# Digital Multimeter Which One?



## crofty (Aug 23, 2008)

I`ve narrowed it down to these four multimeters for testing battery voltage.

http://www.henrys.co.uk/TEST/600038digitalmultester.html
http://www.henrys.co.uk/TEST/600228digitalmultester.html
http://www.henrys.co.uk/TEST/600219digitalmultester.html
http://www.henrys.co.uk/TEST/y124adigitalmultester.html

Is it take your pick or would one be better than the rest?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Cheesy (Aug 23, 2008)

If you're sure that all you want it to do is measure voltage, you might as well get the cheapest they have, about £5.

I'm intrigued as to the narrowing down process that arrived at those four?


Kev.


----------



## crofty (Aug 23, 2008)

I wouldn`t have a clue what else to use it for but those four are the only one`s on that site which are in stock and have a temp. censor which would be a bonus.

So if their all going to be equally as accurate I should just go for the cheapest as the extra features on the other one`s wouldn`t get used?

Thanks


----------



## Cheesy (Aug 23, 2008)

I can't say for certain what use you would get from any extras. From the limited information available to me, I would say not much.

I don't know how much £15 represents to you but in multimeter terms it's very little, practically disposable when the battery runs flat.


Kev.


----------



## crofty (Aug 23, 2008)

So you think I should spend more for an accurate meter, suggestions?

£15 is quite a lot to just read volts but not overly expensive if it`s going to do the job well.

I just want it to read battery voltage accurately.

Thanks


----------



## steve6690 (Aug 23, 2008)

http://www.henrys.co.uk/TEST/600219digitalmultester.html

that's the one I have and I like it. Can't say much more than that really. It's only 15 quid....


----------



## Tomcat! (Aug 23, 2008)

Crofty, from what you mentioned they would all meet your needs. They are fairly basic units, which in this case is a good thing, but don't expect super accuracy for those prices. 

A multimeter is a useful thing to have around the house. Even the most basic units will help you measure voltages from batteries. You can also test faulty DC adaptors (which are notoriously fragile), standard light bulbs, fuses and cable breaks for example. Such testing doesn't require you to understand what the read outs actually mean, just that you actually get a reading at all, though for detailed diagnosis it does help. You can also test mains voltages, but if you don't know what you are doing then don't. Spending big on a piece of test equipment you will not use to its full potential is pointless so these cheap ones should be just fine. Better to get comfortable with using one of these and find out if you need something better later.

Two extra points to add. One - get a small pouch or other storage bag to put your meter and accessories in to stop damage. Maplins do a range of meter pouches or you could even make do with an appropriately sized box lined with bubble wrap. The meters with the yellow rubber holster only protect the unit itself, not the test leads. Damaged leads are just going to make testing harder if you cannot tell whether your test equipment itself is faulty. Two - if you don't use your meter regularly or store it for long periods, take the battery out. A leaking cell will make a real mess of the meter and drive you to distraction if the meter doesn't work when you need it in a hurry. (Nothing ever breaks down when you don't need it!) 
Oh and never use rechargeable batteries to power any measuring device as their voltages are too variable. Primaries only.

Hope this helps.


----------



## crofty (Aug 23, 2008)

How accurate is it, or do these things just work and that`s it? In which case I`d go for the cheaper one.

EDIT: Just seen your reply Tomcat! reading..


----------



## crofty (Aug 23, 2008)

That`s a big help Tomcat thanks, will start of with the cheap one and look into a better one if needed :thumbsup:


----------



## Tomcat! (Aug 23, 2008)

crofty said:


> How accurate is it, or do these things just work and that`s it? In which case I`d go for the cheaper one.
> 
> EDIT: Just seen your reply Tomcat! reading..




More money buys more accuracy, usually. The question is, do you need that accuracy? You can pay hundreds for the best quality meters and pay again to have them manufacturer calibrated every year. Unless you are an electrician, test engineer or some sort of scientist then probably not. Most people will be happy with a read out of two or three decimal places and an accuracy of a percentage point or two. 

When looking at the accuracy of a meter, look at the spec details. Where the ranges are listed you will see a figure in brackets which gives the manufacturers stated accuracy. Example: The 600.038 meter you listed shows a DC voltage range of 200 millivolts to 1000 volts with an accuracy of ±0.5%. This ± figure is what you should look for when comparing one meter against another, across all the measurable ranges listed. Obviously because the ± bit is basically saying 'give or take', you want a lower number so that the variation in accuracy is smaller. If we take a further example using the same meter and compare it against a more expensive 600.527 model and look at the DC current range, one meter is accurate to ±10% whereas the other is ±0.8% which is a huge difference *if* that accuracy is important to you. I say 'if' as a warning not to get too hung up on accuracy in the event that you don't need it or wouldn't appreciate it. Spending more for something you won't notice isn't necessary. Besides, you could be putting that money towards...ooh I dunno... more torches perhaps!:thumbsup:


----------



## HKJ (Aug 23, 2008)

Tomcat! said:


> Oh and never use rechargeable batteries to power any measuring device as their voltages are too variable. Primaries only.



That is not true, NiMH has a much more stable output voltage than alkaline batteries, but most NiMH has a high self discharge rate, i.e. the battery will be empty in 1/2 year, even if the meter is not used.

And that leads to the serious problem with many cheap meters, they do not warn that the battery is low, they will just show a wrong result!

It might be a good idea to get a meter with a 10/20A range, then your can check the current consumption of your flashlights and estimate run time on batteries.
I.e. if your measure a light is using 0.3A and your are using batteries with 600mAH (0.6AH), your can expect about (0.6AH/0.3A) two hours run time.


----------



## Tomcat! (Aug 23, 2008)

HKJ said:


> That is not true, NiMH has a much more stable output voltage than alkaline batteries, but most NiMH has a high self discharge rate, i.e. the battery will be empty in 1/2 year, even if the meter is not used.




What I should have said is that NiMH run at lower voltages than primaries and most measuring devices are designed to operate at a specific voltage. I would never run a photographic light meter for example on rechargeables because of inaccurate readings. As you point out, the self-discharge rate is a very important factor for an item that may not get used often, so for simplicity and reliability sake I wouldn't use rechargeables for a meter.


----------



## HKJ (Aug 23, 2008)

Tomcat! said:


> What I should have said is that NiMH run at lower voltages than primaries and most measuring devices are designed to operate at a specific voltage. I would never run a photographic light meter for example on rechargeables because of inaccurate readings. As you point out, the self-discharge rate is a very important factor for an item that may not get used often, so for simplicity and reliability sake I wouldn't use rechargeables for a meter.



Usual the specification for a alkaline battery specifies that is can be used down to 0.9 volt, before it is empty. A NiMH will be at 1.2 volt for most of its discharge. I.e. for most uses the NiMH has equal or higher voltage than alkaline for half the runtime, with high current devices it might be much more than that.

For equipment with very low current consumption (like multimeters) I would either use primary batteries or low discharge NiMH. But then I do not use meters without "low battery" warning (That is to dangerous)!

As long as equipment has a "low battery" warning, I will use either type of battery, depending on what kind of usage I expect and I might also look at the leak risk (Much higher for alkaline than NiMH, but for a cheap device it does not really matter).


----------



## Tomcat! (Aug 23, 2008)

HKJ said:


> Usual the specification for a alkaline battery specifies that is can be used down to 0.9 volt, before it is empty. A NiMH will be at 1.2 volt for most of its discharge. I.e. for most uses the NiMH has equal or higher voltage than alkaline for half the runtime, with high current devices it might be much more than that.
> 
> For equipment with very low current consumption (like multimeters) I would either use primary batteries or low discharge NiMH. But then I do not use meters without "low battery" warning (That is to dangerous)!
> 
> As long as equipment has a "low battery" warning, I will use either type of battery, depending on what kind of usage I expect and I might also look at the leak risk (Much higher for alkaline than NiMH, but for a cheap device it does not really matter).



I would still recommend primaries for simplicity in this case. The meters the OP was looking at, and indeed all the meters I've owned or used are all 9v powered. As far as I know there aren't any NiMH LSDs available, but I suppose it's only a matter of time. For all non-metering applications I use LSDs and got rid of my high output NiMH. LSDs are wonderful around the home.


----------



## HKJ (Aug 23, 2008)

Tomcat! said:


> I would still recommend primaries for simplicity in this case. The meters the OP was looking at, and indeed all the meters I've owned or used are all 9v powered. As far as I know there aren't any NiMH LSDs available, but I suppose it's only a matter of time. For all non-metering applications I use LSDs and got rid of my high output NiMH. LSDs are wonderful around the home.



For 9 volt I would also use alkaline.
But as I wrote above, I do not really care what the application is, I evaluate it more from how often I replace batteries.


----------



## crofty (Aug 24, 2008)

This is the stuff thanks guys, I`ve learn`t a lot.



Tomcat! said:


> More money buys more accuracy, usually. The question is, do you need that accuracy?


That is the question now, imagine we know a battery is 3.7v. As long as the meter reads it as 3.7v and not 3.8 or 3.6 for example that`s the accuracy I`m looking for.

I`m thinking of giving this one a go but it doesn`t list accuracy. Is there a test that can be done with the meter to check it`s reading correctly?
Somethig like what you can do with scales, weigh a ten pence coin which you know weighs 6.50 grams.

Yeah AA LSD`s would be perfect because I have a few sopare but all the meters seem to use 9v, shame there are no PP3 LSD`s aswell. Saw a PDF somewhere yesterday showing NiMH LSD`s holding higher voltage than alkaline for all but the first bit of charge. 

Thanks


----------



## Cheesy (Aug 24, 2008)

If you click 'view full technical specification' you can see the accuracy is 0.5%. I remain unconvinced that you can actually believe the quoted specifications of a cheap meter but if you only want ±100mV at ~4V that is 2-3%.

I think you need to stop over analysing the issue and buy one.


Kev.


----------



## crofty (Aug 24, 2008)

Cheesy said:


> if you only want ±100mV at ~4V that is 2-3%.


What does that mean, it will only measure up to 4V? I need it to measure up to at least 4.2V



Cheesy said:


> I think you need to stop over analysing the issue and buy one.


I`ve never owned and don`t know how to use a multimeter, simply trying to get something that will do the job to a reasonable standard without paying silly money.
Blindly buying something that I`m not sure will even do the job is stupid, IMO I`m not over analyzing anything but thanks for your opinion.


----------



## Cheesy (Aug 24, 2008)

Yours for free.

As you can see, I've cleaned it up in the third and fifth pictures. The protective film is still in place (the bubbled effect).

The only defect is a broken black probe end, it can be epoxied or Rapid have replacements for ~£1.50.

PM me your address if you want it.

If you want, I'll take it to work and compare readings with a Fluke DMM with a valid calibration certificate.

EDIT: Incidentally, it's this one here and don't bother with Rapid for the leads as they'll want another £6 for delivery.


Kev.


----------



## TinderBox (UK) (Aug 24, 2008)

I have an MASTECH MS8209 it does everything

Display: 3999 counts 
- Auto/Manual Range 
- Relative, Data Hold, Backlight 
- Auto Power Off 
- DC Voltage: 0.4/4/40/400/600V ± 0.7% 
- AC Voltage: 4/40/400/600V ± 0.8% 
- Resistance: 400/4k/40k/400k/4M Ohm ± 1.2% 40M Ohm ± 2.0% 
- Capacitance: 4n/40n/400n/4micro/200microF ± 3.0% 
- Frequency: 10/100/1k/10k/100kHz ± 2.0% 
- Duty Cycle: 0.1% - 99.9% ± 3.0% 
- Temperature: -20°C - 400°C ± 3.0% (0.1°C) 
.................... -20°C - 1000°C ± 3.0% (1°C) 
- Humidity: 30% - 95%RH ± 5.0%RH 
- Light: 4000Lux/40000Lux ± 5.0% 
- Sound Level: 35 - 100dB ± 4dB 
- Continuity Test 
- Diode Test 
- In Accordance with IEC1010 Standard 


http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0007Z0TAY/?tag=cpf0b6-20

A review is below!

http://www.devhardware.com/c/a/Mobile-Devices/Mastech-5-in-1-Multimeter-Review/


----------



## crofty (Aug 24, 2008)

Cheesy, Well it clearly is accurate, Thanks for the offer but I couldn`t possibly take it of you. I`ll get a new one of the bay. :thumbsup:

TinderBox, That`s a bit pricey for my current needs and it`s not likely I`ll ever need an all singing all dancing meter, so I`ll keep that in mind incase I ever do, thanks. :thumbsup:


----------



## yaesumofo (Aug 24, 2008)

I am a fan of FLUKE meters.
They are accurate and heavy duty. they are also protected by a domestic (USA) warranty.

There is no doubt that meters have become cheap. they have also become LOW quality devices. Cheap meters have the potential to be inaccurate as well as to break easily.

IMHO you would be jut as well off going to radio shack (they have those in the UK right) or a good hardware store that sells meters and buying one there rather than buying an unknown meter from a ebay seller.
If you can I highly recommend that buy local. The price might be a little higher but if you have a problem you will have somebody to go to.
Another option is to look for an electronics shop locally and finding a meter there. A USED meter like a fluke is likely better that a NEW cheap low quality meter.
BTW if somebody offered me a free meter and I needed a meter I would take it. Iam sure it is offered in the giving spirit f the CPF. Take it. use it until you feel ready for a higher end unit then give it to another new CPF'er.
Have a great day.
Yaesumofo


----------



## DocD (Aug 25, 2008)

I have two fluke meter's a 179 and a 83 mrk 5, go with the most expenise one you can buy at the time, i aimed for 200 pounds, these are easy to use and everwere sell's spares like clips leads IMO you can't go wrong with fluke
as my father would say "There is no quality in the word cheap"


----------



## Tomcat! (Aug 25, 2008)

Cheesy said:


> Yours for free.
> 
> As you can see, I've cleaned it up in the third and fifth pictures. The protective film is still in place (the bubbled effect).
> 
> ...



Crofty, you should go for it. Cheesy's tested it and quite honestly it's as much as you need right now until you learn how to use a meter and discover whether you want to go further and get a more serious meter. As you've seen, there are plenty of people with quality equipment who can recommend or advise but for now, cheap is fine. Of course free is even better!:twothumbs

DocD and Tinderbox (UK) - Let's not frighten off Crofty with overkill kit too soon. It's like trying to convince someone they want a Polarion HID when what they came in for was a nice keychain light for finding their keyhole. This is his first meter and he doesn't know how to use it or if he really needs anything more. He should discover for himself what his needs are and when Crofty comes back for advice on his next purchase... then we can empty his bank account. :devil:



yaesumofo said:


> IMHO you would be jut as well off going to radio shack (they have those in the UK right) or a good hardware store that sells meters and buying one there rather than buying an unknown meter from a ebay seller.
> If you can I highly recommend that buy local.


We used to have Radio Shack here in the 70s but they traded under the name of Tandy, though all the own brand products were marked as Radio Shack. They disappeared from our high streets in the early 90s and the gap in the UK market for a nationwide chain of electronic components stores was filled by Maplin. They have expanded all over the UK and basically do for the British what Radio Shack does for the Americans. So any Brits getting advice from an American to visit Radio Shack, think Maplin and you'll be on the right track. :wave:
There's an entry in Wikipedia about Radio Shack. I used to live 40ft away from one as a kid and was forever collecting their free batteries and torches. _They_ are responsible for my flashaholism!


----------



## crofty (Aug 25, 2008)

I agree, a fluke would be an ideal choice. I`m a fan of paying a bit more for quality too (just bought a Pila IBC) however, flukes are a big spend for something that`s way overkill for my needs and Cheesy has proven that a £12 meter works well enough for what I need it for.

One day when I`ve got enough spare cash to burn I`ll treat myself to a fluke.

EDIT:
Arg Tomcat you keep posting while I`m replying  ... reading..


----------



## crofty (Aug 25, 2008)

Tomcat! said:


> Crofty, you should go for it.


After the postage, new leads and possibly a battery. The same model new is only a few quid more, I`ve got a bit for a meter just not 100+ for something that`s overkill and won`t get fully utilised. So while appreciative of Cheesy`s offer I think it would be better kept as a spare or given to someone with zero £ who really needs a meter.



Tomcat! said:


> Let's not frighten off Crofty with overkill kit too soon.


Yes and stop tempting me :devil:



Tomcat! said:


> when Crofty comes back for advice on his next purchase... then we can empty his bank account. :devil:


Fine by me as long as your the one to fill it back up again hehe



Tomcat! said:


> _They_ are responsible for my flashaholism!


In my case that would be you lot


----------



## Tomcat! (Aug 25, 2008)

crofty said:


> Arg Tomcat you keep posting while I`m replying  ... reading..



Cover up that webcam and I won't know what you're up to!


----------



## precisionworks (Aug 25, 2008)

> I am a fan of FLUKE meters. They are accurate and heavy duty.





> as my father would say "There is no quality in the word cheap"



+1

A Fluke 179 is my 'at home' DMM, and a Fluke 87V is used at work. Fluke's don't lie to you ... they are consistently accurate.

Most everything else is less than dependable


----------



## crofty (Aug 25, 2008)

crofty said:


> shame there are no PP3 LSD`s


Well thankfully, I was wrong.


----------



## UnknownVT (Aug 25, 2008)

Cheesy said:


> Yours for free.


 
Just can't beat that price :thumbsup:-
now that is extremely generous.....

That pictured DMM looks a lot like the very ubiquitous Digital MultiMeter for $5.... in the USA, and sold in a different color by Harbor Freight (when on sale it can be as low as $2.88) - lots of people use these and they are about as accurate to the least significant digit.



crofty said:


> That is the question now, imagine we know a battery is 3.7v. As long as the meter reads it as 3.7v and not 3.8 or 3.6 for example that`s the accuracy I`m looking for.


 
This may be a problem... 
not for the DMM - any DMM at that - 
but the battery -
most Li-Ion rechargeable batteries are marked as 3.7V (or 3.6V) - 
BUT as most people know when freshly charged they are about 4.1-4.2V and when fully discharged they are about 3.5V.

I think Cheesy's very generous offer above is great, and the accuracy shown on his pics with the power supply about all one really needs, and I'll bet when Cheesy compares it against a certified/calibrated Fluke DMM the accuracy is going to be within the least significant digit - I'd be more than happy with that - and would have already jumped at his very generous offer......


----------



## crofty (Aug 25, 2008)

UnknownVT said:


> most Li-Ion rechargeable batteries are marked as 3.7V (or 3.6V) -
> BUT as most people know when freshly charged they are about 4.1-4.2V and when fully discharged they are about 3.5V.


You`ve took that out of context. It was a hypothetical question, I know battery voltages fluxuate


----------



## TorchBoy (Aug 26, 2008)

Interesting thread. I've been comparing my three digital multimeters recently because I've found pretty much by accident that the resistance of their 200 mA range differs a lot between them. What's a reasonable resistance for that range?



Tomcat! said:


> What I should have said is that NiMH run at lower voltages than primaries and most measuring devices are designed to operate at a specific voltage.


That is also not true. Most of the life of an alkaline cell its voltage is below that of a similarly loaded NiMH cell. Have you seen the PDF by curious_character on that subject?

But like you say, the trouble with self discharge tends to rule NiMH out.



crofty said:


> This is the stuff thanks guys, I`ve learn`t a lot.


Next lesson... "learnt" doesn't have an apostrophe. 

Great pics Cheesy, and great offer.


----------



## crofty (Aug 26, 2008)

TorchBoy said:


> I've been comparing my three digital multimeters recently because I've found pretty much by accident that the resistance of their 200 mA range differs a lot between them.


What`s that all about, have I purchased something that`s not so accurate after all?



TorchBoy said:


> the trouble with self discharge tends to rule NiMH out.


Accept LSD`s



TorchBoy said:


> Next lesson... "learnt" doesn't have an apostrophe.


Thanks for pointing out that typo, grammer nazi.


----------



## Mr Happy (Aug 26, 2008)

TorchBoy said:


> Interesting thread. I've been comparing my three digital multimeters recently because I've found pretty much by accident that the resistance of their 200 mA range differs a lot between them. What's a reasonable resistance for that range?


It's always going to be fairly high, at least on every meter I've tested. Maybe really expensive meters like Flukes are better, but I don't have one to test.

Basically I always use the 10A range for measuring currents in lights, even for lower currents. The 200 mA range is best used for current regulated circuits where the increased resistance of the meter won't affect the reading.


----------



## Meterman (Aug 26, 2008)

Mr Happy said:


> Basically I always use the 10A range for measuring currents in lights, even for lower currents. The 200 mA range is best used for current regulated circuits where the increased resistance of the meter won't affect the reading.



_Mr Happy_ is right as usual.

For example my Metrix mtx 3282 (much too expensive) has the following resistances for A DC:

1000μA > 170Ω
10mA > 17Ω
100mA > 1.7Ω
1000mA > 0.17Ω
10/20A > 0.03Ω (no typo)

Don't forget the resistance of the test leads when measuring high currents! I've measured a few of them and found them between 21mΩ and 25mΩ each.

Wulf

*EDIT*: To avoid voltage loss when measuring currents I prefer the use of a special current clamp, ranging from 1mA to 4500mA.


----------



## Cheesy (Aug 26, 2008)

Meterman said:


> my Metrix mtx 3282



What do you think of it? (other than the eye-watering price tag)

I am considering a MTX3282-COM, could you start a new thread and post some photos? I'm not 100% clear on what you get in the box.

Also, is eur516 a good price.


Kev.


----------



## TorchBoy (Aug 26, 2008)

crofty said:


> Accept LSD`s


I certainly accept LS'Ds - Eneloop in particular. There awl eye ewe's these daze. I suppose 9V Eneloops will arrive eventually, but in the meantime NiMH isn't a good long-term option. And my England is good gramm*a*r.





Meterman said:


> *EDIT*: To avoid voltage loss when measuring currents I prefer the use of a special current clamp, ranging from 1mA to 4500mA.


Doesn't that add its own load to the circuit, thereby resulting in a voltage drop? Thanks very much for the measurements. :twothumbs


----------



## Meterman (Aug 27, 2008)

Cheesy said:


> What do you think of it? (other than the eye-watering price tag)
> 
> I am considering a MTX3282-COM, could you start a new thread and post some photos? I'm not 100% clear on what you get in the box.
> 
> ...



The mtx 3282 is an excellent multimeter with a giant range of measuring possibilities, including a graphic display and a memory (data logger). I'd for sure buy it again, but may be in the bluetooth version.

Without photos and so on (in the above shown link you find a lot of pictures) I think we can keep it in this thread, even if the question was merely thought for cheap DMMs. It may be interesting for some people though to see what can be done with a multimeter.

The content of the box is given at the end of the description and the lowest price for the *mtx 3282 com* I could find in Germany is 510.51EUR including taxes (19%).

Wulf


----------



## Meterman (Aug 27, 2008)

_(Originally Posted by Meterman: 
To avoid voltage loss when measuring currents I prefer the use of a special current clamp, ranging from 1mA to 4500mA.)_



TorchBoy said:


> Doesn't that add its own load to the circuit, thereby resulting in a voltage drop? Thanks very much for the measurements. :twothumbs



You are quite right in saying that there is a load added when measuring by means of the current clamp, as there is no measurement in the world possible without influencing the measured object.





But as I'm using the _upper_ clamp with probably one ore more hall generators in the jaw (and not the lower Fluke clamp, which is only a transformer for AC) I think the load will be neglectable as it is when you measure the voltage of an 18650 cell with a high impedance DMM.

Wulf


----------



## Wok (Aug 27, 2008)

Hi Meterman,

Is the small DCA an add-on to a standard DMM? Supplier/manufacturer links?

eng hoe


----------



## Meterman (Aug 27, 2008)

Hi _Wok_,

the AC/DC current probe K1 is made by Chauvin Arnoux, it converts current to voltage (1mV/mA) from 1mA to 4500mA DC and from 1mA to 3000mA AC. The output connectors of it's adapter case are to be plugged into a voltmeter with appropriate ranges.

If you want a tenfold resolution at a tenth of the possible current (0.1 to 450mA) , the model K2 is right for you.

Manufacturer is given in the link, my supplier in Germany would deliver to the USA, but via the manufacturer you might find a supplier sitting directly in the USA.

But here is a warning: Better you sit down before asking for the price! :sigh:

Wulf


----------



## crofty (Aug 27, 2008)

TorchBoy said:


> I suppose 9V Eneloops will arrive eventually


Hope so too, untill then Uniross PP3 LSD`s will have to do.

_I never did and do not wish to turn this thread into a war, so that`s all I shall say._


----------



## Cheesy (Aug 27, 2008)

Meterman said:


> The content of the box is given at the end of the description



Cheers Wulf.

I had seen that PDF already, that was why I was confused. 

It doesn't state which accessories come with each version it just says that they are optional or included depending on version. The only thing I can work out is that the 2 & 3 have NiMH and the 1 has primary cells included.

Which version have you got, -COM?

If so, does the software and leads come with it or are they optional?

I believe the case is optional but possibly not required as the meter folds up to protect the LCD and keypad anyway.


Kev.


----------



## eluminator (Aug 27, 2008)

I use eneloops in my latest DMM. It's a Mastech MS8268. It uses 3 AAA cells instead of a 9 volt battery. 

It came with "no name" alkaline cells. One cell was dead when I got it.


----------



## Alan B (Aug 28, 2008)

If you want to work with PWM you might want an RMS reading meter.

Another feature that can be handy is clamp-on amps. Some meters have DC clamp on ammeters that are quite useful for measuring currents without breaking the conductors.

It makes some sense to have more than one meter, so one can easily be very inexpensive. You choose whether to start with a low cost or better quality meter.

-- Alan


----------



## TorchBoy (Aug 28, 2008)

crofty said:


> Hope so too, untill then Uniross PP3 LSD`s will have to do.


Hey, nice. 200 mAh _and_ LSD. Sounds almost too good to be true. Pity payback time would be so long - a few years, I'd guess.


----------



## Meterman (Aug 29, 2008)

Cheesy said:


> Cheers Wulf.
> 
> I had seen that PDF already, that was why I was confused.
> 
> ...



Hi Kev,

in the meantime I've double and triple checked it, as my buying the _3282 COM_ has been nearly two years ago and I want to be quite sure about my informations.

The standard 3282 brings manual, test-leads, 3 NiMH batteries and charger.

The _3282 COM_ in addition is supplemented with the communication kit HX0050, containing the optical RS232 cable + PC software.

(The pouch is always an extra. I don't need it.)

Hope these informations encourage you!


Wulf


----------



## wptski (Aug 30, 2008)

Meterman said:


> Hi _Wok_,
> 
> the AC/DC current probe K1 is made by Chauvin Arnoux, it converts current to voltage (1mV/mA) from 1mA to 4500mA DC and from 1mA to 3000mA AC. The output connectors of it's adapter case are to be plugged into a voltmeter with appropriate ranges.
> 
> ...


I have the K110 or what's refered to as the K2 in your link. The max conductor that can be measured is 3/16" or 4.5mm. So, you couldn't hardly clamp around two conductors like AC phase and neutral if you were checking for leakage/unbalance. Working with AC, it has a low crest factor, so it's a problem with distorted signals.


----------



## Meterman (Aug 30, 2008)

wptski said:


> I have the K110 or what's refered to as the K2 in your link. The max conductor that can be measured is 3/16" or 4.5mm. So, you couldn't hardly clamp around two conductors like AC phase and neutral if you were checking for leakage/unbalance. Working with AC, it has a low crest factor, so it's a problem with distorted signals.



I couldn't find anything about a K110, Chauvin Arnoux only shows K1 and K2.

I'm very happy with the small clamping capacity as this minimizes external influence and improves accuracy. Up to now I had not the need to clamp around two conductors. And for measuring only AC current there is a big variety of current clamps available. Perhaps I'll try one of mine for the purpose mentioned by you some day, but for real measuring leakage current etc. I've got a special instrument made by Gossen for testing 230V devices.

For K1 and K2 CA show at their internet page "Measurement range 1mA ... 3A RMS" for the K1 and "0.1 ... 300mA RMS" for the K2 respectively, and "RMS measurements with AC + DC components". 

In the manual they write: 

"These probes measure . . . DC . . . and on the other hand sinusoidal AC currents . . .

These probes output the current measured in the form of a voltage that is the *image* of the primary current, *in form* and amplitude."

This makes me think that the accepted crestfactor is merely a question of the voltmeter you use and not of the current probe.

Wulf


----------



## wptski (Aug 30, 2008)

Meterman said:


> I couldn't find anything about a K110, Chauvin Arnoux only shows K1 and K2.
> 
> I'm very happy with the small clamping capacity as this minimizes external influence and improves accuracy. Up to now I had not the need to clamp around two conductors. And for measuring only AC current there is a big variety of current clamps available. Perhaps I'll try one of mine for the purpose mentioned by you some day, but for real measuring leakage current etc. I've got a special instrument made by Gossen for testing 230V devices.
> 
> ...


Look here: http://www.tequipment.net/AEMCDCACMicroprobes.html

I was getting a OL LED far below the AC max and emailed them and the answer given was a lower limit for a higher crest factor. Not sure about the CF being deterimed by the meter but I know RMS or non-RMS is by the meter. That's the answer I got from them!


----------



## Ray1968 (Aug 30, 2008)

I just bought a Fluke 179 off of eBay. It was new in the box and never used with a 'buy now' price of $100. But I have a bad feeling about this. The seller only has a rating of 16, and only one transaction between now and 2006. And in one of his older deals he aparantly never shipped the item.

Guess I'll have to kick myself in the back-side if I get ganked.


----------



## Meterman (Aug 31, 2008)

wptski said:


> Look here: http://www.tequipment.net/AEMCDCACMicroprobes.html
> 
> I was getting a OL LED far below the AC max and emailed them and the answer given was a lower limit for a higher crest factor. Not sure about the CF being deterimed by the meter but I know RMS or non-RMS is by the meter. That's the answer I got from them!



Interesting URL. So Chauvin Arnoux seem to sell their equipment in the USA branded AEMC? The logo is that of CA. There I read "Chauvin Arnoux®, Inc. d.b.a. AEMC® Instruments", but I can't find out what "_Inc. d.b.a._" means.

The OL LED of course can be set to on only by the K110, as the voltmeter doesn't give any feedback. I think the answer of tequipment is quite a bit lazy, there should have been more information from a qualified person. If this strange OL effect happens again, it might be interesting to see that current at an oscilloscope.

Wulf


----------



## Ray1968 (Aug 31, 2008)

d.b.a. = doing business as


----------



## Meterman (Aug 31, 2008)

Thank you, _Ray1968_, now that's clear!

Wish you much luck in getting your Fluke! I myself own some very different instruments from them.

Wulf


----------



## BentHeadTX (Sep 1, 2008)

I have used fluke, extech and jensen meters with no problems
My favorite is the Fluke 179 true RMS and Extech automatic oscilliscope/meter thing. Even if you get a basic meter, the fluke lead sets make it much easier to use. Good luck!


----------



## crofty (Feb 1, 2009)

OP followup: My cheap meter is going wonky, sometimes it shows the error symbol when you turn it on, it also reads about 0.20v higher than it should. Turning it off and on a few times turns it back to normal operation. Tried a new battery but it acts the same, I`ve lost confidence in cheap meters now.

So I`m going to save up for a fluke, not sure which one to go for though. The 179 looks nice and can measure temperature, cheapest I`ve found it for is around £200. Is their a cheaper Fluke that is ideal for measuring battery voltages and has temperature sensing?


----------



## Alan B (Feb 1, 2009)

The Extech's are excellent. I use one frequently. Mine is about $50 and came with the temperature probe. They have lots of models and price points to choose from.

I was about to buy a Fluke 179 when I discovered it has AC RMS, so it disregards the DC component. So it won't read PWM accurately which is what is needed for flashlights.

I bought instead a Fluke 189. These are recently discontinued but quite available.


----------



## Mr Happy (Feb 1, 2009)

There is a mid-way point between cheap meters and really expensive meters. I share your experience that some of the really cheap stuff like the $2.99 meters I have bought from Harbor Freight are just too cheap and sometimes misbehave after a bit of use. However, I have one of these more expensive Innova meters (model 3320) found in Wal-Mart, and the quality of construction is in a different league. I don't know if is available anywhere in the UK, but I would certainly recommend it.


----------



## Lite_me (Feb 1, 2009)

This is what I use. Same model. I've recommended it here in the past and no one said anything, good or bad. I like mine.


----------



## TakeTheActive (Feb 1, 2009)

*There's a BIG Difference Between INEXPENSIVE and CHEAP!*



crofty said:


> OP followup: My cheap meter is going wonky... ...I`ve lost confidence in cheap meters now.
> 
> So I`m going to save up for a fluke... ...cheapest I`ve found it for is around £200...


Which meter did you eventually buy? There's a BIG difference between INEXPENSIVE and CHEAP!

Around 25 years ago, I bought a Hitachi VR-3550 for ~$60 at a computer meet. The accuracy is:
VDC: ±0.5%
VAC ±1.0%
ADC ±1.0% (±2.0% on 10A)
AAC ±1.5% (±3.0% on 10A)
Still works just fine for my needs.

A few years ago, I bought a Sears Craftsman 82015 for ~$10 *ON SALE* for something to carry around, use outside, etc... since it included a "Shock-Absorbing Holster". The accuracy is:
VDC: ±1.0%
VAC ±1.2%
ADC ±1.2%
Again, it does the job and never gave me any trouble.

IMHO, $290.78 is a *LOT* of money to spend on something that you didn't even know how to use on 08-23-2008 @ 07:35 AM.  I bet that *FREE* meter from *Cheesy* is still running fine. 

Get some recommendations for an INEXPENSIVE meter that you can buy locally in a B&M for <£20.63 ($30). And don't over-analyze! 


```
£  1.00 = $  1.4539
£  6.88 = $ 10.00
£ 41.27 = $ 60.00
£200.00 = $290.78
```


----------



## crofty (Feb 1, 2009)

No luck find either Innova or Extech`s in UK, I guess I just need to spend a bit more than the really cheap one`s to get more reliability.

Would prefer a fluke if I can`t get the same model as you guys use (tried and tested). The 116 looks like a good alternative for the 179. Please keep your budgest suggestions coming though.


TakeTheActive, Needs and opinions change, get over it and stop over analyzing things


----------



## likeguymontag (Feb 1, 2009)

crofty said:


> No luck find either Innova or Extech`s in UK, I guess I just need to spend a bit more than the really cheap one`s to get more reliability.
> 
> Would prefer a fluke if I can`t get the same model as you guys use (tried and tested). The 116 looks like a good alternative for the 179. Please keep your budgest suggestions coming though.



I've gotten along just fine with my Radio Shack and Craftsman branded DMMs, each costing something like $30. You won't find either of those brands in the UK, but the point is that the choice isn't Fluke vs. crap; there's a whole range of choices.


----------



## Mr Happy (Feb 1, 2009)

Unfortunately I can't find the Innova/Equus 3320 in the UK, though it really is a nice meter at a good price if you could find a US vendor that ships to the UK.

Here are some other places to browse for meters:

Amazon
Maplin
test4less

There's a whole range of prices and features to pick from in the sub-£100 bracket. Oddly, I find relatively few auto ranging meters on the UK market. I'm not sure why.


----------



## TakeTheActive (Feb 1, 2009)

TakeTheActive said:


> *Which meter did you eventually buy?*


 



Cheesy said:


> If you click 'view full technical specification' you can see the accuracy is 0.5%. I remain unconvinced that you can actually believe the quoted specifications of a cheap meter but if you only want ±100mV at ~4V that is 2-3%.
> 
> *I think you need to stop over analysing the issue and buy one.*


  



crofty said:


> ...TakeTheActive, Needs and opinions change, get over it and stop over analyzing things


What are your needs and opinions now?


----------



## Black Rose (Feb 1, 2009)

Mr Happy said:


> However, I have one of these more expensive Innova meters (model 3320) found in Wal-Mart, and the quality of construction is in a different league. I don't know if is available anywhere in the UK, but I would certainly recommend it.


I agree. The Innova/Equus DMMs are very good DMMs for the money.

I have a couple Innova/Equus 4320a's, which are similar to the Innova 3310.
I bought them on sale for $9.99 each and they work well.

I've already verified that the fuse does it's job well


----------



## Justin Case (Feb 1, 2009)

crofty said:


> This is the stuff thanks guys, I`ve learn`t a lot.
> 
> 
> That is the question now, imagine we know a battery is 3.7v. As long as the meter reads it as 3.7v and not 3.8 or 3.6 for example that`s the accuracy I`m looking for.
> ...



The link provided does give accuracy. It is listed as 0.5% + 2 digits (I assume that is +/-) and a 3 1/2 digit display.

This sort of accuracy probably doesn't matter unless you are measuring charge termination voltage for Li-ions. But if you are checking charge termination to avoid overcharge, I think that this level of accuracy is borderline, unless you can calibrate the meter.

Here's why. Let's assume a voltage of 4.20V (the typical recommended max charge termination voltage for Li-ions). The accuracy spec then gives

4.20*0.005 = 0.021

We round this to 0.02. Then we add the 2 digits, for a total accuracy of 0.04. For a 3 1/2 digit meter, the 2 digits really kill you.

Thus a 4.20V measurement could be 4.16V-4.24V.

This is the crux of the dilemma with these typical meters (including mine which has a very similar accuracy spec) if you are checking your Li-ion charger to make sure your cells don't get overcharged. You might think you are safe because your meter reads 4.20V or under. But the accuracy spec IMO is insufficiently narrow relative to the sensitivity of Li-ions to overcharge.

Based on observations with my meter, it appears that even inexpensive DMMs have excellent precision. It's the accuracy that is the issue. So if you can compare your meter to a very accurate meter (like one of the Flukes that specs out to something like 5 1/2 digit display and 0.05% + 1 digit) or to an accurate voltage standard, then you can have better confidence in your measurements.


----------



## Justin Case (Feb 1, 2009)

TinderBox (UK) said:


> I have an MASTECH MS8209 it does everything
> 
> Display: 3999 counts
> - Auto/Manual Range
> ...


 
Specifically, the accuracy spec at the relevant voltage range for 4.2V Li-ions is +/-(0.7% + 2 digits). 

The MS8209's 3999 display count probably means that the DMM will read out 4.2000V as 4.20V (2 decimal places). Thus, the accuracy spec gives

4.20*0.007 = 0.0294, or 0.03 rounded.

Adding in the 2 digits to the least significant place gives a final accuracy of 0.05V. Thus the reading of 4.20V may actually be 4.15V-4.25V.

IMO, 4.25V is excessively high if you are checking for Li-ion termination voltage to avoid overcharging. If your charger happens to charge your cells such that your DMM reads 4.20V, then IMO you can't be sure if you are charging safely or unsafely.


----------



## HKJ (Feb 2, 2009)

Check a company like RS for a selection of multimeters.


----------



## Justin Case (Feb 2, 2009)

The B&K 2880B looks like the one to get on the RS Electronics web site if you need the accuracy to measure 4.2V Li-ion terminating charge voltage. It reads out to four decimal places on the DMM's 5V scale, with accuracy of 0.03% + 5 digits. Thus, if the B&K reads exactly 4.2000V, the accuracy spec gives

4.2000*0.0003 = 0.00126 = 0.0013 (rounded)

Adding the 5 digits to the least significant place gives +/-0.0018V.

Thus, the reading could be 4.1982V-4.2018V.

The similarly-priced Fluke 87-5 that I had been considering from Amazon has a high-res mode that gives four decimal places on the DMM's 6V scale, with an accuracy spec of 0.05% + 1 digit. That translates to +/-0.0022V spread, or 4.1978V-4.2022V.


----------



## TakeTheActive (Feb 3, 2009)

*Interpreting DMM Accuracy Specifications...*



Justin Case said:


> The link provided does give accuracy. It is listed as 0.5% + 2 digits (I assume that is +/-) and a 3 1/2 digit display.
> 
> *This sort of accuracy probably doesn't matter unless you are measuring charge termination voltage for Li-ions.* But if you are checking charge termination to avoid overcharge, I think that this level of accuracy is borderline, unless you can calibrate the meter...


*Justin Case,*

THANK YOU for the education on interpreting DMM Accuracy Specifications (% + Digit). Previously, I didn't understand the significance of the 'Digit'. 

I spent an hour GOOGLEing and learned about ppm, step and XX-bit ADCs. I found a good 'hobbyist-level' explanation at Twisted Pair Forum:


> ...Back to the DMM, it's that "Â± digit" specification that's the killer if you don't watch what you're doing. You have to add this second specification on to the %reading specification to see the full effect of the meters accuracy. For instance, that same 100.0 reading on the 200v range that gave us Â±0.1v has to be modified to include Â±1 digit. Since the last digit on our reading represents tenths of a volt, that means that the reading can bobble ANOTHER 0.1v up or down from that point for a total of Â±0.2v. This gives an overall percentage accuracy for that reading of Â±0.2%, still not bad at all for our meter.
> 
> It's when you try to read a lower voltage on that same 200v range that you can get into trouble. Yes, the overall accuracy specification was only Â±0.01v in our example, but we have to add that Â±1 digit onto that reading. This translates into Â±0.11v total and for a 10v reading, this means that our overall accuracy specification just slipped to a lousy Â±1.1%! Use the 20v range for this same 10v measurement, and you accuracy will pop back up the Â±0.2%. So, the same rule applies to DMMs as it does to analog meters: use the lowest range that you can without going overrange for the best accuracy.
> 
> ...


*Reference: **Twist Pair Forum: Meter Specifications: VOM vs. DMM*

I'm now also going to look harder at X 3/4 digit displays with ranges that end in other than (some form of) 1999.



Justin Case said:


> ...Based on observations with my meter, it appears that *even inexpensive DMMs have excellent precision*. It's the accuracy that is the issue. So if you can compare your meter to a very accurate meter (like one of the Flukes that specs out to something like 5 1/2 digit display and 0.05% + 1 digit) or to an accurate voltage standard, then you can have better confidence in your measurements.


Am I interpreting this correctly? If one were to borrow a _more_ accurate meter and build a "Translation Table" for their _less_ accurate meter, temporarily ignoring temperature and component aging, the results would be repeatable.


----------



## TakeTheActive (Feb 3, 2009)

Mr Happy said:


> ...I have one of these *more expensive* Innova meters (model 3320) found in Wal-Mart, and the quality of construction is in a different league...


*Mr Happy,*

I followed your LINK and viewed the PDF Manual. The DCV accuracy is 0.8% + 5 digits into a 3 1/2 digit display. Paraphrasing *Justin Case*:


> ...Let's assume a voltage of 4.20V (the typical recommended max charge termination voltage for Li-ions). The accuracy spec then gives
> 
> 4.20*0.008 = 0.0336
> 
> ...





Mr Happy said:


> ...I would certainly recommend it.


Isn't this worse for checking Li-Ions than the _less expensive_ (~$10) '3 1/2 digit display w/0.5% + 2 digits' DMMs we've been discussing?


----------



## Justin Case (Feb 3, 2009)

For the Mastech MS8209 that has been mentioned previously, the calibration instructions state:

"An alternative to any of these procedures is to adjust the variable resistors to match the readings of a known instrument under the same conditions."

Presumably, you'd ideally check some voltage level that falls within the lowest voltage range available to your meter. Then you would conduct your comparison to your DMM standard (e.g., a calibrated Fluke or HP) at all of the appropriate voltage ranges. For the MS8209, the voltage ranges are 400mv, 4V, 40V, 400V, and 1000V. So, you'd prefer to use a voltage source of say 100mV and conduct your comparison.

FYI, here is a 5V voltage standard. Too bad the product doesn't use the TI REF5040 or 5045. With this standard, in theory, you don't need the second, highly accurate DMM for comparison. You just use your DMM to measure the voltage output of the standard.

For this 5V standard, you'd check its voltage output on the 40V, 400V, and 1000V ranges (assuming an MS8209 DMM), and hopefully get 5V at all ranges (out to however many decimal places are available at each range).


----------



## Mr Happy (Feb 3, 2009)

TakeTheActive said:


> *Mr Happy,*
> 
> I followed your LINK and viewed the PDF Manual. The DCV accuracy is 0.8% + 5 digits into a 3 1/2 digit display. Paraphrasing *Justin Case*:
> 
> ...


It may or may not be worse. Take note that I said _the quality of construction_ is in a different league, not the accuracy. I stand by that opinion.

IMHO basic accuracy specs do not tell the whole story. For sure they are what they are, but you also have to consider variables like stability with temperature, calibration drift over time, variation with declining battery voltage, statistical accuracy of factory calibration, wear and tear on switches and contacts, and so on.

When you look at display counts for meters you might have "2000 count" (1999, 3 1/2 digits), "4000 count", (3999), or "6000 count" (5999). However, if you really want to move up a level you should ignore such small increments and go for more digits. E.g. "20000 count", giving you readings up to 19999, or even meters that give you 6 digits (expensive Flukes, for example). That is the way to minimize the +/- last digits effect on accuracy.


----------



## was.lost.but.now.found (Feb 4, 2009)




----------



## crofty (Feb 6, 2009)

So, a periodically calibrated F179, with the linked voltage reference to keep an eye on it between calibrations should do the job nicely.

Accuracy, durability, peace of mind. I`ll let you know when it`s here, won`t be for a while mind.

Thanks for all your help lads.


----------



## Mr Happy (Feb 6, 2009)

crofty said:


> So, a periodically calibrated F179, with the linked voltage reference to keep an eye on it between calibrations should do the job nicely.


But bear in mind that the voltage reference itself is not eternal. When you obtain one its accuracy may only be guaranteed for six months or a year, and then it will itself need re-calibrating against an external reference. (Or you could buy another pre-calibrated voltage reference each time.)


----------



## Justin Case (Feb 6, 2009)

The fellow at voltagestandard.com offers a free re-cal service for the first year. Subsequent recals cost $5. If you go to his web site, he shows some ongoing, long term stability tests of 5 of his voltage references. He also ages his voltage references for 200 hrs before selling them. For a 3 1/2 digit meter, it's hard to imagine that the voltage reference would drift so much as to affect the second decimal place, especially since they've already been aged before trimmed. They appear to typically be trimmed to exactly 5.00000V. I got an untrimmed, unaged version that measured 5.00036V. It might drift an additional 200uV over the next 200 hrs, based on the long term stability test curves for the 5 test references. That might mean an output of 5.00056V, which is still far more accuracy than needed for a 3 1/2 digit meter.


----------



## was.lost.but.now.found (Feb 9, 2009)

Newbie here (especially with electronics), but I got my first DMM for Christmas from my brother in law who is an electrician. He showed me how every time you take a reading you first want to touch the probes together and wait for the reading to go to zero. Call me a simpleton but is this not a free (and accurate) calibration check every time you use your instrument?


----------



## Justin Case (Feb 9, 2009)

Touching the probes together checks for zero offset. It doesn't address gain.


----------



## was.lost.but.now.found (Feb 9, 2009)

Justin Case said:


> Touching the probes together checks for zero offset. It doesn't address gain.


 
I don't know what this means. Could you explain a scenario when I would check for zero offset vs. gain?


----------



## likeguymontag (Feb 9, 2009)

was.lost.but.now.found said:


> I don't know what this means. Could you explain a scenario when I would check for zero offset vs. gain?



You can't calibrate about a single point. You need two points of reference at minimum to define a line, aka linear response. For instance, a meter that read f(x)=2x would still read accurately at 0V, but would read 10V when it was actually measuring 5V.


----------



## Justin Case (Feb 9, 2009)

Look at your bathroom scale. Is it at zero when you aren't standing on it, or is there some offset? Any offset is a constant percent of full scale and independent of any input (e.g., standing on the scale, measuring a voltage). You can zero the scale for convenience or just note the offset and subtract it off the measurement of your weight. It's probably more sensible to zero the scale since you may forget to account for the offset otherwise. For a DMM, you may not have an external pot adjustment to zero the offset, so if your DMM doesn't read zero when touching the probes, you'll have to mentally subtract the offset.

My meter shows zero voltage offset when shorting the probes and also zero voltage offset when touching the output terminals of the 5V reference when it is turned off.

Stand on your scale (or measure a voltage). That's gain, and gain errors are a function of the input. The voltage reference allows you to estimate gain error.

Let's say your DMM has voltage ranges of 400mv, 4V, 40V, 400V, and 600V, like the 3999 count Mastech MS8209 mentioned previously. For this meter, a voltage source of 4.2V or 5V is measured with 2 decimal places on the 40V scale (a good reason to get a 4999 count meter for measuring terminating voltages for Li-ions). It would be preferable to use the 4V scale and get 3 decimal place measurements, but 4.2V and 5V exceed the scale maximum. But you can try to trick your meter into reading out to 3 decimal places for this sort of 4.2V or 5V measurement by using the "relative" function that many DMMs have. Measure the voltage of say a 3V Li primary cell. The cell could read something like 3.145V. Press the relative button to zero the DMM relative to the nominal 3V measurement. Then measure the 4.2V or 5V source. If you are lucky and your DMM circuitry actually has a greater count than advertised, you effectively can get 3 decimal places of accuracy by making your voltage measurements on the 4V scale. You might get a relative measurement of 1.083V, giving an absolute voltage of 3.145+1.051=4.196V (or 4.20V when measured on the 40V scale).

My meter can go up to about 4.300V using this trick. Unfortunately, it can't quite make it to 5000 counts. Thus, my meter reads 5.02V for the 5V reference, whose output has been measured at 5.00036V by a calibrated 8.5 digit HP DMM. Ideally, you'd probably want to have voltage references near full scale for all of the ranges available on your meter and make those measurements (both forward and reverse), not just at one voltage level. But that's probably overkill for our purposes.


----------



## was.lost.but.now.found (Feb 10, 2009)

Thanks for the responses. Not so confused anymore.


----------



## AnotherADDiction (Feb 12, 2009)

There is such a lot of excellent information in this thread. I keep re-reading and getting confused-- >understand-->confused:thinking:
I guess that I will have to read this at home, as well as break out my meter.

The meter I have is a *Wavetek 2030* that I was told was very good when we got them at work a lifetime ago(in its day- probably 15 yrs ago?). My collegue was very excited about it at the time (he repaired TV sets and electronics).
Some specs that I see on line are:

_2030: ±(0.10%rdg +2dgt)
0.01 ohms Resolution__
zeros out test lead resistance for increased accuracy of low ohm (0.01 resolution) measurements
4 digit, 10,000 count display_

 I guess that now there are much more accurate meters, but for my usage it is more than adequate, correct? Right now, my uses are to play with my batteries. I do plan to learn much more about electronics and eventually start to build some lights. I would also like to step up to a hobby charger when needed. Currently, I do not have the time, $$$, batteries, or lights to warrant it.
I do love gadgets , shiny things, lights, and the possibility to shock myself (JK)
Seriously, I do plan to educate myself on this subject, and this forum is a great resource. 
Thanks,
AnotherADDiction


----------



## PeAK (Feb 12, 2009)

crofty said:


> I`ve narrowed it down to these four multimeters for testing battery voltage.
> 
> http://www.henrys.co.uk/TEST/600038digitalmultester.html
> http://www.henrys.co.uk/TEST/600228digitalmultester.html
> ...



I pick "Door #2" (600228) just because it has the Auto-off facitlity stated right up front. The other ones may have it but don't count on it. 

If you do not have this feature, the odds are that you will one day need your meter and you're find that you forgot to shut it off last week.

PeAK


----------



## crofty (Feb 12, 2009)

Keep up PeAk, those cheap meters are no good. And I already decided on a meter.


----------



## PeAK (Feb 13, 2009)

crofty said:


> Keep up PeAk, those cheap meters are no good. And I already decided on a meter.



I did not wade through the thread but my point is that for a given meter of a said quality, an 'auto-off' feature is still useful. I'll go over the rest of the comments...later.

PeAK


----------



## crofty (Feb 13, 2009)

No worrys PeAK, I`m just pointing out for anyone else not following the thread that a conclusion has been made. 

Indeed an auto cut of is useful, especially if using a secondary.


----------



## mr.snakeman (Feb 13, 2009)

Crofty, you never said what type of batteries you wanted to test. If you want to test LiIon batteries to insure that you do not fall under the max. discharge than I would suggest the you purchase a dedicated batterý tester like the ZTS MBT-1 Multi Battery Tester. Costs about $60 and is made in the US of A. It can test over 25 types of batteries and does so with the batteries under load which gives a better true view of the batteries true state of condition. Do a Google and check it out.


----------



## DHart (Apr 5, 2009)

Justin... I recently bought this DMM

http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_03481077000P?mv=rr

(is it ok to link to sears?)

and it seems ok, but the readouts on voltage for Li-Ions are to 1 decimal place and the manual says nothing about being able to select the # of places in the readout. Am I just about as well off with a less expensive meter instead of this one? I'm mostly just testing volts and current on Li-Ions.


----------



## Mr Happy (Apr 5, 2009)

DHart said:


> Justin... I recently bought this DMM
> 
> http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_03481077000P?mv=rr
> 
> ...


See my reply in the other thread where you asked the same question. But do not "test" current on a lithium ion battery by measuring across the battery terminals, in case you are trying to do that. It is not how the meter is designed to be used.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Apr 5, 2009)

Mr Happy said:


> See my reply in the other thread where you asked the same question. But do not "test" current on a lithium ion battery by measuring across the battery terminals, in case you are trying to do that. It is not how the meter is designed to be used.



Measuring A's across the battery terminals is something that got started several years ago here on CPF. It is called measuring "flash amps". It was done quite a lot and is still done by some. Maybe not a proper technique, particularly with the newer IMR series of LiIon's becoming popular.

Bill


----------



## Mr Happy (Apr 5, 2009)

Bullzeyebill said:


> Measuring A's across the battery terminals is something that got started several years ago here on CPF. It is called measuring "flash amps". It was done quite a lot and is still done by some. Maybe not a proper technique, particularly with the newer IMR series of LiIon's becoming popular.


I understand that, but IMHO it is not something to be recommended as advice to the newcomer, especially with Li-ion cells of any kind. (When you feel in an experimental frame of mind, try measuring the flash amps on your car battery... )


----------



## DHart (Apr 5, 2009)

Thanks for the replies. When I have measured current, I used the cell in a flashlight, neg lead to cathode of the cell and pos lead to the threads of the flashlight. The only times I have connected leads to each end of the cells is when measuring voltage.

For what I'm doing, just measuring volts and current on Li-Ions, it would seem that even a decent low end, but good name brand, DMM should be plenty good enough, right?


----------



## Mr Happy (Apr 5, 2009)

DHart said:


> Thanks for the replies. When I have measured current, I used the cell in a flashlight, neg lead to cathode of the cell and pos lead to the threads of the flashlight. The only times I have connected leads to each end of the cells is when measuring voltage.


That's good, that's the correct way to use the current range.



> For what I'm doing, just measuring volts and current on Li-Ions, it would seem that even a decent low end, but good name brand, DMM should be plenty good enough, right?


True. You have to pay a lot more money than that to gain a useful advantage in accuracy or other features. But make sure the meter has a 20 V scale -- that Craftsman meter jumps straight from 2 V to 200 V DC, which is why you cannot get a reading with more than two digits at 4.1 V.


----------



## DHart (Apr 5, 2009)

Mr Happy said:


> But make sure the meter has a 20 V scale -- that Craftsman meter jumps straight from 2 V to 200 V DC, which is why you cannot get a reading with more than two digits at 4.1 V.



Aha! Now I see... thank you for that! I will return this meter to Sears.

And, a DC current capacity of 10 amps s/b plenty enough for what I'm doing, right?


----------

