Author Topic: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510  (Read 117741 times)

shodan@micron and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BitWrangler1001

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 9
  • Country: us
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1050 on: May 20, 2020, 10:24:08 pm »
Quote
TSP-NET and TSP-Link
Are there any good examples of using one and the two?

Here are TSP-NET examples.  Although none connect 2 KEI instruments together, only to other companies equipment.  But you could use those as an example to see how to adapt 2 Keithley instruments together.

https://github.com/tektronix/keithley/tree/627a9bb2436d08186655742097693691885a7c89/Instrument_Examples/TSP-NET_Seed_Ideas
 
The following users thanked this post: MegaVolt

Offline eplpwr

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 40
  • Country: se
  • Wannabe VoltNut
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1051 on: May 21, 2020, 12:08:24 pm »
I have wasted a lot of time trying to get TSP-Link to work. I even bought an additional card for the DAQ6510.

I could not find any good docs on TSP: some basic illustrations showing daisy-chaining, telling me to use crossover Cat5 cables and set unique node numbers. Well, I've tried all that but must have missed something essential.

There is no marking for "in" or "out" on the TSP connectors. My best guess is that it is connector-xfmr-instrument-xfmr-connector, but I'm not sure.

Also, connecting >2 instruments always causes an error. I've used different cables and the strange thing is that identically connected cables give different results - some refuse to work. Any shielded (S/FTP) cable is a no-no. And, yes, I know how a crossover cable is wired, even from memory.
 

Offline The Soulman

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 741
  • Country: nl
  • The sky is the limit!
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1052 on: May 21, 2020, 12:15:15 pm »
I know how a crossover cable is wired, even from memory.

You also know there are two different rj45 pinout standards?
 

Offline z01z

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 146
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1053 on: May 21, 2020, 12:24:56 pm »
You also know there are two different rj45 pinout standards?
Electrically these look the same, the orange and green markings are the only difference.
 

Offline The Soulman

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 741
  • Country: nl
  • The sky is the limit!
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1054 on: May 21, 2020, 12:42:18 pm »
You also know there are two different rj45 pinout standards?
Electrically these look the same, the orange and green markings are the only difference.

Yes, but if he started out with a pre-made cable which uses 568A on one side and he wired the other side as (crossed) 568B
it would cause trouble, still something worth to check.
 

Offline eplpwr

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 40
  • Country: se
  • Wannabe VoltNut
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1055 on: May 21, 2020, 12:49:40 pm »
Yes, but if he started out with a pre-made cable which uses 568A on one side and he wired the other side as (crossed) 568B
it would cause trouble, still something worth to check.

I've so far only used pre-made molded cables. Checked electrically for 1-3, 2-6, 3-1, 6-2. Also optically; the wires can clearly be seen through the transparent connectors.

EDIT: Also, all cables work OK as GigE network cables.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2020, 12:52:17 pm by eplpwr »
 

Offline JxR

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
  • Country: us
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1056 on: May 21, 2020, 07:18:50 pm »
Yes, but if he started out with a pre-made cable which uses 568A on one side and he wired the other side as (crossed) 568B
it would cause trouble, still something worth to check.

I've so far only used pre-made molded cables. Checked electrically for 1-3, 2-6, 3-1, 6-2. Also optically; the wires can clearly be seen through the transparent connectors.

EDIT: Also, all cables work OK as GigE network cables.

The cables supplied by Keithley for TSP are wired in the following config:
1-3
2-6
3-1
4-4
5-5
6-2
7-7
8-8
 
The following users thanked this post: thm_w, voltsandjolts, The Soulman

Offline The Soulman

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 741
  • Country: nl
  • The sky is the limit!
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1057 on: May 21, 2020, 08:16:06 pm »
Quote
The cables supplied by Keithley for TSP are wired in the following config:
1-3
2-6
3-1
4-4
5-5
6-2
7-7
8-8

Interesting.
So a T-568A to T-568B cross-over cable?

 
The following users thanked this post: JxR

Offline JxR

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
  • Country: us
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1058 on: May 21, 2020, 08:20:40 pm »
Interesting.
So a T-568A to T-568B cross-over cable?

Yessir, that looks correct.  :-+

I can confirm 3 working TSP-Linked instruments with this cable config.
 

Offline KedasProbe

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 533
  • Country: be
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1059 on: May 22, 2020, 05:18:11 pm »
The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. ;) (Andrew S. Tanenbaum)
Not everything that counts can be measured. Not everything that can be measured counts.
[W. Bruce Cameron]
 

Offline ivonenand

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 32
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1060 on: May 23, 2020, 06:51:58 am »
Hi Guys,
Has anyone used the Raw Socket communication over LAN with the DMM6500? With the instruments I've used in the past I would use Putty and just type in commands, but with the DMM6500 I cannot get it to even return a *IDN? command. Any tips? The manual says that raw socket communication is on port 5025, which is what I've used (with no luck). The TCP/IP connection does get established, but I cannot get the DMM to return anything.

Thanks for any tips,
Ivo
« Last Edit: May 23, 2020, 06:58:23 am by ivonenand »
 

Online HKJ

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1133
  • Country: dk
    • Tests
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1061 on: May 23, 2020, 07:31:23 am »
Hi Guys,
Has anyone used the Raw Socket communication over LAN with the DMM6500? With the instruments I've used in the past I would use Putty and just type in commands, but with the DMM6500 I cannot get it to even return a *IDN? command. Any tips? The manual says that raw socket communication is on port 5025, which is what I've used (with no luck). The TCP/IP connection does get established, but I cannot get the DMM to return anything.

I have not seen any problems with TestController.
You can use TestController like Putty, its command line goes to the connected and selected device.
 

Online shodan@micron

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 198
  • Country: ru
    • My personal page
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1062 on: May 23, 2020, 03:40:26 pm »
Has anyone used the Raw Socket communication over LAN with the DMM6500?

I use Raw socket with lxi library at least 6-9 months, no problem.
I found only one issue with raw sockets - after each command need send "\n" control character to instrument.


a *IDN? command.

I'm not sure, but "*IDN?" it's SCPI command.
Try switch dmm's to SCPI command set.

Also - i think you can't talk with dmm's directly via Putty. When i use LXI i must set "instance" to "inst0", without that dmm no answer anything. Probably need some special to set that when you send data directly.
Try use telnet to talk with dmm directly(DMM6500-901-01 Rev. B / September 2019 page 2-20).
« Last Edit: May 23, 2020, 04:09:19 pm by shodan@micron »
My lab in Instagram. LXI Instruments Data Logger apps.
For sale: Arroyo 585-05-12 55W TEC-temperature controller with TEC and accessory, contact for more details.
 

Offline KedasProbe

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 533
  • Country: be
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1063 on: May 23, 2020, 06:03:48 pm »
Hi,

I just made a short video to show a bug in the displayed values that I like to see fixed.


Thanks
Not everything that counts can be measured. Not everything that can be measured counts.
[W. Bruce Cameron]
 

Offline ivonenand

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 32
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1064 on: May 23, 2020, 07:44:00 pm »
Has anyone used the Raw Socket communication over LAN with the DMM6500?

I use Raw socket with lxi library at least 6-9 months, no problem.
I found only one issue with raw sockets - after each command need send "\n" control character to instrument.


a *IDN? command.

I'm not sure, but "*IDN?" it's SCPI command.
Try switch dmm's to SCPI command set.

Also - i think you can't talk with dmm's directly via Putty. When i use LXI i must set "instance" to "inst0", without that dmm no answer anything. Probably need some special to set that when you send data directly.
Try use telnet to talk with dmm directly(DMM6500-901-01 Rev. B / September 2019 page 2-20).

Thanks for this! I will try the Telnet option. May I ask which port you are using? My bet is that you are using 1024, which is ment for VXI-11 (LXI) communication.

I'm trying to use port 5025, which should be basically printf over TCP/IP. At least that's what I've been used to with other instruments I've used SCPI with. I'm a fairly old-style programmer and I write my scripts mostly in C and Linux. To communicate the raw socket way with a device, I don't need any libraries, just standard BSD sockets (which every programming language has built in).

I will try the same method, but with Port 23 and I'll report on how that went.

Regards,
Ivo
« Last Edit: May 23, 2020, 07:52:29 pm by ivonenand »
 

Online HKJ

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1133
  • Country: dk
    • Tests
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1065 on: May 23, 2020, 07:58:24 pm »
I'm trying to use port 5025, which should be basically printf over TCP/IP. At least that's what I've been used to with other instruments I've used SCPI with. I'm a fairly old-style programmer and I write my scripts mostly in C and Linux. To communicate the raw socket way with a device, I don't need any libraries, just standard BSD sockets (which every programming language has built in).

Don't act silly, the port is 5025 and it works nicely with standard raw socket ascii communications.
As I wrote TestController has no trouble using it. If you want to see exactly what bytes are send and received you can use debug mode.
 

Online shodan@micron

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 198
  • Country: ru
    • My personal page
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1066 on: May 23, 2020, 09:05:15 pm »
My bet is that you are using 1024, which is ment for VXI-11 (LXI) communication.

By default I use port 5025 in raw mode.

