about how I should use continuity mode for the tests described above- you realise a diode or transistor can fail open as well as short, right? A quick diode test will give you a ballpark idea of a working device and you can move on from there. The fact that you don't get this ought to automatically disqualify you from this conversation because this is real troubleshooting 101 shit.
These devices are NOT analogous to continuity testers. I can put 3 different IC's in them one after another and it will tell me what they are or if they're cooked. Absolutely nobody in their right mind has any expectation that they will pick obscure/intermittent faults that might cause them not to match the data sheet specs, this is just some bizarre bee you have in your bonnet about them. Nobody is using these things to launch rockets, it's just a go/no go tool to speed up troubleshooting. You still need to use your brain and judgement beyond that point if there are doubts about a part.
With regard to your argument that it's not a real world test- welcome to planet earth. Do you think a multimeter is a real world test for resistors/capacitors/diodes/etc? Of course it isn't. It doesn't need to be. It'll tell me if a part reads roughly what it should under simple, low voltage conditions and in most cases that is perfectly fine to get the job done. There are other more advanced tools available when required, and the same goes for IC testing.
-
Except it's not even a go/no-go as they dont specify what has been tested. A diode test on a multimeter generates some measurements which can be directly applied to the end use (screening for matched forward voltage or checking for excessive reverse leakage are both practical on a multimeter) but a widget that says "diode*"
* probably.
Is not a test. Look at the good link aboveFor a tester that makes analog measurements on the outputs, have a look at the Tauntek IC tester:
http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm (http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm)
It's just a pcb + pre-programmed microcontrollers. You'll have to supply some commonly available parts to build it.
List of supported devices: http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf (http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf)
A blog post about it:
https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/ (https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/)
A basic tester that has some limits etc, very different from a device which tells you what it thinks the chip is (identifies).
Again, you're looking at this from an overly ambitious perspective. My analogy with the diode test was precisely that when you're quickly sweeping through with one as a go/no go test you AREN'T using it to match forward voltages and so on. It's just "Is it blatantly fucked? Yes? In the bin it goes". Same with these cheap IC testers.
As a quick example of both the analogy and the actual use case- on one job today a power supply board was shutting down. I had seen the exact same fault on another unit yesterday, so the first thing I did was probe the rectifier diodes I had seen fail before and found a shorted one as expected. I don't remotely care about the precise forward voltage when using the meter for this, all I want to know is if the diodes are basically OK or not. In the case of the IC tester, earlier tonight I had a channel strip from a mixing console up on the bench. On these particular strips I've seen one particular IC kill audio on a few of them, so if one goes down now I'll routinely pull that IC and throw it in the tester. If it fails I can replace it on the spot while I'm at the studio and the channel will likely spring back to life. No need to wire up the channel with a bench supply, set up a scope, etc., if it's as simple as a bad IC I know and it's sorted in a minute.
If you are looking for shorts, why bother with diode test? Just use continuity mode and listen for beep. You framed the discussion around diode test.... which is not comparable to these automated IC "testers". I'll suggest they're much closer to continuity beepers in information content than a diode test mode.
So when you say a "tester" which model/style are you referring to? what information does it provide? is its documentation available online?
There are a range of products out there with wildly different capabilities, the device you refer to may well have much more intelligence than the example the OP is asking about. What passes as "ok" in these cheap testers doesnt always function in real circuits, thats the biggest problem as it provides a false sense of security/validation.
This is the weirdest hill to die on.
First off, about your great advice about how I should use continuity mode for the tests described above- you realise a diode or transistor can fail open as well as short, right? A quick diode test will give you a ballpark idea of a working device and you can move on from there. The fact that you don't get this ought to automatically disqualify you from this conversation because this is real troubleshooting 101 shit.
These devices are NOT analogous to continuity testers. I can put 3 different IC's in them one after another and it will tell me what they are or if they're cooked. Absolutely nobody in their right mind has any expectation that they will pick obscure/intermittent faults that might cause them not to match the data sheet specs, this is just some bizarre bee you have in your bonnet about them. Nobody is using these things to launch rockets, it's just a go/no go tool to speed up troubleshooting. You still need to use your brain and judgement beyond that point if there are doubts about a part.
With regard to your argument that it's not a real world test- welcome to planet earth. Do you think a multimeter is a real world test for resistors/capacitors/diodes/etc? Of course it isn't. It doesn't need to be. It'll tell me if a part reads roughly what it should under simple, low voltage conditions and in most cases that is perfectly fine to get the job done. There are other more advanced tools available when required, and the same goes for IC testing.
Lol, I point out a comparative example/analogy and you nail that to the nth percent rather than stick to the thread topic?
As above, if they are a go/no-go tester then where is the threshold for pass/fail? what do they actually test? You and Fungus seem to be ignoring that while claiming they are perfectly good testers. I say it isn't a tester because there is no documentation or evidence of what has been tested.
I put all that context in my opening post yet you come back and try to argue... something?
Probably more correctly described as a IC identifier rather than a tester, there are no pass/fail criteria or performance measurement as would be associated with testing.
Everyone else in the thread is more realistic and agrees they are some basic tool which is of little confidence. Many posters offered slightly more expensive tools that offer documentation and defined test capability along with increased functionality.
So how about instead of just making noise you actually lay out your explanation of what they test, and why that is useful. Saying they tell you if the item is "working" is some non specific threshold, untrustworthy, particularly these extreme low cost items where the underlying implementation is subject to change (as it was never specified or documented) as long as it still meets the advertised function of telling you which logical pinout the chip is (identification).
-
I forgot to mention, i need it for testing ic in solid state radios, tape players etc
So mostly analog ICs like opamps? Then no, I don't think any of these cheap IC testers are going to be of any value. I'd focus on in-circuit trouble shooting and if necessary a simple test setup on a breadboard to test the basic operation of an op-amp for example.
Not true, they definitely can test *some* op amps. On mine it's only a handful, but I keep wondering if newer firmware has added any more.
-
Except it's not even a go/no-go as they dont specify what has been tested. A diode test on a multimeter generates some measurements which can be directly applied to the end use (screening for matched forward voltage or checking for excessive reverse leakage are both practical on a multimeter) but a widget that says "diode*"
* probably.
Is not a test. Look at the good link aboveFor a tester that makes analog measurements on the outputs, have a look at the Tauntek IC tester:
http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm (http://tauntek.com/LogICTester-low-cost-logic-chip-tester.htm)
It's just a pcb + pre-programmed microcontrollers. You'll have to supply some commonly available parts to build it.
List of supported devices: http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf (http://tauntek.com/ctchiplist.pdf)
A blog post about it:
https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/ (https://www.barbouri.com/2021/09/13/building-the-tauntek-logic-ic-tester/)
A basic tester that has some limits etc, very different from a device which tells you what it thinks the chip is (identifies).
Again, you're looking at this from an overly ambitious perspective. My analogy with the diode test was precisely that when you're quickly sweeping through with one as a go/no go test you AREN'T using it to match forward voltages and so on. It's just "Is it blatantly fucked? Yes? In the bin it goes". Same with these cheap IC testers.
As a quick example of both the analogy and the actual use case- on one job today a power supply board was shutting down. I had seen the exact same fault on another unit yesterday, so the first thing I did was probe the rectifier diodes I had seen fail before and found a shorted one as expected. I don't remotely care about the precise forward voltage when using the meter for this, all I want to know is if the diodes are basically OK or not. In the case of the IC tester, earlier tonight I had a channel strip from a mixing console up on the bench. On these particular strips I've seen one particular IC kill audio on a few of them, so if one goes down now I'll routinely pull that IC and throw it in the tester. If it fails I can replace it on the spot while I'm at the studio and the channel will likely spring back to life. No need to wire up the channel with a bench supply, set up a scope, etc., if it's as simple as a bad IC I know and it's sorted in a minute.
If you are looking for shorts, why bother with diode test? Just use continuity mode and listen for beep. You framed the discussion around diode test.... which is not comparable to these automated IC "testers". I'll suggest they're much closer to continuity beepers in information content than a diode test mode.
So when you say a "tester" which model/style are you referring to? what information does it provide? is its documentation available online?
There are a range of products out there with wildly different capabilities, the device you refer to may well have much more intelligence than the example the OP is asking about. What passes as "ok" in these cheap testers doesnt always function in real circuits, thats the biggest problem as it provides a false sense of security/validation.
This is the weirdest hill to die on.
First off, about your great advice about how I should use continuity mode for the tests described above- you realise a diode or transistor can fail open as well as short, right? A quick diode test will give you a ballpark idea of a working device and you can move on from there. The fact that you don't get this ought to automatically disqualify you from this conversation because this is real troubleshooting 101 shit.
These devices are NOT analogous to continuity testers. I can put 3 different IC's in them one after another and it will tell me what they are or if they're cooked. Absolutely nobody in their right mind has any expectation that they will pick obscure/intermittent faults that might cause them not to match the data sheet specs, this is just some bizarre bee you have in your bonnet about them. Nobody is using these things to launch rockets, it's just a go/no go tool to speed up troubleshooting. You still need to use your brain and judgement beyond that point if there are doubts about a part.
With regard to your argument that it's not a real world test- welcome to planet earth. Do you think a multimeter is a real world test for resistors/capacitors/diodes/etc? Of course it isn't. It doesn't need to be. It'll tell me if a part reads roughly what it should under simple, low voltage conditions and in most cases that is perfectly fine to get the job done. There are other more advanced tools available when required, and the same goes for IC testing.
Lol, I point out a comparative example/analogy and you nail that to the nth percent rather than stick to the thread topic?
As above, if they are a go/no-go tester then where is the threshold for pass/fail? what do they actually test? You and Fungus seem to be ignoring that while claiming they are perfectly good testers. I say it isn't a tester because there is no documentation or evidence of what has been tested.
I put all that context in my opening post yet you come back and try to argue... something?
Probably more correctly described as a IC identifier rather than a tester, there are no pass/fail criteria or performance measurement as would be associated with testing.
Everyone else in the thread is more realistic and agrees they are some basic tool which is of little confidence. Many posters offered slightly more expensive tools that offer documentation and defined test capability along with increased functionality.
So how about instead of just making noise you actually lay out your explanation of what they test, and why that is useful. Saying they tell you if the item is "working" is some non specific threshold, untrustworthy, particularly these extreme low cost items where the underlying implementation is subject to change (as it was never specified or documented) as long as it still meets the advertised function of telling you which logical pinout the chip is (identification).
Mate... are you serious? There are people here going "I use this effectively for troubleshooting" and your argument is what exactly? That even though it does what we need, we shouldn't use them because you have a weird phobia?
I go back to what I just said about real world testing and thresholds- almost none of the tools we use daily test components under real world conditions. No multimeter out there is going to red flag a noisy plate resistor or excessive leakage on a capacitor, and by the same token these IC testers aren't expected to tell you if the high/low threshold is wonky by a few millivolts in a part. What is it about this you don't understand?
-
I put all that context in my opening post yet you come back and try to argue... something?
Probably more correctly described as a IC identifier rather than a tester, there are no pass/fail criteria or performance measurement as would be associated with testing.
Everyone else in the thread is more realistic and agrees they are some basic tool which is of little confidence. Many posters offered slightly more expensive tools that offer documentation and defined test capability along with increased functionality.
So how about instead of just making noise you actually lay out your explanation of what they test, and why that is useful. Saying they tell you if the item is "working" is some non specific threshold, untrustworthy, particularly these extreme low cost items where the underlying implementation is subject to change (as it was never specified or documented) as long as it still meets the advertised function of telling you which logical pinout the chip is (identification).
Mate... are you serious? There are people here going "I use this effectively for troubleshooting" and your argument is what exactly? That even though it does what we need, we shouldn't use them because you have a weird phobia?
I go back to what I just said about real world testing and thresholds- almost none of the tools we use daily test components under real world conditions. No multimeter out there is going to red flag a noisy plate resistor or excessive leakage on a capacitor, and by the same token these IC testers aren't expected to tell you if the high/low threshold is wonky by a few millivolts in a part. What is it about this you don't understand?
You're the one who keeps quoting my comments with some sort of bizarre disagreement to it. I'm pointing out your disagreements have no substance. So what exactly are these devices testing?
I put it really simply above (quoted it again, and included it in the context with this post just so there can be no misunderstanding) and now you appear to agree with that opening statement, but are still arguing what exactly?
-
Not true, they definitely can test *some* op amps. On mine it's only a handful, but I keep wondering if newer firmware has added any more.
What is not true? That I don't think they have any value for testing analog ICs? Can you read my mind? I didn't say they couldn't do any test on op amps, just that I don't think it's a very useful test. Never mind other analog ICs like motor drivers or tape head amplifiers.
What do you mean it supports a handful of op amps? I can imagine doing a basic dc test for single and dual op amps, the same you can do with a breadboard, a few resistors and an LED.
But why would it need to support more than a generic single, dual and quad op amp? Is it going to test parameters that are different between a ua741, op07 or tl081? Slew rate? GBW? Offset voltage? Bias current? That would be useful for checking for counterfeit ICs, especially if they could give quantitative results. But I highly doubt the cheap IC testers are going to do those tests.
-
No multimeter out there is going to red flag a noisy plate resistor or excessive leakage on a capacitor, and by the same token these IC testers aren't expected to tell you if the high/low threshold is wonky by a few millivolts in a part.
Oh a MC meter can in resistance mode.
Used that many years back to find faulty ignition caps.
Electronic ignitions saw the end to that need.
-
I put all that context in my opening post yet you come back and try to argue... something?
Probably more correctly described as a IC identifier rather than a tester, there are no pass/fail criteria or performance measurement as would be associated with testing.
Everyone else in the thread is more realistic and agrees they are some basic tool which is of little confidence. Many posters offered slightly more expensive tools that offer documentation and defined test capability along with increased functionality.
So how about instead of just making noise you actually lay out your explanation of what they test, and why that is useful. Saying they tell you if the item is "working" is some non specific threshold, untrustworthy, particularly these extreme low cost items where the underlying implementation is subject to change (as it was never specified or documented) as long as it still meets the advertised function of telling you which logical pinout the chip is (identification).
Mate... are you serious? There are people here going "I use this effectively for troubleshooting" and your argument is what exactly? That even though it does what we need, we shouldn't use them because you have a weird phobia?
I go back to what I just said about real world testing and thresholds- almost none of the tools we use daily test components under real world conditions. No multimeter out there is going to red flag a noisy plate resistor or excessive leakage on a capacitor, and by the same token these IC testers aren't expected to tell you if the high/low threshold is wonky by a few millivolts in a part. What is it about this you don't understand?
You're the one who keeps quoting my comments with some sort of bizarre disagreement to it. I'm pointing out your disagreements have no substance. So what exactly are these devices testing?
I put it really simply above (quoted it again, and included it in the context with this post just so there can be no misunderstanding) and now you appear to agree with that opening statement, but are still arguing what exactly?
Sorry mate, again- what is your point with all of this? I'm telling you I have one and it is helpful at work. Are you arguing that it isn't helpful? Are you only really arguing about the semantics of what we call these things? Or just that the results aren't as reliable as tests done on the test setups manufacturers use to get their specs? You keep ranting on about the finer details of the tests despite the fact that literally nobody cares about the finer details of the tests, only that we get a ballpark idea of whether or not a part works or not. Again, nobody is using these to test ICs going into space.
Let's try another example and see if this one clicks.
Those cheap 3 terminal multifunction testers that do LCR/transistors/etc. I use one all the time for checking go/no go status, checking pinouts, etc. It doesn't test under real world conditions, I don't know or care what exactly the test method is, and I don't trust or care about the particular measurement numbers it spits out. If those details matter I have dedicated, proper equipment for detailed measurements, but it's very rarely needed in practice. In most cases the 5 second test on the $10 tester tells me what I need to know in the moment and I can get on with the job.
-
Not true, they definitely can test *some* op amps. On mine it's only a handful, but I keep wondering if newer firmware has added any more.
What is not true? That I don't think they have any value for testing analog ICs? Can you read my mind? I didn't say they couldn't do any test on op amps, just that I don't think it's a very useful test. Never mind other analog ICs like motor drivers or tape head amplifiers.
What do you mean it supports a handful of op amps? I can imagine doing a basic dc test for single and dual op amps, the same you can do with a breadboard, a few resistors and an LED.
But why would it need to support more than a generic single, dual and quad op amp? Is it going to test parameters that are different between a ua741, op07 or tl081? Slew rate? GBW? Offset voltage? Bias current? That would be useful for checking for counterfeit ICs, especially if they could give quantitative results. But I highly doubt the cheap IC testers are going to do those tests.
You said you didn't think these are of any value for op amps. That's what I was saying was not true, based on the fact that I have identified tonnes of bad op amps with these in seconds flat.
Of course you can test op amps with breadboards and external components, but who the hell has the kind of time on their hands to fuck around like that at work? I don't make a habit of carrying a breadboard kit to a callout.
Nobody is suggesting it can/could/would test for the finer details of things like slew rate etc. I don't know how to drive this point home any harder- these are go/no go testers, not complete measurement suites. They DON'T need to support more than standard op amp packages- if this is in response to my question about supporting a wider variety of op amps, I mean that there are some it recognises and some it doesn't (e.g. both dual op amps, same pinout, but different models). No idea about the inner workings of why that is, hence my curiosity about whether these libraries have been expanded or if the issue is the test method itself. For supported ICs though, it works consistently for me.
-
Not true, they definitely can test *some* op amps. On mine it's only a handful, but I keep wondering if newer firmware has added any more.
What is not true? That I don't think they have any value for testing analog ICs? Can you read my mind? I didn't say they couldn't do any test on op amps, just that I don't think it's a very useful test. Never mind other analog ICs like motor drivers or tape head amplifiers.
What do you mean it supports a handful of op amps? I can imagine doing a basic dc test for single and dual op amps, the same you can do with a breadboard, a few resistors and an LED.
But why would it need to support more than a generic single, dual and quad op amp? Is it going to test parameters that are different between a ua741, op07 or tl081? Slew rate? GBW? Offset voltage? Bias current? That would be useful for checking for counterfeit ICs, especially if they could give quantitative results. But I highly doubt the cheap IC testers are going to do those tests.
You said you didn't think these are of any value for op amps. That's what I was saying was not true, based on the fact that I have identified tonnes of bad op amps with these in seconds flat.
You believe that, and we don't. It's some arbitrary distinction of what you want as the threshold for "works" and what we want as the threshold. Rather than saying we're wrong (because we're not) why not explain your reasons rather than just attacking what we say as if its incorrect (which you cannot seem to build an argument to support).
Real simple, if you think it is a good test, what is it testing?
If you don't know what it is testing I say it is a bad test, and given it returns only a binary result barely able to be called a test.
Those cheap 3 terminal multifunction testers that do LCR/transistors/etc. I use one all the time for checking go/no go status, checking pinouts, etc. It doesn't test under real world conditions, I don't know or care what exactly the test method is, and I don't trust or care about the particular measurement numbers it spits out. If those details matter I have dedicated, proper equipment for detailed measurements, but it's very rarely needed in practice. In most cases the 5 second test on the $10 tester tells me what I need to know in the moment and I can get on with the job.
I feel the 3 terminal testers are vastly more useful and powerful as (the ones I have used) return some parameters that the user can make judgements from and allow insight into what the pass/fail criteria is. Just as some IC testers do, but not the one the OP asked about, which I say is generally a waste of time as you have no idea what it is claiming.
-
I have built the Tauntek tester and it works great for logic chips, 7400, 4000 cmos etc. I would replace it if something happened to it, as its useful to me in my lab. That being said, I enjoy working on 70 and 80is test equipment that used those types of chips. For OpAmps I have scratch built a few versions of the testers offered by night fire electronics, and they are good go/no go testers. All of this just speeds up testing of failed chips, none of them stress test the parts to their limits, that is just not what they are designed to do.
-
Not true, they definitely can test *some* op amps. On mine it's only a handful, but I keep wondering if newer firmware has added any more.
What is not true? That I don't think they have any value for testing analog ICs? Can you read my mind? I didn't say they couldn't do any test on op amps, just that I don't think it's a very useful test. Never mind other analog ICs like motor drivers or tape head amplifiers.
What do you mean it supports a handful of op amps? I can imagine doing a basic dc test for single and dual op amps, the same you can do with a breadboard, a few resistors and an LED.
But why would it need to support more than a generic single, dual and quad op amp? Is it going to test parameters that are different between a ua741, op07 or tl081? Slew rate? GBW? Offset voltage? Bias current? That would be useful for checking for counterfeit ICs, especially if they could give quantitative results. But I highly doubt the cheap IC testers are going to do those tests.
You said you didn't think these are of any value for op amps. That's what I was saying was not true, based on the fact that I have identified tonnes of bad op amps with these in seconds flat.
You believe that, and we don't. It's some arbitrary distinction of what you want as the threshold for "works" and what we want as the threshold. Rather than saying we're wrong (because we're not) why not explain your reasons rather than just attacking what we say as if its incorrect (which you cannot seem to build an argument to support).
Real simple, if you think it is a good test, what is it testing?
If you don't know what it is testing I say it is a bad test, and given it returns only a binary result barely able to be called a test.
Those cheap 3 terminal multifunction testers that do LCR/transistors/etc. I use one all the time for checking go/no go status, checking pinouts, etc. It doesn't test under real world conditions, I don't know or care what exactly the test method is, and I don't trust or care about the particular measurement numbers it spits out. If those details matter I have dedicated, proper equipment for detailed measurements, but it's very rarely needed in practice. In most cases the 5 second test on the $10 tester tells me what I need to know in the moment and I can get on with the job.
I feel the 3 terminal testers are vastly more useful and powerful as (the ones I have used) return some parameters that the user can make judgements from and allow insight into what the pass/fail criteria is. Just as some IC testers do, but not the one the OP asked about, which I say is generally a waste of time as you have no idea what it is claiming.
Huuuuuge armchair expert vibes going on here.
I don't care if you "believe" these aren't of any value for troubleshooting, given that I make a living troubleshooting electronics and these have found a place in my toolkit.
You keep looping back to the testing parameters over and over again, despite the fact that absolutely nobody is using these for characterising devices. I can't tell if you're illiterate, inexperienced or just trolling here.
Have you actually used one of these and had issues with results, or is your issue here all in your head?
-
Not true, they definitely can test *some* op amps. On mine it's only a handful, but I keep wondering if newer firmware has added any more.
What is not true? That I don't think they have any value for testing analog ICs? Can you read my mind? I didn't say they couldn't do any test on op amps, just that I don't think it's a very useful test. Never mind other analog ICs like motor drivers or tape head amplifiers.
What do you mean it supports a handful of op amps? I can imagine doing a basic dc test for single and dual op amps, the same you can do with a breadboard, a few resistors and an LED.
But why would it need to support more than a generic single, dual and quad op amp? Is it going to test parameters that are different between a ua741, op07 or tl081? Slew rate? GBW? Offset voltage? Bias current? That would be useful for checking for counterfeit ICs, especially if they could give quantitative results. But I highly doubt the cheap IC testers are going to do those tests.
You said you didn't think these are of any value for op amps. That's what I was saying was not true, based on the fact that I have identified tonnes of bad op amps with these in seconds flat.
You believe that, and we don't. It's some arbitrary distinction of what you want as the threshold for "works" and what we want as the threshold. Rather than saying we're wrong (because we're not) why not explain your reasons rather than just attacking what we say as if its incorrect (which you cannot seem to build an argument to support).
Real simple, if you think it is a good test, what is it testing?
If you don't know what it is testing I say it is a bad test, and given it returns only a binary result barely able to be called a test.
Those cheap 3 terminal multifunction testers that do LCR/transistors/etc. I use one all the time for checking go/no go status, checking pinouts, etc. It doesn't test under real world conditions, I don't know or care what exactly the test method is, and I don't trust or care about the particular measurement numbers it spits out. If those details matter I have dedicated, proper equipment for detailed measurements, but it's very rarely needed in practice. In most cases the 5 second test on the $10 tester tells me what I need to know in the moment and I can get on with the job.
I feel the 3 terminal testers are vastly more useful and powerful as (the ones I have used) return some parameters that the user can make judgements from and allow insight into what the pass/fail criteria is. Just as some IC testers do, but not the one the OP asked about, which I say is generally a waste of time as you have no idea what it is claiming.
Huuuuuge armchair expert vibes going on here.
I don't care if you "believe" these aren't of any value for troubleshooting, given that I make a living troubleshooting electronics and these have found a place in my toolkit.
You keep looping back to the testing parameters over and over again, despite the fact that absolutely nobody is using these for characterising devices. I can't tell if you're illiterate, inexperienced or just trolling here.
Have you actually used one of these and had issues with results, or is your issue here all in your head?
You say you trust it but cannot say what it does? Great, leave it at that. Why keep coming back in combative argumentative mode?
If a product can not tell me what it is doing (and has no specifications) I treat that as a toy and value it accordingly, that is what I keep communicating and you keep coming back with more disagreement. You value it differently, both points of view have been put forward and I'm not arguing against your opinion of that. I'm pointing out your arguments against my posts are baseless, and continue to be so.
If I want to know if a part is working I'll test it in representative conditions, not some undefined mode. Have I debugged and fixed equipment in the field (away from a workshop or lab) ? sure have, and would not place any value in the cheap toy that the OP was asking about. You see that value judgement differently which is ok, but you seem to think it is ok to keep coming back and arguing that I cannot have such an opinion (and failing to explain or back up your claims that others opinions are wrong, just because you disagree does not mean it is wrong).
From my point of view you do care (keep coming back and choosing to quote specific comments + reply to them), and are unable to engage in basic discussion (as you simply dismiss other viewpoints without any basis and ignore direct questions).
-
Not true, they definitely can test *some* op amps. On mine it's only a handful, but I keep wondering if newer firmware has added any more.
What is not true? That I don't think they have any value for testing analog ICs? Can you read my mind? I didn't say they couldn't do any test on op amps, just that I don't think it's a very useful test. Never mind other analog ICs like motor drivers or tape head amplifiers.
What do you mean it supports a handful of op amps? I can imagine doing a basic dc test for single and dual op amps, the same you can do with a breadboard, a few resistors and an LED.
But why would it need to support more than a generic single, dual and quad op amp? Is it going to test parameters that are different between a ua741, op07 or tl081? Slew rate? GBW? Offset voltage? Bias current? That would be useful for checking for counterfeit ICs, especially if they could give quantitative results. But I highly doubt the cheap IC testers are going to do those tests.
You said you didn't think these are of any value for op amps. That's what I was saying was not true, based on the fact that I have identified tonnes of bad op amps with these in seconds flat.
You believe that, and we don't. It's some arbitrary distinction of what you want as the threshold for "works" and what we want as the threshold. Rather than saying we're wrong (because we're not) why not explain your reasons rather than just attacking what we say as if its incorrect (which you cannot seem to build an argument to support).
Real simple, if you think it is a good test, what is it testing?
If you don't know what it is testing I say it is a bad test, and given it returns only a binary result barely able to be called a test.
Those cheap 3 terminal multifunction testers that do LCR/transistors/etc. I use one all the time for checking go/no go status, checking pinouts, etc. It doesn't test under real world conditions, I don't know or care what exactly the test method is, and I don't trust or care about the particular measurement numbers it spits out. If those details matter I have dedicated, proper equipment for detailed measurements, but it's very rarely needed in practice. In most cases the 5 second test on the $10 tester tells me what I need to know in the moment and I can get on with the job.
I feel the 3 terminal testers are vastly more useful and powerful as (the ones I have used) return some parameters that the user can make judgements from and allow insight into what the pass/fail criteria is. Just as some IC testers do, but not the one the OP asked about, which I say is generally a waste of time as you have no idea what it is claiming.
Huuuuuge armchair expert vibes going on here.
I don't care if you "believe" these aren't of any value for troubleshooting, given that I make a living troubleshooting electronics and these have found a place in my toolkit.
You keep looping back to the testing parameters over and over again, despite the fact that absolutely nobody is using these for characterising devices. I can't tell if you're illiterate, inexperienced or just trolling here.
Have you actually used one of these and had issues with results, or is your issue here all in your head?
You say you trust it but cannot say what it does? Great, leave it at that. Why keep coming back in combative argumentative mode?
If a product can not tell me what it is doing (and has no specifications) I treat that as a toy and value it accordingly, that is what I keep communicating and you keep coming back with more disagreement. You value it differently, both points of view have been put forward and I'm not arguing against your opinion of that. I'm pointing out your arguments against my posts are baseless, and continue to be so.
If I want to know if a part is working I'll test it in representative conditions, not some undefined mode. Have I debugged and fixed equipment in the field (away from a workshop or lab) ? sure have, and would not place any value in the cheap toy that the OP was asking about. You see that value judgement differently which is ok, but you seem to think it is ok to keep coming back and arguing that I cannot have such an opinion (and failing to explain or back up your claims that others opinions are wrong, just because you disagree does not mean it is wrong).
From my point of view you do care (keep coming back and choosing to quote specific comments + reply to them), and are unable to engage in basic discussion (as you simply dismiss other viewpoints without any basis and ignore direct questions).
Issue is all in your head, got it.
-
You believe that, and we don't.
Who's "we"?
-
If a product can not tell me what it is doing (and has no specifications) I treat that as a toy
The source code is available. Feel free to download it and find out for yourself.
Do you really think that nobody who's coding this would make an effort to (eg.) check all combinations of inputs to a 7400-series chip to make sure it outputs correct values?
-
If a product can not tell me what it is doing (and has no specifications) I treat that as a toy
The source code is available. Feel free to download it and find out for yourself.
Where?
Or are you confusing the well documented and more complex examples linked to in this thread as suggestions, vs the toy the OP opened with questions about?
Do you really think that nobody who's coding this would make an effort to (eg.) check all combinations of inputs to a 7400-series chip to make sure it outputs correct values?
Where has anyone suggested that? As I keep saying, testing logic combinations is pretty much the only thing those low cost "testers" do. Doesnt meet the dictionary definition of a test, and is better described as identifying.
-
On a sidenote.
If you are interested in IC testing, look into an "IV tester" (as in current and voltage).
These things can detect "fake" and rebranded IC's even if they are "funcional", and can probably also detect ESD damage even if the IC is still "mostly working", but "just out of spec".