LCR meter opinion

[Crambone]

As a newbie in the electronics hobby I’m looking at the DE-5000 and wanted opinions and maybe suggestions for other type LCR meter?

[AJ3G]

I too had been looking at the DE-5000. I ultimately decided on the Applent AT826, which can be purchased for very reasonable prices on sites such as Alliexpress. I have never owned a DE-5000, so I cannot offer a personal comparison, but I watched a lot of videos and product reviews on the DE-5000. All reviews of the DE-5000 have been very positive, so either way you go, I am sure you will be happy.

Rich

[nctnico]

First question: what do you want to do with it?

[Martin72]

Hi,

I’m looking at the DE-5000 and wanted opinions

I own this since over a year and I´m confident with it.
Took it to work and compared it with some of our yearly calibrated LCRs (Keysight, GenRad for example) and the results were very close to the other ones, nice.
Like the compared ones, you can use it for the most common coils, for power coils other measuring methods are better.

Martin

[kripton2035]

the Applent AT826 has better specifications than the de5000, but it's 4x the price ...
for hobby, the de5000 is more than enough.

[AJ3G]

I just took a look. The AT826 is listed on AlliExpress for $296.00. I think after discounts I had with Alliexpress, I paid closer to $220.00 for it a year ago. On Amazon the DE-5000 is running between $129.00 - $138.00USD.

Rich

[Andrew_Debbie]

As a newbie in the electronics hobby I’m looking at the DE-5000 and wanted opinions and maybe suggestions for other type LCR meter?

My very old Tenma (GW Instek?) LCR meter died.

I've got a Uni-T UT622A on the way.

622A 

100Hz, 120Hz, 1KHz, 10KHz    99999 Count
0.00pF~99.999mF
0.00μH~99.999H
ESR 0.0000Ω~999.99Ω

Uni-T do not specify accuracy on the various ranges  It could be dreadful at 1pF and 1μH. 



There are big differences in maximum ranges.  For example the UT-622 series max out at 99.999H while the DE-5000 can go all the way to 2.0KH.   That is a very big inductor.


If 100kHz is important, the ~$300 UT-622E adds a 100kHz test freq and DC resistance with .01milliOhm resolution.

https://www.uni-trend.com/meters/html/product/tyyq/ComponentTesting/UT622%20Series/

https://www.deree.com.tw/de-5000-lcr-meter.html

[Martin72]

the Applent AT826 has better specifications than the de5000

At826 got a "basic accuracy" of 0.2%, whatever this means - At any range...?
DE 5000 got "worser" accuracy, but listed for every range separately.

for hobby, the de5000 is more than enough.

Absolutely.

[indman]

As a newbie in the electronics hobby I’m looking at the DE-5000 and wanted opinions and maybe suggestions for other type LCR meter?

The DE-5000's agnalogue, the Mastech MS5308, may be considered. The DE-5000 is a good instrument, but it has problems at 100kHz that the MS5308 doesn't have.

[Wallace Gasiewicz]

Pardon me for butting in .
I have old HP LCRs HP4332 Analog (KHz ) and 4271B 1MHz (1MHz)digital
Neither reads high impedances, I use a cheapo for this.

How do these new LCRs do at very low impedances. Like nanoHenrys and less than one pF

Wally

[Martin72]

but it has problems at 100kHz that the MS5308 doesn't have.

Which problems?

[coromonadalix]

the mastech and de-5000 are based on the same ic's ??

[indman]

the mastech and de-5000 are based on the same ic's ??

Yes, but nevertheless there is a difference in work and not in favor of DE-5000 
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/any-one-mod-the-de-5000-for-1mhz-frequency/msg2626974/#msg2626974

[Martin72]

Testing 2µF with 100khz and wondering why it won´t work proper.

[coromonadalix]

you dont test a 2uf at 100 khz   you test it at 50-60 100 and 120 hz

snipet taken from a web page

Virtually all electrolytic capacitors will cease being capacitive at all before 100kHz, and beyond that, will be inductive.
This is universal to all electrolytic capacitors. Generally, an electrolytic capacitor will gain about 10% capacitance if the DC capacitance is measured.
It will lose about 10% by 1kHz (or more in the case of your capacitors - but they say they are designed for DC and ripple applications, so they are probably not optimized for anything above 120Hz).


And this link

https://forum.digikey.com/t/measuring-a-capacitor/4265

and this one,  a 4.5 meg pdf
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi39bT_1pv0AhUNzYUKHd6UCnEQFnoECBIQAw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.venkel.com%2Fmedia%2Fwysiwyg%2Ftechnical%2Fdocs%2Ftechnical-papers%2FTesting_and_Measurement_Practices_of_High_Capacitance_Capacitors.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3NmsPp_o7DinutdRxvwplk

[masterx81]

Sorry for the stupid question, but how they work in a ripple application, if the frequency of the ripple is quite high? Most of the times after the rectfier stage of an smps (working anywhere from 10khz to 100khz) there are only low esr electrolytic caps...

[indman]

you dont test a 2uf at 100 khz   you test it at 50-60 100 and 120 hz
Virtually all electrolytic capacitors will cease being capacitive at all before 100kHz, and beyond that, will be inductive.

You're talking about the truths that everyone knows. But what do electrolytic capacitors and their properties have to do with the measurement of high quality Films capacitors? The link I provided compares the D and ESR readings of 2 units at 10 and 100kHz for Films Capacitors. No electrolytes or ceramics! Explain to me why MS5308 shows adequate results at these frequencies, while DE-5000 overestimates them by 100 times?
Here is more links to such measurements https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/esr-meter-adapter-design-and-construction/msg425088/#msg425088
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/esr-meter-adapter-design-and-construction/msg425012/#msg425012

[orzel]

Sorry for the stupid question, but how they work in a ripple application, if the frequency of the ripple is quite high? Most of the times after the rectfy stage of an smps (working anywhere from 10khz to 100khz) there are only low esr electrolytic caps...

I was wondereing too. Anyone ?

[Trader]

For the DE-5000 you can transform the probes in a real 4-wire measurement, which improves the accuracy.

[Ungolian]

Hi all, after going through the threads for the DE-5000 and the Hantek 1833c, I haven't really seen anything about how these two compare head-to-head.  They both seem to do the same tests, similar accuracy, and the only real differences seem to be price, the Hantek has more bells and whistles, and is fancier overall.  The DE-5000 is more minimal, but basically does the same thing.  Not sure if any owners care to chime in on their experiences with long term use, issues, durability, etc.  I'm looking to purchase one of the two.  The Hantek is obviously sexier.  The DE-5000 is more bare-bones, and a part of me is wondering how many corners they cut to get it to that price point.  I'd mainly be using it for diagnosing older audio through-hole equipment, to speed up the process, triage what really needs to be replaced.  Thanks!     

[kripton2035]

it seems you have one more digit on the hantek vs de5000, and more test frequencies (will you ever use them ?)
not sure if it's worth twice the price for hobby use ?
for me you need a $1000+ device to get something really better than a de5000.

[AJ3G]

Hello:

You may want to review the following video from “Kiss Analog”:

https://youtu.be/6_6KMnD4f0E

In this video he discusses both models and compares, so I think you may find this useful.

I am still pretty happy with the Applent AT826, which I use now at the office. It can be bought for the low two hundred dollar range if you look around.

Rich

[TERRA Operative]

I have a DE-5000 and I like it. I also did the kelvin clip mod. youtube.com/watch?v=PxCG-p-D9vI

It reads close enough to my HP 4276A to keep me happy.

[Vojtech]

Consider also ET432, I am very satisfied with it, I think it is a better choice than DE5000

[Ungolian]

Thank you all for the feedback and video link.  The ET432 seems really interesting.  Not sure how I feel about an unknown Chinese brand though (never heard of East Tester).  Hantek will definitely have better support, and probably better QC.  I'm always a little cautious about that stuff.  Honestly, the DE-5000 is probably the right one for what I need.  It doesn't need to be high precision, I just need it to reliably test high voltage electrolytics, small caps down to 100pf, resistors, and various transformers (power, output, and chokes) in circuit.     

[rsjsouza]

As a newbie in the electronics hobby I’m looking at the DE-5000 and wanted opinions and maybe suggestions for other type LCR meter?

The DE-5000's agnalogue, the Mastech MS5308, may be considered. The DE-5000 is a good instrument, but it has problems at 100kHz that the MS5308 doesn't have.

Interesting; I didn't know the DE-5000 had these issues. In this case, you might also consider the Reed R5001, which works very well at this frequency.

It does not have four wire measurements, but its relative mode works very well.

[AJ3G]

I have never seen a REED before. Kind of looks like a CEM. Is REED and CEM one in the same?

Rich

[rsjsouza]

Yes, it is a CEM rebrand.
DT-9935
https://www.cem-instruments.com/en/Product/detail/id/1147

[Martin72]

Interesting; I didn't know the DE-5000 had these issues.

It isn´t an issue as long as you use the meter according to it´s specs.

[indman]

It isn´t an issue as long as you use the meter according to it´s specs.

This is an issue with the DE-5000 and a very unpleasant problem, since it is used according to the specification.
If an appliance has flaws, there is no need to hide them and write nonsense without understanding the problem.

[rsjsouza]

Indeed. Does it show in its manual a tremendously low accuracy specification for D at 100kHz? (The problem at hand in the other thread, as I understand it)

If so, then it is indeed operating as specified. Otherwise, look elsewhere if you need this frequency range.

[indman]

Indeed. Does it show in its manual a tremendously low accuracy specification for D at 100kHz?

Where in the manual does it say that the D parameter and the ESR have a really low accuracy at 100kHz? Finally, can someone explain to me, why MS5308 shows adequate results at 100kHz and is built on the same component base as DE-5000? Does it have a different D and ESR parameter accuracy claimed at 100kHz in manual?

[rsjsouza]

I don't know; I don't have this meter.

It was a question to Martin since he is so sure the device is operating under its specs...

[Martin72]

Hi,
Sorry guys,
I was completely convinced that the entire µF range of the table in the specifications at 100Khz included a dash, which means out of specs.
Then looked at the manual...
But.... there´s something strange in this table...
I think the few entries in the 100khz for µF range are faulty.
Will take my DE5000 to work and test the 100khz against our two calibrated LCRs.

Martin

[rsjsouza]

Interesting to see some of the blanked regions of the spec sheet, thanks for sharing.

Despite the Reed R5001 uses the same chipset, it has a more complete spec sheet.



However it does not come without flaws as well. I just recalled an ancient thread that discuss these flaws and proposed solutions. It also links to other threads with rebrands of the same model. 
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/reviews/reed-r5001-lcr-meter/

[Martin72]

Will take my DE5000 to work and test the 100khz against our two calibrated LCRs.

So I did today, but there was a strange thing that got me stop so far for further investigation.

At work we got a handheld calibrated LCR, keysight 1733C, and a stationary from sourcetronic.
DUT was a cap, a special one for snubbing from wima, 1µF.
First step was cap measure in itself.
Measuring with the sourcetronic, cap was 1.001µF at 100khz.
Keysight measured 0.993 µF.
DE5000 measured 0.950µF.
So far so good, but..
Keysight and DE5000 uses the alligator clip thing with short wires, the sourcetronic got kelvin clamp leads.
But for the sourcetronic we also got a test fixure with very short ways.
When I´ve used this thing, sourcetronic will measure....0.950µF.
So what to choose...must think about it, then repeat the measures from today, post them here.

Martin

[Martin72]

Hi,

I´ve changed the cap, the snubber one got not 100% contact areas, as it doesn´t got normal wire leads.
So I´ve taken a MKP 1µF, 250V cap and measure it.

1Khz:

U1733C            ST2830         DE5000

1.000µF            1.0008µF      1.0001µF
D0.000             D0.000         D0.000

10Khz:           

1.000µF            1.0007µF     1.0000µF
D0.031             D0.000        D0.001

100Khz:

1.044µF            1.0069µF     1.0029µF
D0.141             D0.010        D0.013

Everything´s fine with the DE5000....
Next days, I´ll measure a greater value, 2.2µF or little bit higher.

Martin

[mawyatt]

The SourceTronic 2830 looks like a rebranded Tonghui TH2830.

Best,

[indman]

Martin72,If this is not a measurement error, then I understand that the U1733C at 10 and 100kHz is already out of the list of reliable meters? The D reading is already 10 times higher than the other 2 units.

[Martin72]

Hi,

Yes, that was the surprise at this afternoon - The U1733C shows the behaviour the DE5000 should have, according to the other thread.
But let´s see what a greater values does, maybe tomorrow.

@mawyatt:

We got it from here:

https://www.sourcetronic.com/shop/en/lcr-meters/

[indman]

The U1733C shows the behaviour the DE5000 should have, according to the other thread.

If you look again at my measuring results and also pantelei4,you will see that problems with DE-5000 starts close to the 2μF margin.

[Martin72]

Therefore I wrote, I´ll test further with greater values.

[T_guttata]

I'm also currently looking for a reasonnably priced LCR Meter where you could possibly also measure small resistances  (4K probes).

In the range of $200 there are more options around.

Did you have a look at the Peak Tech devices?

https://www.peaktech.de/uk/Products/Electrical-engineering/LCR-component-tester/LCR-meters/

There are several options starting at about $50. I have a power supply from Peaktech.

The biggest difference seems to be the range of capacity and inductivity.

[nctnico]

Will take my DE5000 to work and test the 100khz against our two calibrated LCRs.

So I did today, but there was a strange thing that got me stop so far for further investigation.

At work we got a handheld calibrated LCR, keysight 1733C, and a stationary from sourcetronic.
DUT was a cap, a special one for snubbing from wima, 1µF.
First step was cap measure in itself.
Measuring with the sourcetronic, cap was 1.001µF at 100khz.
Keysight measured 0.993 µF.
DE5000 measured 0.950µF.
So far so good, but..
Keysight and DE5000 uses the alligator clip thing with short wires, the sourcetronic got kelvin clamp leads.
But for the sourcetronic we also got a test fixure with very short ways.
When I´ve used this thing, sourcetronic will measure....0.950µF.
So what to choose...must think about it, then repeat the measures from today, post them here.

I assume you have 'nulled' the wires & test fixture before making the measurements? At higher frequencies it is important to cancel the offsets introduced by the wires / test fixture of an LCR meter.

[Martin72]

Yepp.

Today afternoon a test with an wima mkp10 cap, 2.2µF:


1Khz:

U1733C            ST2830         DE5000

2.102µF            2.103µF       2.103µF
D0.001             D0.000         D0.000

10Khz:           

2.105µF            2.106µF       2.104µF
D0.018             D0.000        D0.000

100Khz:

2.351µF            2.389µF     2.121µF
D0.232             D0.015       D0.081

Still nothing to worry, next test perhaps with a 3.3 or 4.7µF - although it makes no sense at 100khz because of the high cap value.

[oz2cpu]

The SourceTronic 2830 looks like a rebranded Tonghui TH2830.
Best,

I own a TH2830, dont see any difference, please post more details about the ST2830
price ? where to purchase ?
the info screen ?

[Martin72]

Hi,

We got it from here:
https://www.sourcetronic.com/shop/en/lcr-meters/

[indman]

10Khz:           
2.105µF            2.106µF       2.104µF
D0.018             D0.000        D0.000
100Khz:
2.351µF            2.389µF     2.121µF
D0.232             D0.015       D0.081
Still nothing to worry

I strongly disagree, there is reason for concern, because the difference in the results for U1733 20 times, for DE-5000 - 80 times!

[nctnico]

10Khz:           
2.105µF            2.106µF       2.104µF
D0.018             D0.000        D0.000
100Khz:
2.351µF            2.389µF     2.121µF
D0.232             D0.015       D0.081
Still nothing to worry

I strongly disagree, there is reason for concern, because the difference in the results for U1733 20 times, for DE-5000 - 80 times!

You have to check the specs for the LCR meter. The accuracy depends greatly on the test frequency used. This has everything to do with the signal amplitude across the DUT at the test frequency. For example: a large capacitor has a lower impedance at higher frequencies so the voltage across a capacitor is smaller. In turn this means the accuracy becomes lower.

Still, the measurement results for the ST2830 at 100kHz should be much closer to 2.1uf; something is wrong here.

[TimFox]

The three meters agree tightly at 1 kHz on the nominal 2 uF part.
At higher frequencies, a bit of stray inductance in the test connections (not properly calibrated by the short correction) will affect the readings:  series inductance (including the self-inductance of the part) leads to an increased measured capacitance at higher frequency.

[indman]

You have to check the specs for the LCR meter.

This is fair, but now I see that 3 different instruments have readings at 10 and 100kHz differ by more than 200 times! What testimony should I trust in such a case? How do you reconcile this with such a measurements below?

[rsjsouza]

Yepp.

Today afternoon a test with an wima mkp10 cap, 2.2µF:


1Khz:

U1733C            ST2830         DE5000

2.102µF            2.103µF       2.103µF
D0.001             D0.000         D0.000

10Khz:           

2.105µF            2.106µF       2.104µF
D0.018             D0.000        D0.000

100Khz:

2.351µF            2.389µF     2.121µF
D0.232             D0.015       D0.081

Still nothing to worry, next test perhaps with a 3.3 or 4.7µF - although it makes no sense at 100khz because of the high cap value.

Thanks for doing this comparison, Martin. MKP tends to have a larger tan δ variation in comparison to similar materials (interesting TDK article)



My Reed R5001R reads the following on a few capacitors lingering around. All MKP

		2,5 µF				3,9 µF				6,8 µF
Freq		C	tan δ			C	tan δ			C	tan δ
1 kHz		2,379	0,003			3,535	0,000			6,801	0,001
10 kHz		2,340	0,015			3,509	0,007			6,754	0,006
100 kHz		2,23	0,099			3,47	0,082			6,89	0,065

[Martin72]

I strongly disagree, there is reason for concern, because the difference in the results for U1733 20 times, for DE-5000 - 80 times!

Hi,

What have we done...
We´ve measured cap values beyond their claimed specs.
In a meter-range with mostly undefined specs(in case of the de5000, for the two others I must have a look in their specs.)
This is not the way it should go.
Normally you got a look at the datasheet from the cap-manufacturer, on which frequency the values based.
For example, wima their special snubbercaps, all the values mentioned in the spec were measured with 10khz.
It makes no sense to measure the cap with 100khz and judging about the displayed values.
Apart from this:
I´ve taken some oscilloscope pics from the testfrequencies.
There´s an interesting behaviour on the keysight u1733c and de5000.
Both sending a sinewave to the DUT, which amplitude decreases the higher the testfrequency get.
So far, so good, the ST2830 does it too.
But, while the sinewave of the ST2830 is still an ac signal at 100Khz, the two others their signals are getting above zero-crossing.

MKP tends to have a larger tan δ variation in comparison to similar materials

Indeed, it´s getting more and more interesting for me, therefore I´ll do more cap-measurings and post them here.

[indman]

But, while the sinewave of the ST2830 is still an ac signal at 100Khz, the two others their signals are getting above zero-crossing.

A similar effect is also mentioned here and how do you explain it?
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/any-one-mod-the-de-5000-for-1mhz-frequency/msg2673546/#msg2673546

[Martin72]

Let me think about for a while..
It could be the reason, why the u1733c and de5000 showing more dissipation than the st2830.
Could, not will.

Here the pics..

[tautech]

Martin, probably a bit unfair to compare devices using 4GSa/s and 1GSa/s DSO's.

[nctnico]

I strongly disagree, there is reason for concern, because the difference in the results for U1733 20 times, for DE-5000 - 80 times!

Hi,

What have we done...
We´ve measured cap values beyond their claimed specs.
In a meter-range with mostly undefined specs(in case of the de5000, for the two others I must have a look in their specs.)
This is not the way it should go.
Normally you got a look at the datasheet from the cap-manufacturer, on which frequency the values based.
For example, wima their special snubbercaps, all the values mentioned in the spec were measured with 10khz.
It makes no sense to measure the cap with 100khz and judging about the displayed values.

That doesn't matter. The readings should still agree.

[Martin72]

@tautech:
Hm?
Shouldn´t make a difference in this case...

@nctnico:

That doesn't matter. The readings should still agree.

Agree to what ?

[nctnico]

@nctnico:

That doesn't matter. The readings should still agree.

Agree to what ?

Between eachother. All LCR meters measure the capacitance at a given frequency. So in whatever way the DUT is affected by the frequency, they should read the same value (within their accuracy specification).

[Martin72]

They do, see the values at 1khz and 10khz.
At 100 khz they differ for some reasons, but they all are in their specs.

[TimFox]

@nctnico:

That doesn't matter. The readings should still agree.

Agree to what ?

Between eachother. All LCR meters measure the capacitance at a given frequency. So in whatever way the DUT is affected by the frequency, they should read the same value (within their accuracy specification).

My point is that the change in measured capacitance is affected by the fixturing (including clips and lead length) and short-circuit calibration, which can differ slightly between LCR meters.

[Martin72]

Yes, therefore I will bring the three on the nearest level when doing the next measures.
Actually, the keysight got short 2-wire alligator clips.
DE5000 got short 4-wire alligator clips and ST2830 4-wire kelvin clips.
But all got these "direct" terminals (ST2830 a fixture for this), next time I´ll use these ones, when the cap allow it.

[TimFox]

Pay special attention to the connections for "short" calibration, to ensure that they are very equivalent to each other to get a repeatable parasitic inductance (outside of the internal inductance of the capacitor).
It might be better to use a very short piece of medium-heavy copper wire between the clips, rather than connect the clips to each other directly.

[Martin72]

Will have it in mind.

Interesting thing:

chinese bench lcr

[mawyatt]

Pay special attention to the connections for "short" calibration, to ensure that they are very equivalent to each other to get a repeatable parasitic inductance (outside of the internal inductance of the capacitor).
It might be better to use a very short piece of medium-heavy copper wire between the clips, rather than connect the clips to each other directly.

Agree, this is the inductive equivalent of removing the few femto farads from the test fixture. A small piece (20mm x 10mm x 3mm) of solid copper sheet works well as a good inductive & resistive shunt.

Best,

[Martin72]

Today I took several caps to work, starting to measure them, hope of finishing before the weekend starts.
1µ, 2.2µ, 3.3µ, 4.7µ and 8.2µF.
First I took the 8.2µ . ....You can forget it at 100khz..
Every LCR are showing nonsense at this frequency but that doesn´t surprise me much, I´ve expected it already.
It´s simply not the frequency for µFs.
Nevertheless, the values will be recorded in the table.
The 16µf the keysight shows, the 39µf the ST2830 shows and the 9.1µF the DE5000 shows (Winner!  )

Martin

[ogden]

First I took the 8.2µ . ....You can forget it at 100khz..
Every LCR are showing nonsense at this frequency but that doesn´t surprise me much, I´ve expected it already.

No wonder! Reactance of 8.2uF capacitor at 100 KHz is 0.1941 Ohms. Lowest impedance of most LCR meters is 100 Ohms meaning by measuring such a big capacitor at such a high frequency you are throwing resolution of your instrument out of the window. Only reason to measure such capacitor at 100KHz is to show that you don't know what you are doing

[Martin72]

I wasn't going to say it so directly, but now you have.
Thank you...

[ogden]

Right. Check specs of decent meter like U1733C and you will see that measurement accuracy for capacitors larger than 20pF is better at 1KHz rather than 10KHz or 100Khz. Inductor measurements are what you need 100KHz LCR meter for.

[edit] Decent primer of impedance measurement: https://www.keysight.com/zz/en/assets/7018-06840/application-notes/5950-3000.pdf

[Martin72]

Point is, I know that, many others too.
But some doesn´t and then they´re getting upset.
Meter is crap, faulty, have issues, not recommendable, and so on...
You doesn´t measure µF caps with more than 10khz, point.
When cap manufacturers don´t so, why should you.
Then the D-Factor thing...
On keysight and DER LCR, the D-factor will displayed with maximum 3 digits after the comma.
It´s  a kind of nonsense for most of the foil caps.
So mostly you´ll see only 0.000 in the display, when testing with the best suitable frequency.
The D-factor is a calculated parameter, based on the measure.
You can´t trust measurements with 100khz what µFs concerns - So you musn´t get upset, when the calculated D-factor rises up 80x in comparison to lower testfrequencies.
Best example is the test with the 8.2µF on the keysight.
It shows a dissipation of 4.26.....Before, with 10khz, it was 0.001...
So it should be clear to everyone, what that means.


Martin

[indman]

The DE-5000 has problems measuring high quality film capacitors at 100kHz and no one has convinced me otherwise. Best of luck with the measurements!

[Martin72]

When you don´t use the right frequency for testing, it´s not the problem of the lcr.
Here a couple of datasheets snippets from high quality foil capacitors, their dissipation factors(see attachments below).
They all have one thing in common, 100khz only for caps max 100nF(except 383 series from vishay).
I can understand your concerning, it shows something at 100khz you can´t trust.
But that is not important, it´s not a issue, a showstopper, a problem.
Because you don´t test mikro-farads with 100khz, sounds simple, is simple.
When the DE5000 would have this behaviour on the right frequency, then it will be a problem, a isssue, a no go thing.
But it don´t have it.
And it´s getting "better":
DE5000 and the unlikely more expenisve U1733C from keysight have one thing in common, the D-factor display is nearly useless for foil-caps because of the poor display resolution(lowest value 1x10-³ = 0.001).
The ST2830 fits better.

Martin

[nctnico]

Sorry but you are not convincing me by showing capacitor specifications. It is not like you can't use these capacitors above the frequencies used to measure / specify them.

Loss factor is frequency dependant so it will show different values at different frequencies. How much different depends on the dielectric losses which can vary wildly with frequency depending on the dielectric material used:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/dielectric-loss
https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/39574

In a real world scenario I would like to know how a several uF capacitor behaves at higher frequencies (heck, your LCR meter likely has a several uF capacitor at the input to seperate the DC bias from the signal and the designer very likely specified / measured them to assess fitness for the purpose). An LCR meter typically covers the lower frequencies where a network analyser typically doesn't work very well.


Bottom line: saying LCR meter can't measure capacitors at higher frequencies doesn't make sense. Your results scream measurement / equipment error to me. Are the Kelvin clips actually Kelvin clips? How about shielding?

For example: this 10uf 0402 capacitor is specified up to several GHz: https://www.murata.com/en-eu/products/productdetail?partno=GRM155D70G106ME18%23


I did some testing with my own LCR meter (GW Instek LCR-821 to be precise; an older higher end model) and I measured some polyester/MKT capacitors: 1.5uf, 1.8uf and 2.2uf from my parts bin (unfortunately the largest I have around is 2.2uf). They all read to within a few % of error from 100Hz to 200kHz using Kelvin clips. With every frequency change I performed an offset calibration (with a piece of busbar for the short test). As expected the dissipation factor changes with frequency. The 2.2uf goes from 0.0011 (@100Hz) to 0.043 (@ 200kHz).

[Martin72]

Bottom line: saying LCR meter can't measure capacitors at higher frequencies doesn't make sense. It screams measurement error to me.

I don´t tell that. 

It´s important to do measures according to the specs for getting more or less constant reproduceable results you or others can work with.
Specs what the selected cap concerns and what the measure device concerns.
Measuring values with a frequency higher/lower than the frequency on which the values based according to the datasheet means simply, that what you measure then is not specified.
Same when using a frequency range of the meter.
When you want to do measures with a frequency that covers all ranges of the meter, you must choose a frequency that will do so, according to the specs of the meter.
When you want to measure "higher" capacities with e.g 100khz for what reasons ever, you must use a meter which can do that.
It´s not a fault of the meter you used before.
When you test a cap beyond it´s specs with a meter beyond it´s specs, what do you expect to get ?

[Vgkid]

My LCR meter has a bunch of calculations to calculate the measured accuracy.
Most high end LCR / cap meters should use a accuracy formula...
the easy to use calculator for my unit:
https://www.ietlabs.com/notes/digibridge_accuracy_calculator

[nctnico]

Bottom line: saying LCR meter can't measure capacitors at higher frequencies doesn't make sense. It screams measurement error to me.

I don´t tell that. 

It´s important to do measures according to the specs for getting more or less constant reproduceable results you or others can work with.
Specs what the selected cap concerns and what the measure device concerns.
Measuring values with a frequency higher/lower than the frequency on which the values based according to the datasheet means simply, that what you measure then is not specified.

No. You are grossly mis-interpreting capacitor specifications! According to your logic capacitors should only be used at the frequency stated in the datasheet which is completely bonkers. The real problem with one or two datapoints in the datasheet is that you need an LCR meter to get yourself more datapoints if you are interested in those. Keep in mind that manufacturers want their parts to look good so they are more likely have left high dielectric loss figures out of the tables you posted for cosmetic reasons rather than not being able to measure them. OR that the losses at the maximum voltage rating exceed the thermal rating of the part; but that doesn't rule out using a higher voltage (physically larger) part at a lower voltage but higher frequency. The latter would require you to use an LCR meter to measure the losses at the maximum frequency you want to use the capacitor at.

And again, your wildly varying test results are measurement errors. I'm pretty sure that an LCR meter designed to go up to 100kHz can measure a capacitor with a value in single digits uf within a few percent of error (assuming the LCR meter has a reasonable base accuracy) IF the LCR meter is used properly.

[ogden]

Sorry but you are not convincing me by showing capacitor specifications. It is not like you can't use these capacitors above the frequencies used to measure / specify them.

We talk about measurements, not use. Specified at some frequency does not mean it can't be used or won't work at higher frequencies. Thou if you want *assured* performance at higher frequency than your capacitor specified at, you are using wrong component.

Bottom line: saying LCR meter can't measure capacitors at higher frequencies doesn't make sense. Your results scream measurement / equipment error to me. Are the Kelvin clips actually Kelvin clips? How about shielding?

Look into DER EE5000 datasheet - at 100KHz frequency max 10uF, 3% accuracy. Keysight U1733C has 5% accuracy for up-to 20uF at 100KHz. It's because of LCR meter, not capacitor limitations. Isn't that obvious for you already?

For example: this 10uf 0402 capacitor is specified up to several GHz: https://www.murata.com/en-eu/products/productdetail?partno=GRM155D70G106ME18%23

Capacitor indeed can be measured at any frequency, even up-to several GHz, but not using common LCR meter! For that impedance analyzers are used, like: https://www.hioki.com/global/products/lcr-meters/3-ghz/id_6618

[nctnico]

Sorry but you are not convincing me by showing capacitor specifications. It is not like you can't use these capacitors above the frequencies used to measure / specify them.

We talk about measurements, not use. Specified at some frequency does not mean it can't be used or won't work at higher frequencies. Thou if you want *assured* performance at higher frequency than your capacitor specified at, you are using wrong component.

That is what I would call a contradiction. You will want assured performance in any application!

I gave a perfect example which you appearantly have missed. Again: If my application doesn't need a low loss-factor at a given frequency, I'm not going to care that the loss factor isn't specified for a certain capacitor at that frequency. Just check the material specifications (graphs and links have been posted before) and measure a few samples to make sure what kind of ball-park figure the value is at to prevent potential problems.

Think about how audio equipment uses electrolytics in the audio path. In consumer equipment none of those capacitors are specified at 20kHz.

Bottom line: saying LCR meter can't measure capacitors at higher frequencies doesn't make sense. Your results scream measurement / equipment error to me. Are the Kelvin clips actually Kelvin clips? How about shielding?

Look into DER EE5000 datasheet - at 100KHz frequency max 10uF, 3% accuracy. Keysight U1733C has 5% accuracy for up-to 20uF at 100KHz. It's because of LCR meter, not capacitor limitations. Isn't that obvious for you already?

You are repeating exactly what I'm stating! And the conclusion is the same: measurement error in the case where an 8.2uf capacitor shows results which are way off (far outside what you would expect based on the LCR meter specification). In the end an LCR meter is less easy to use than it appears.

[ogden]

Sorry but you are not convincing me by showing capacitor specifications. It is not like you can't use these capacitors above the frequencies used to measure / specify them.

We talk about measurements, not use. Specified at some frequency does not mean it can't be used or won't work at higher frequencies. Thou if you want *assured* performance at higher frequency than your capacitor specified at, you are using wrong component.

That is what I would call a contradiction. You will want assured performance in any application!

Application?      It does not matter - opponent can't read on purpose or not, I am out of such kind of discussion. GLHF

[nctnico]

Application?      It does not matter - opponent can't read on purpose or not, I am out of such kind of discussion. GLHF

Now you are being silly.

Back to the core of the discussion: Are you seriously going to suggest that a reading which is several 100's of percent off from what is expected (based on what the test equipment is capable of) indicates that the piece of test equipment is unsuitable (despite it's specifications saying it is) and not a case of user error?

[ogden]

Application?      It does not matter - opponent can't read on purpose or not, I am out of such kind of discussion. GLHF

Now you are being silly.

Back to the core of the discussion: Are you seriously going to suggest that a reading which is several 100's of percent off from what is expected (based on what the test equipment is capable of) indicates that the piece of test equipment is unsuitable (despite it's specifications saying it is) and not a case of user error?

You are wandering all over the place. When we are talking about assured performance of *capacitor* at higher frequencies - we were talking about *capacitors*, not about equipment capabilities.

[nctnico]

I'm following your lead. You came up with 'assured performance' which I countered with the hint that you'll need to use a component that is fit for purpose anyway. But maybe you missed that hint.

Anyway, if your beef is with capacitor specs: in general the specifications for capacitors leave a lot to be desired and in many cases you have to look further than just the datasheet. Capacitor datasheets just provide a few data points from which you can determine the performance over a wider range based on construction and dielectric. For example: the datasheet for MLCC capacitors typically doesn't specify the leakage current. But this isn't zero and for some circuits this leakage is not insignificant. You'll need to dive into the properties of the dielectric to get a ballpark figure (and perhaps measure a bunch of samples). So yes, an LCR meter is an important tool to measure components to supplement information that is not in the datasheet.

[Martin72]

and in many cases you have to look further than just the datasheet

But not with those instruments we´re talking about and not in "many cases".
It´s always the same when you´re "on stage".

Nect week I´ll continue testing between the three LCRs and several caps with values between 47nf and 4.7µF.
In the table, I´ll put the dissipation factor sheet vs measuring, when it´s possible because of the limited resolution of the keysight and DE5000.
Btw., is a schmematic of the DE5000 known/ avaible ?

[nctnico]

Before taking any more measurements: check the Kelvin clips and connectors for damage and do an open / short offset calibration after changing the measurement frequency. You should not get any readings which exceed the LCR meter's accuracy specification with those capacitors.

[ogden]

I'm following your lead. You came up with 'assured performance' which I countered with the hint that you'll need to use a component that is fit for purpose anyway. But maybe you missed that hint.

What would "if you want *assured* performance at higher frequency than your capacitor specified at, you are using wrong component" mean, huh? Whatever you are smoking - you shall consider to quit.

[nctnico]

I'm following your lead. You came up with 'assured performance' which I countered with the hint that you'll need to use a component that is fit for purpose anyway. But maybe you missed that hint.

What would "if you want *assured* performance at higher frequency than your capacitor specified at, you are using wrong component" mean, huh? Whatever you are smoking - you shall consider to quit.

Did you ever see a capacitor specification / datasheet stating a maximum operating frequency? IMHO you are mis-interpreting capacitor datasheets by mistaken datapoints for operational limits.

[ogden]

Did you ever see a capacitor specification / datasheet stating a maximum operating frequency? IMHO you are mis-interpreting capacitor datasheets by mistaken datapoints for operational limits.

Specified at particular frequency does not mean it is maximum operating frequency. Are you OK?

[nctnico]

Did you ever see a capacitor specification / datasheet stating a maximum operating frequency? IMHO you are mis-interpreting capacitor datasheets by mistaken datapoints for operational limits.

Specified at particular frequency does not mean it is maximum operating frequency. Are you OK?

You are contradicting yourself again. At one hand you say assured performance based on data points in a datasheet are not to be exceeded (no guarantees beyond that) and on the hand point your are claiming that it is fine to use a capacitor at any frequency. What is it? Make up your mind!

[ogden]

Did you ever see a capacitor specification / datasheet stating a maximum operating frequency? IMHO you are mis-interpreting capacitor datasheets by mistaken datapoints for operational limits.

Specified at particular frequency does not mean it is maximum operating frequency. Are you OK?

You are contradicting yourself again. At one hand you say assured performance based on data points in a datasheet are not to be exceeded (no guarantees beyond that) and on the hand point your are claiming that it is fine to use a capacitor at any frequency. What is it? Make up your mind!

I was saying: you *can* use component at ANY frequency, yet if you want assured performance at specified frequency - you better have specification for it. I am explaining this like third time here 

[edit] I also said: "Specified at some frequency does not mean it can't be used or won't work at higher frequencies. ".  Explaining in your terms: No guarantees beyond data points in datasheet does not mean one can't use part beyond that, just performance won't be assured. Comprehend?

[Martin72]

Before taking any more measurements: check the Kelvin clips and connectors for damage and do an open / short offset calibration after changing the measurement frequency.

I think I know what I´m doing since 22yrs, but thank you for the advices.

You should not get any readings which exceed the LCR meter's accuracy specification with those capacitors.

This was already proved, at 1 and 10khz you get results which are very familar in comparison with the two other LCRs.
At 100khz it´s drifting a little bit, but it´s still in the specs of every LCR.
What the displaying capacitance value concerns.
But that wasn´t the point in this thread.
Mainpoint starts with the statement of a user, after several recommendations to go for the DE5000, that this LCR is a good one, but have problems on 100khz.
The "problem" turned out to be a probably wrong display of the D-factor in the 100Khz range.
This is irrelevant in more ways than one, but it does give the impression that the LCR has a flaw.
Yes, in theory it is -BTW, I found out, that the U1733C got this too.
But in practice...
Point one:
You won´t measure µF caps with 100khz - why should you.
Point two and most important:
The resolution of the D-factor display itself.
"0.001" - If you exclude the basic digit errors, this would be the highest resolution.
0.001 or 1x10-³...
This resolution is useless for foilcaps.
So if the LCR shows "nonsense" at 100khz or "0.000", it´s the same:
You can´t see the real value.
Same when you use lower testfrequencies, the usually ones for foil caps in µf-range, 1 or 10khz.
You´ll see "0.000" or "0.001"
Therefore it is a problem in theory, not a real one which can stop you buying the DE5000.
Displaying the capacitive value was never the issue here.

[cdev]

itd great but people should realize that most of the info you usually seek to get from L and C components could also be derived with a small and inexpensive nanovna2 too, using the right fixture.. (for series or shunt components). If I was going to choose between the two I would choose the nanovna. I spend a lot more time playing around with it than any piece of test equipment I have had previously. But the nanovna2 - although its not as rapid to test a passive component for something like esr, you will also need to make a "test fixture".

But it will show you the numbers you need to know and do it in a useful way.

The DE-5000 will be able to test components at (much) higher frequencies than most LCR meters but its still very limited to the in depth data you'll get with a nanovna2. If you are into RF stuff, that decides it. If you are into more generic electronics, maybe the DE-5000 will be better. I suspect it would be they are two specialized tools each does well at what its intended to do.

I dont know. Until I got a nanovna2 not much later DE-5000 was the only LCR meter Ive owned besides the AVR Transistor tester.. (which is very useful, especially for its cost, too, its really cheap. It will give you a very rapid interesting fast evaluation of what any component with two or three connections is. By probing them with a bunch of different signals. Simply having the ability to measure low L was a big thing for me. And it turns out DE-5000 does very well at that. But so does the nanovna2 it turned out.

If you are really on a tight budget also look at the AVRTT. For $20 or less, It will act as an LCR meter within limits. Also give you ESR. Accuracy is surprisingly good.  But, it does not support 4 wire measurement, as far as I know. Maybe a new version does. They are constantly improving it.

[Martin72]

I don´t know this meter, but what I know in general:
You won´t cover all your needs with only one instrument.
For example inductor measure...
We (Company I work for) use at last three methods to measure them.
General purpose LCR Meter, a (selfbuild) voltage-time-area tool and the good old resonant-frequency solution, with a little bit power...

[ogden]

VNA has it's own impedance limitations. One can't replace another. For component measurements I still suggest LCR meter, especially for >1uF capacitors, >1mH inductors and literally any resistor, unless you are looking for hi-frequency parasitic impedances of such. VNA is RF territory. Thou there is one capacitor-related measurement I suggest VNA any day: power plane impedance analysis. If you try - don't forget to use DC blocking capacitor! Without such you may damage instrument.

[probe]

Hi all,

For me the DER-EE DE-5000 LCR kit ordered at eleshop.eu and shipped to Italy would be €240, a set of kelvin clips around €20, so €260 total. If I were to order a Tonghui TH2810+ from Batterfly.com it would be €667 shipped, including Kelvin clips, fixture, short and test report.

So, €400 more for the Tonghui. I'm leaning towards a benchtop, but the Tonghui is 10kHz and the next next step up to 100kHz would hit €1000.

What would be your advice? general hobbyist use, mostly HAM radio stuff. (building a QDX now, when available will order a (tr)u-SDX).

[Shock]

My advice would be to avoid the DE5000 kit and just look at getting a DE5000 with TL21 adapter. The kit adds almost $200 to the price for no additional measurement functionality.

For most people to start off with they are fine. Roughly their base cost is $90 plus accessories on the ebay.com site. A fancy display and pc connectivity is mostly a gimmick on LCR meters for home use. Moneys better spent on a decent diy test lead or fixture setup in my opinion (it's the most painful aspect of a measurement).

[Martin72]

My tests will be expanded by another relative cheap LCR measure device.
Just bought an ET4410 today, will arrive end of next week.

[trobbins]

If the OP is in to DIY and short on cash then I'd recommend setting up their PC and soundcard as an impedance measurement rig.  I have a decade old USB soundcard with 192kHz sampling and it accurately measures L, C and R from circa 2Hz to 90kHz as an impedance plot with free software like REW.  The accuracy performance relates to the reference resistor tolerance used during calibration, so a 0.1% resistor allows better than 1% capacitance and inductance measurements.  The measurement plot also provides enhanced information on parts, especially inductors where the first self-resonance will typically show up, as well as the shunt capacitance value.

There are quite a few ESR meters suitable for DIY - I use a circuit by JAY_DIDDY_B in the projects area of this forum that properly extracts the resistive component of capacitors (no matter what type), as well as measuring resistance levels down to 100 microohm resolution to about 1milliohm accuracy. 

Combined with a cheapo 4-digit DMM like the Aneng AN8009, that covers rapid and accurate measurement of R and C, and a more informative measurement of L than the common practise of purchasing what can be an expensive commercial LCR meter.

[Martin72]

My tests will be expanded by another relative cheap LCR measure device.
Just bought an ET4410 today, will arrive end of next week.

It´s here (on postal office, will get it tomorrow)!! After only 48h, although I´ve ordered it from Banggood.
While ordering, I had the choice between "CN" and "CZ" Location - "CZ" was a little bit cheaper, so I´ve choosed this.
Now I know what it means....

Meanwhile I´ve expand the cap test, adding some electrolyt and ceramic capacitors.
So table will start with 470p, 1n ceramic, then 47n, 100n FKP, 220n MKP, 470n Snubber MKP, 1µ MKP250V, 1µ MKP700V, 2.2µ MKP, 3.3µ MKP, 4.7µ MKP, 8.2µMKP, 10µ elektrolyt, 100µ elektrolyt, 1000µ elektrolyt.
Cap-tests finished with the DE5000, U1733C and ST2830 will follow, at last the ET4410.

[ogden]

Did you get it? Please share your impressions

[Martin72]

Hi,

Sorry forget it here....

New thread:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/east-tester-et4410-desktop-lcr-meter/

[marcus h]

I've got a Uni-T UT622A on the way.

622A 

100Hz, 120Hz, 1KHz, 10KHz    99999 Count
0.00pF~99.999mF
0.00μH~99.999H
ESR 0.0000Ω~999.99Ω

Uni-T do not specify accuracy on the various ranges  It could be dreadful at 1pF and 1μH. 

There are big differences in maximum ranges.  For example the UT-622 series max out at 99.999H while the DE-5000 can go all the way to 2.0KH.   That is a very big inductor.

If 100kHz is important, the ~$300 UT-622E adds a 100kHz test freq and DC resistance with .01milliOhm resolution.

This is a late reply to this older topic but given the scarcity of information on the UNI-T UT622 LCR-meter series in this forum I think that a reply to this old posting is warranted.

Andrew cites the display range for inductance as "0.00μH~99.999H" which I think comes from the official datasheet -- which is still available (see link below).

However, the user manual (page 41, also see link below) gives a much more believable range: "0.001uH - 9999.9H"
That would mean 10KH.

Why is that "much more believable"?
Because it has a) a more realistic looking lower ceiling of "0.001" instead of "0.00" uH
and b) the other display ranges look less like a cut & paste job in the manual (resistance only 10 MegOhms?).
Also consider, this is a 99,999 and not a 9,999 count device. Higher/Lower ceilings are expected (even if they aren't necessarily more accurate).
Finally, datasheets are usually getting produced much earlier than the manuals.
Therefore I conclude -- albeit without final proof -- that the manual has the correct values.

I wonder how many customers they lost thanks to the (still!) faulty datasheet?

And indeed: UNI-T doesn't provide an accuracy table. Neither in the datasheet, nor the manual or on their website.

What they offer, though, is a rather large section in the manual how they calculate the accuracy (pages 42 - 44).
The accuracy formula for L/C/R/Z/X/DCR measurements contains lots of stuff but the gist of it seems to be that you have to try to get the best parameters under the circumstance.
This accuracy will never get better than 0.1 % and it will likely get worse (= higher %), depending on the parameters (voltage level, speed) and more (impedance, temperature...).
It looks a bit like they tell us "use friendly parameters and hope for the best!"

On a final note, the UT622-series consists of three models:
622A: max. 10 kHz, no DSR-measurement, alligator clip test leads with rubber plugs
622C: max. 100 kHz, no DSR-measurement, four-terminal kelvin test leads
622E: same as 622C but with DSR-measurement
Everything else should be the same, including accuracy, speed etc.

So if you want 100 kHz but don't need DSR you could get the 622C which is much cheaper than the 622E.

Both the datasheet and the manual can be downloaded here:
https://instruments.uni-trend.com/EU-EN/search?scode=all&name=ut622

Product page (links to manual & datasheet don't work for me):
https://instruments.uni-trend.com/EU-EN/lcrmeters/ut622.html

HTH

[Andrew_Debbie]

I've had my UT-622A for over a year now.   
It came with a multi-page calibration document and (sigh) clip leads.

The meter works. It meets my needs. 

For small parts, I stick the leads in the socket for the Kelvin lead set. For big parts, the error introduced by the clip leads is usually a don't care.

The kelvin leads are available seperately for about $60 US. If you think you might want them, get the 622C which is about the same total cost but has 100kHz.



There is also a less expensive 20,000 count Uni-T UT612. It comes with a 4-wire tweezers.    The 612 is from their "meter" divison.   The 622 is from the instruments side.


622 series:
https://instruments.uni-trend.com/EU-EN/lcrmeters/ut622.html

612:
https://meters.uni-trend.com/product/ut612/

[Andrew_Debbie]

Not a review, but here are some photos:

Unboxing.   Note the multi-page test report.


Initial power-on user interface is not in english.   It was not hard to change.



470µF Nichicon UPW at 100Hz


Amveco / Talema 70000K series

[ogden]

Not a review, but here are some photos:

Thank you for sharing. Nice calculator indeed!