Now i try dump network traffic in both modes.
tcpdump in raw and vxi11 mode example:
« Last Edit: May 23, 2020, 11:29:39 pm by shodan@micron »
My lab in Instagram. LXI Instruments Data Logger apps.
For sale: Arroyo 585-05-12 55W TEC-temperature controller with TEC and accessory, contact for more details.
 
The following users thanked this post: MegaVolt

Online shodan@micron

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 198
  • Country: ru
    • My personal page
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1067 on: May 28, 2020, 07:02:15 pm »
Now i'm start trying calibrate my DMM6500... it is not simple... 1 day past... i do not receive any answers about price and authority metrology centers answer...
Hmm... sounds bad....

I found on Keithley web-site contacts of Fluke Moscow, but he decline my request. He answer - We are not an authorized service center for Keithely DMM's :horse: And forward me to unknown lab, i create request and waiting....

With Keysight it is always simple:
- making request directly to Keysight and paid - 1 day.
- send dmm's to Keysight and wait - 1-2 week.
- receive dmm's.
- happy - 1-3 years.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2020, 07:09:03 pm by shodan@micron »
My lab in Instagram. LXI Instruments Data Logger apps.
For sale: Arroyo 585-05-12 55W TEC-temperature controller with TEC and accessory, contact for more details.
 

Offline MegaVolt

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 266
  • Country: by
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1068 on: May 28, 2020, 07:08:13 pm »
I found on Keithley web-site contacts of Fluke Moscow, but he decline my request. He answer - We are not an authorized service center for Keithely DMM's :horse: And forward me to unknown lab, i create request and waiting....
There is a site http://www.actimaster.ru/ they brought the device into the state registry. Perhaps they can calibrate it ...

http://www.actimaster.ru/upload/iblock/a7a/a7a7f02185694fa5c60f3893f0daf762.pdf
 
The following users thanked this post: shodan@micron

Online shodan@micron

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 198
  • Country: ru
    • My personal page
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1069 on: May 28, 2020, 07:12:19 pm »
There is a site http://www.actimaster.ru/

If they make me Z540.1 w/Data calibration and provide official traceability Keithley certificate i use it.
I try... thanks.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2020, 07:16:19 pm by shodan@micron »
My lab in Instagram. LXI Instruments Data Logger apps.
For sale: Arroyo 585-05-12 55W TEC-temperature controller with TEC and accessory, contact for more details.
 

Offline MegaVolt

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 266
  • Country: by
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1070 on: May 28, 2020, 07:20:37 pm »
If they make me Z540.1 w/Data calibration and provide official traceability Keithley certificate i use it.
I try... thanks.
I'm afraid they will calibrate it according to the Russian method in accordance with the type certificate. Those. relative to Russian standards. Not Fluke standards.
 

Offline MegaVolt

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 266
  • Country: by
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1071 on: May 28, 2020, 07:24:30 pm »
Here is the calibration instruction.
 

Online shodan@micron

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 198
  • Country: ru
    • My personal page
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1072 on: May 28, 2020, 07:44:04 pm »
I'm afraid they will calibrate it according to the Russian method in accordance with the type certificate. Those. relative to Russian standards. Not Fluke standards.

If it's true, i do not buying Keithley anymore.
My lab in Instagram. LXI Instruments Data Logger apps.
For sale: Arroyo 585-05-12 55W TEC-temperature controller with TEC and accessory, contact for more details.
 

Offline MegaVolt

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 266
  • Country: by
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1073 on: May 28, 2020, 07:47:33 pm »
If it's true, i do not buying Keithley anymore.
In my opinion this is a common Russian practice. If you want the instrument to be checked by the Keithley laboratory, you will have to send them the device by mail. Perhaps sellers of this firm can help with this.
 

Online shodan@micron

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 198
  • Country: ru
    • My personal page
Re: New Keithley DMM6500 and now DAQ6510
« Reply #1074 on: May 28, 2020, 07:51:27 pm »
In my opinion this is a common Russian practice. If you want the instrument to be checked by the Keithley laboratory, you will have to send them the device by mail. Perhaps sellers of this firm can help with this.

If i send it out of country border, price for shipments + cal. price ~= new dmm price.

Perhaps sellers of this firm can help with this.

Nope, seller of my DMM's unauthorized. I think he can't help me.

Authorized seller have extremely high price for all! I use it sometimes... :palm:

I'm already prepare 2 tons of popcorn.... stay tuned!
« Last Edit: May 29, 2020, 01:17:25 am by shodan@micron »
My lab in Instagram. LXI Instruments Data Logger apps.
For sale: Arroyo 585-05-12 55W TEC-temperature controller with TEC and accessory, contact for more details.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf