Author Topic: Fluke 289 supercap/battery-draining issues now resolved? Other problems to watch  (Read 3984 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline LoFi

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 29
  • Country: us
  • Madness, put to good use
A year or so ago when I was in the market for my first truly high-quality DMM, I considered getting a Fluke 289 or 287.  I really liked the idea of the multiline display, data logging, and onboard trend graphing.  I wished it was smaller and had more than 100-hour battery life, but it looked like a great meter.

Then I began reading all the forums about the supercap problems and the tendency of many 287/289 meters to drain their batteries quickly, even when off.   :scared: Yikes. After a lot of reading, it appeared that many of those problems might have gone away with the change Fluke made to a battery backup for the onboard clock, rather than the previous leak-prone supercap.  But I decided to play it safe and bought a Fluke 87V instead.  I’m glad I did… I really iike the 87-5.

Still… the 289 features looked pretty cool. My interest in it kept simmering. So I finally pulled the trigger, and it arrived a few days ago.  I decided to buy new, so that I wouldn’t have to worry about the supercap issues.

I have a 30 day period to return it if I need to.  I really like it and plan to keep it assuming no serious underlying problems crop up. I suspect, but am not certain, that all the annoying battery-drain problems that were reported in years past were a side-effect of the supercap issues.  Is that correct?

I’ve tested the power consumption on the 289 that I received and have found the following:
- draws about 45mA when powering up
- draws 20-24 mA after power-up with backlight off.  Averages 22mA
- draws about 36mA when low backlight is on
- draws 55-60 mA when high backlight is on
- draws about 50 uA when powered off

Now according to my calculations, the measurements above should result in about 100-120 hours of normal usage (assuming 2000-2500 mah alkaline batteries, backlight mostly off)… perhaps even a bit better depending on how the batteries hold out as charge drops below 9V. At a 50 microAmp power drain when switched off, a fresh set of batteries should last for years if the meter sits idle.  This all seems to line up pretty well with what Fluke claims for the meter’s power usage.

I’d like to find out about any problems during the 30-day grace period.  So far I’m quite happy.  :-+  Any reason I shouldn’t be?

No major worries power-wise?  Anyone with new recent vintage 287/289s experiencing severe/unexpected battery drain?  Any likelihood of problems if/when that little button-battery eventually goes dead? (other than the clock needing reset at main battery change?).  Anything else to watch out for?

[BTW, whatever happens, I'll be keeping the 87V]
« Last Edit: April 10, 2018, 06:39:00 pm by LoFi »
"Don't play stupid with me... I'm better at it."
 
The following users thanked this post: Marco1971, Mick

Offline LoFi

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 29
  • Country: us
  • Madness, put to good use
... I considered getting a Fluke 289 or 287.  I really liked the idea of the multiline display, data logging, and onboard trend graphing.  I wished it was smaller and had more than 100-hour battery life...

... and was less expensive... I wish it didn't cost quite so much.  :horse:
"Don't play stupid with me... I'm better at it."
 

Offline mqsaharan

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 44
  • Country: pk
Hi LoFi
As per Fluke, they have solved the supercap problem. Only time will tell the effectiveness of their solution. So far, I have not seen any new reports of that particular cap leakage.

Regarding batteries, my suggestion is to use rechargeable NiMH. Since there is no way to figure out when an alkaline battery will leak, it is better to use rechargeable ones. They are usually better sealed than primary batteries.

Regarding problems, there is one. It is not well known. You can read about it in the following threads.
www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/is-my-new-fluke-289-multimeter-faulty/
www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/fluke-289-defective-or-not/

If you watch the joeqsmith's video about UT181A, somewhere around 21:02 minutes in, you can see the conductance range is not 0.0nS with open leads. It is only my assumption that that meter has the same problem.



Other than that it is a great meter.

Regards,
Qasim.
 
The following users thanked this post: LoFi, Marco1971

Offline srjaynes49

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 11
  • Country: us
  • 70 is the new 50!
I just received back my 2017 FLUKE 289 I sent in to Fluke for SuperCapacitor inspection and and any other issues provided by visual and electrical inspection. 

It passed in flying colors.   :)  No SuperCap leak.  Nearly imperceptible measurement drift from when it was manufactured.  It met every aspect of calibration, but since the job was "warranty, for free" no traceable docs supplied.  The tech did write aa anecdotal note about comparison of today vs what was recorded at build. 

Seems meter "generation" as a far back as when mine was made, Nov. 2016, Fluke 287s and 289s are free from known/chronic issues, other than battery life and price.

Has anyone tried Lithium disposable or rechargeable AA's in the FLUKE meters?  I'm sure the readership would enjoy your shared experiences. :-+

ON THE OTHER HAND, I personally discovered both of my 189s, separated by a large S/N gap, had corrosion on their SuperCaps which I replaced.  SN's:  85280130 and 89770031 (Note:  Part of that 4489901 difference may be due to lot numbers or date codes.) 

I did quick and dirty measurements on the old Caps and they were NOT functional.  They weren't worth the effort of profiling charge and discharge.  They were TOAST.

Now with new SuperCaps, they hold their data with batteries removed and both of these old troupers are STILL in spec!  Who can complain about that! 

Note:  Right and left meters in photo still have protective plastic on the screens which is awful for photographs, but not bad in person.

Steve Jaynes,
Nov. 5th, 2020
Portland, OR
« Last Edit: November 06, 2020, 12:39:11 am by srjaynes49 »
Nothing clever to read here...
 
The following users thanked this post: Marco1971

Offline retiredcaps

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3558
  • Country: ca
Has anyone tried Lithium disposable or rechargeable AA's in the FLUKE meters?
There lots of posts here on the forum of people using low discharge nimh like Eneloops in the 187/189, 287/289 with no problems.

I use Eneloops in my 187 and use the backlight all the time and never worry about wasting battery power since I can always recharge and have spares lying around.
 

Offline mqsaharan

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 44
  • Country: pk
Hi Steve

I just received back my 2017 FLUKE 289 I sent in to Fluke for SuperCapacitor inspection and and any other issues provided by visual and electrical inspection. 

It passed in flying colors.   :)  No SuperCap leak.  Nearly imperceptible measurement drift from when it was manufactured.  It met every aspect of calibration, but since the job was "warranty, for free" no traceable docs supplied.  The tech did write aa anecdotal note about comparison of today vs what was recorded at build. 

Seems meter "generation" as a far back as when mine was made, Nov. 2016, Fluke 287s and 289s are free from known/chronic issues, other than battery life and price.

I don't think Fluke is using Super Capacitor in 287/289 anymore. They are using rechargeable cell. The silk screen on the PCA with revision 17 or later has also changed and calls it "BT1" instead of "C145" as it used to on older revisions. I hope it'll last longer than super capacitor.

Has anyone tried Lithium disposable or rechargeable AA's in the FLUKE meters?  I'm sure the readership would enjoy your shared experiences. :-+

As for the batteries, just as retiredcaps has mentioned in his post above, I also use NiMH in my 289, both Eneloops and Energizer rechargeables. They are working great and you don't have to worry about battery leakage or battery power anymore, unless you are doing some long time logging (primary cells give longer runtime). The auto power off on my meter is set to 1 hour and backlight timeout is disabled. As soon as voltage reaches 0.9 to 1.0 in these cells, the meter turns itself off. So, all I can say is that it is well designed for rechargeables as well.
 I have no experience with primary Lithium batteries.

Qasim.
 
The following users thanked this post: LoFi, Marco1971

Offline LoFi

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 29
  • Country: us
  • Madness, put to good use
OP Update: I’ve had the 289 for over two years now with no problems; it has become my primary meter.  The resolution and accuracy have been superb, once the boot-up has completed the meter is very quick in operation.  Battery life has not been an noticeable issue; with my modest use of the backlight they seem to last just fine.  I’ve been quite pleased with it.
"Don't play stupid with me... I'm better at it."
 
The following users thanked this post: Marco1971

Offline wangine

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 1
  • Country: ro
I have a 289 even when appear on marked . I dont remember how many years past . No any issue , i made 2 software upgrade without problems.
Single problem was the " battery " using the metter at least 9-12h at day , drawing fast, so after searching hours on web in that time , i found a 1.5 li-po from "kentli" https://www.amazon.com/KENTLI-li-polymer-rechargeable-falshlight-Microphone/dp/B01CZV0ZYW the battery itself use a trick , have a small converter on top
that deliver 1.5v from 3.7 standard li-polimer. Working for 3-4 years , and recgarge once at 2-3 months but now , some of them discharge himself during st-by.
I try NiMh , but the metter after 1 day of use , show already a bar with not full battery . That because the Vc of NiMn is 1.2v .
Now after 4 years i will buy a new li-po 1.5v , probably USB charging battery, not decided yet.
I hope that help.
Thanks
Bobby
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf