| Products > Test Equipment |
| Shannon ST42 LCR Tweezer Test and Comparison Thread |
| << < (3/28) > >> |
| Overspeed:
--- Quote from: Martin72 on June 18, 2024, 10:16:41 pm --- --- Quote ---I don't want to spend 2 hours measuring 48 of the same component before I could continue testing/installing parts. --- End quote --- You don't have to.... ;) The warm-up time is to be regarded as a standardization. An LCR meter may well need 20 to 30 minutes (the more complex the design, the more) to be able to measure within its own tolerance. But who cares about a basic accuracy of say 0.05% if the components to be measured have a tolerance of 5% or more.... In other words, if it is necessary to select components with an accuracy of 0.05%, then there is something wrong with the circuit. Or to put it another way, if the ST42 reaches its own tolerance significantly shorter, it is only because significantly fewer circuits have to be thermally balanced. All theory is gray, it's the practice that counts. --- End quote --- Hello Accuracy is the result of the sum of the uncertainties so accuracy of a component need to be separate from the accuracy of measuring equipment There is several use for a LCR or even a ohmmeter _ Sorting component in the same ''precision quality so reject the extremes values / out of tolerances values _ Matching components in pair , triple ... as capacitor in parallel _ Select component to catch the closest perfect nominal value _ Identify component with out engraving value A very good test of a Quality setup which include a measuring equipment is to run an ANOVA R&R test Regards OS |
| KungFuJosh:
--- Quote from: Cyclotron on June 19, 2024, 05:03:04 am ---That said, I can imagine there are a lot of objective tests that can be done, and I do look forward to reading the results, but I don't know how that will impact the subjective recommendations that are made to people. Obviously, if you have findings that show a better solution at comparable pricing that fits my needs, I'm all ears. --- End quote --- I've already done comparison tests (which I'll be diving deeper into again soon when I receive my new test PCBs), but the tweezers performed exactly as they're supposed to. I think part of the point is that there really isn't much to compare within the price point. These tweezers are as good better than tweezers that cost 3x as much. They also held their own (and helped correct bad fw) in bench meters that cost 10 to 20x as much. I think if somebody has some of those overpriced Canadian tweezers to compare to, that would be great. |
| BirdManPhil:
Are there any tweezers that can measure caps as low as 0.1pf with a resolution that works for this? I see shannon st42 bottoms out at 0.3 or 0.5 pf |
| KungFuJosh:
--- Quote from: BirdManPhil on June 19, 2024, 02:38:23 pm ---Are there any tweezers that can measure caps as low as 0.1pf with a resolution that works for this? I see shannon st42 bottoms out at 0.3 or 0.5 pf --- End quote --- I'd be a little surprised, but maybe. Even our expensive bench meters doesn't claim accuracy below 1pF. |
| Martin72:
At less than 1pF, you are also more likely to be in the parasitic range where you are measuring something. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |