Old DMMs

[HKJ]

How long the batteries last during logging?

I did never time it.

Do you keep 189 and 289 logging the same DUT to be able to keep one working while replacing the batteries from the other?

They where the first meters I used for the curves in my charger reviews: https://lygte-info.dk/info/roundCellChargerIndex%20UK.html
Mostly I restarting on a new logging session a couple of times each day and once in a while one failed because I did not notice that the batteries where about done.

Maybe this can help you:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQSrMJDws-Q

As I wrote above, I have replace them with a better solution, now the meter are used on my test bench once in a while, but not much, I have way to many good multimeters to change between.

[BeBuLamar]

If I have to do logging like you I would run either meter on AC power.

[HKJ]

If I have to do logging like you I would run either meter on AC power.

That is also what I do now, but even with the 289 it was probably not more than once a week I had to replace batteries. I said 24/7 before, that was not really correct, each test is usually between 1 and 24 hours, but I cannot restart a new test while I am sleeping or on work, i.e. there where often some hours where the meters could turn off.

[Trader]

I have way to many good multimeters to change between.

Your site is like a DMM Wikipedia.  You should review the Fluke 189 and the Gossen for the posterity know how good they were. 

[HKJ]

Your site is like a DMM Wikipedia.  You should review the Fluke 189 and the Gossen for the posterity know how good they were. 

I do not want to review the 189 because it is out of production and has been for many years. I would sort of like to review the Energy, but I would like a new one to review, my Energy is from 2010.
But I also have many other meters I would like to review and I have them, I only need to sit down and do the work. But for now my time is used on TestController and I am also looking on doing a comparison between a couple of high end multimeters (The Energy included).

[Trader]

I would sort of like to review the Energy, but I would like a new one to review, my Energy is from 2010.

What's the problem? Your Energy is out of the specs? What happened?

For me will be much more interesting Reviews of OLD and Very USED DMMs to see if they still keeping all the specs after 5, 10, 20, 30 years, and so on.

Even an Aneng (or another Chinese medium quality device) usually works very well and inside the specs when Brand NEW.

[BeBuLamar]

I agree on reviewing the 189. It was supposed to replace the 87 but Fluke decided that the 87 has a lot of following so they make the 87V. They replaced it with the 289 so the 189 production is kind of short so it would be interesting to review. I have the 189 since 2005 or so but I didn't use it much (a couple times a year?) so I am think I would try to use it more now and see how it is.

[HKJ]

What's the problem? Your Energy is out of the specs? What happened?

I do not believe so, it still matches my other meters on regular measurements.

For me will be much more interesting Reviews of OLD and Very USED DMMs to see if they still keeping all the specs after 5, 10, 20, 30 years, and so on.

Even an Aneng (or another Chinese medium quality device) usually works very well and inside the specs when Brand NEW.

That is another type of review/article, but it is a bit hard for me to do, because I do not remember when I bought a specific meter. With most of the reviewed meters I could use the date on the pictures as reference, but my Flukes and and Keysight/Agilent I have no precise idea about the date.

I agree on reviewing the 189. It was supposed to replace the 87 but Fluke decided that the 87 has a lot of following so they make the 87V. They replaced it with the 289 so the 189 production is kind of short so it would be interesting to review. I have the 189 since 2005 or so but I didn't use it much (a couple times a year?) so I am think I would try to use it more now and see how it is.

I will rate it as a good meter and definitely recommend you use it more. It may not have as many measurements as the 289, but it is close and much better to use. Where the 289 really shines compared to the 189 is when doing stuff where multiple values on the display is a advantage (Mostly min/max), it can also show logged values as a curve.

[BeBuLamar]

Yes I think I would try to use it more and no I don't use the 289 either. I use the 87V daily. May be I can clean the holster on the 87V without worrying about the strong solvent damaging the meter. The holster on the 189 and 289 is permanent and cleaning them risk having solvent on other parts of the meter.

[David Hess]

Beckman had their Circuitmate series of handheld digital multimeters like the DM25L with capacitance and transistor hfe measurement in 1985 if not earlier.  They even provided schematics.  I have one somewhere.

https://www.radiomuseum.org/r/bekman_ins_circuitmate_digital_multimeter_dm25l.html

I consider capacitance, hfe, and frequency measurement to be almost completely useless on multimeters.

[Fungus]

I have the 189 since 2005 or so but I didn't use it much (a couple times a year?) so I am think I would try to use it more now and see how it is.

They're fast and they're 50,000 counts. Dual display can be nice.

They also hold together really well at the outer limits of measurement (eg. AC with large DC offsets).

There's a few too many positions on the selector switch IMHO but that's better than having to live with the wrong default setting for current (ie. AC instead of DC).

[BeBuLamar]

Yeah although I almost never use the 87V to measure current but the fact that it defaults to AC current does bother me. I often use the current measurement function as a jumper.

[Trader]

Yeah although I almost never use the 87V to measure current but the fact that it defaults to AC current does bother me. I often use the current measurement function as a jumper.

LOL, I thought nobody does that.



(1:19 min)

[BeBuLamar]

Great idea! I use the resistance and or diode check as voltage source. Now I learned something new.

[Fungus]

Great idea! I use the resistance and or diode check as voltage source.

Ummm.. it's a current source, not a voltage source.

[BeBuLamar]

But I use it as a voltage source. The voltage output would depend on the input impedance of the device and the resistance range. I really need a voltage not current but just a low DC voltage not anything specific. What I do is to give a drive a voltage reference so it would run. A volt or two would be fine.

[tautech]

But I use it as a voltage source. The voltage output would depend on the input impedance of the device and the resistance range. I really need a voltage not current but just a low DC voltage not anything specific. What I do is to give a drive a voltage reference so it would run. A volt or two would be fine.

Yes but technically and correctly it's always a current source as Imax is limited and V available is related to I drawn.

A small but definite distinction between what defines voltage and current sources. 

[BeBuLamar]

I know technically it's a current source as it supplies constant current in each range of measurement. But since I need a voltage I use it for the purpose of supplying a voltage to an inverter drive.

[HKJ]

I know technically it's a current source as it supplies constant current in each range of measurement. But since I need a voltage I use it for the purpose of supplying a voltage to an inverter drive.

Handheld DMM's do not always use a current source for ohm measurement, often they do not. Read more here: https://lygte-info.dk/info/DMMDesign%20UK.html#Ohm