You need to wait for the meter to fully settle with OFL displayed before reapplying the short if you want it to reproduce when you apply the short or device you are testing. The other two meters over range very fast so they repeat. Still, a good test and thank you for showing it.
Hi Joe Smith, thank you for your comment, did not know it requires to wait until OFL shows on display, then they were keep searching in the auto rage in my video. Great to have beneficial knowledge. Thanks.
If you decide to repeat the test, you may find it takes just as long to go both directions. OFL to short and short to OFL may both be around your six or so seconds. You could just verify this on the bench and post your results. Again, thank you for taking the time to post this information.
What I find interesting is if these are the same Brymen leads as Dave said came with the BM235, this doesn’t match mine at all. And I don’t use my leads often, mostly my fluke or Pro master probes. So my fluke 298 says 0.08 with a dead short before zeroing out, but it’s a two wire reading. FYI, under 3 seconds for the fluke auto range to zero out. My 2 miliohm meters I’m testing agree with each other. Let say 0.0289 for one, and 0.0248 for the other. When checked on my HP34401A I get 0.028 and 0.023. I forgot to set my HP on a higher resolution count. Either way, your probes should be in the 0.06? Range. I also removed the banana adapters from my Brymen leads like you have for this test.
I wonder if they are trying to auto zero it out like the BM235 does. I would rather it doesn’t do this, and manually zero it out for the lower ranges, and have it over limit in the higher resistance ranges. So I hope they didn’t try to build this into the firmware. If they did, they need to remove it so the meter doesn’t struggle with the extra math, lol. I noticed you added the alligator clips that should have added 0.033 Ohms to the measurement since you didn’t zero out the meter. So maybe they are trying to do this for user ease of use. If so, they shouldn’t. If you buy a 50,000 count meter then users need to understand they will just have to zero out under a certain range for accurate reading. This is how it is with higher resolution meters. Why change this now, dump that code for auto zeroing if they put it in. This meter does have a ref (zero) button? Doesn’t it?
I have a cheapo UNI-T UT61E and it takes a fraction of a second for the resistance ranging test with hands, and maybe half for going from open to shorted. I'm way too impatient to wait several seconds for a reading.
Gracias amigo por kompartir una preg d la marca Hioki multímetro análogo o digital cuál recomiendas o chekar pulsos automotrices d sensores actuadores o pulsos d trasmisión electrónica gracias por tu ayuda
Did you post a link to this video on the EEVBlog, or start a new thread called 121GW testing/features? If so, can you add that EEVBlog thread URL to the description of the video. Thanks for taking the time to to these videos. I know your normally don’t do videos and it does take extra time out of the day so I appreciate you doing these. If I had mine (lost on shipping) I might have figured out some of these issue already as I mentioned some interesting behavior in Joe’s comment on this video. If my theory is correct, it could also explain why the bar reads faster then the displayed results. The bar isn’t trying to do any math, seem like this should be able to fix with a firmware update. Scott
Thanks, it is good idea to put the link of the discussion in EEVblog forum. I have not made a new thread at the forum by myself since there ware already a good thread with long discussion. I made the video after I saw the discussion at this link. www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-eevblog-branded-multimeter-coming/msg1396054/#msg1396054
Agreed, all the meters have pros and cons, and I am using 121GW when I want 50,000 count resolution, that is enough for me. The auto range speed on Voltage is alright at least for me and the auto rage speed on Resistance is not fast and I just switch to the manual ranges. My first multimeter was manual range and my old habit kicks in :)
You need to wait for the meter to fully settle with OFL displayed before reapplying the short if you want it to reproduce when you apply the short or device you are testing. The other two meters over range very fast so they repeat. Still, a good test and thank you for showing it.
Hi Joe Smith, thank you for your comment, did not know it requires to wait until OFL shows on display, then they were keep searching in the auto rage in my video. Great to have beneficial knowledge. Thanks.
If you decide to repeat the test, you may find it takes just as long to go both directions. OFL to short and short to OFL may both be around your six or so seconds. You could just verify this on the bench and post your results. Again, thank you for taking the time to post this information.
What I find interesting is if these are the same Brymen leads as Dave said came with the BM235, this doesn’t match mine at all. And I don’t use my leads often, mostly my fluke or Pro master probes.
So my fluke 298 says 0.08 with a dead short before zeroing out, but it’s a two wire reading. FYI, under 3 seconds for the fluke auto range to zero out.
My 2 miliohm meters I’m testing agree with each other. Let say 0.0289 for one, and 0.0248 for the other. When checked on my HP34401A I get 0.028 and 0.023. I forgot to set my HP on a higher resolution count. Either way, your probes should be in the 0.06? Range. I also removed the banana adapters from my Brymen leads like you have for this test.
I wonder if they are trying to auto zero it out like the BM235 does. I would rather it doesn’t do this, and manually zero it out for the lower ranges, and have it over limit in the higher resistance ranges.
So I hope they didn’t try to build this into the firmware. If they did, they need to remove it so the meter doesn’t struggle with the extra math, lol.
I noticed you added the alligator clips that should have added 0.033 Ohms to the measurement since you didn’t zero out the meter. So maybe they are trying to do this for user ease of use.
If so, they shouldn’t. If you buy a 50,000 count meter then users need to understand they will just have to zero out under a certain range for accurate reading. This is how it is with higher resolution meters. Why change this now, dump that code for auto zeroing if they put it in.
This meter does have a ref (zero) button? Doesn’t it?
Forgot to add the link to your reply. www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-eevblog-branded-multimeter-coming/msg1397204/#msg1397204
I have a cheapo UNI-T UT61E and it takes a fraction of a second for the resistance ranging test with hands, and maybe half for going from open to shorted. I'm way too impatient to wait several seconds for a reading.
Definitely, Hioki is the ¡Lightning! I have a 3246-60 pencil tester and is really fast.
Gracias amigo por kompartir una preg d la marca Hioki multímetro análogo o digital cuál recomiendas o chekar pulsos automotrices d sensores actuadores o pulsos d trasmisión electrónica gracias por tu ayuda
Did you post a link to this video on the EEVBlog, or start a new thread called 121GW testing/features?
If so, can you add that EEVBlog thread URL to the description of the video.
Thanks for taking the time to to these videos. I know your normally don’t do videos and it does take extra time out of the day so I appreciate you doing these.
If I had mine (lost on shipping) I might have figured out some of these issue already as I mentioned some interesting behavior in Joe’s comment on this video. If my theory is correct, it could also explain why the bar reads faster then the displayed results. The bar isn’t trying to do any math, seem like this should be able to fix with a firmware update.
Scott
Thanks, it is good idea to put the link of the discussion in EEVblog forum. I have not made a new thread at the forum by myself since there ware already a good thread with long discussion. I made the video after I saw the discussion at this link. www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-eevblog-branded-multimeter-coming/msg1396054/#msg1396054
It's not fair to compare these 3 multimeters, when the resolution on the other two is so poor compared to the EEVblog one.
Agreed, all the meters have pros and cons, and I am using 121GW when I want 50,000 count resolution, that is enough for me. The auto range speed on Voltage is alright at least for me and the auto rage speed on Resistance is not fast and I just switch to the manual ranges. My first multimeter was manual range and my old habit kicks in :)