I may be needing a new meter for the lab and I was wondering what else is out there? I have seen the new Flukes and I am thinking there has to be something better than that accuracy wise that is not gonna cost you the bank like the 3458A does???
The 34410A might be your best bet. I do not think there is anything better than the 3458A for the price. The new Fluke meters are triple the cost of a 3458A
I was looking for something in between a 34401 and a 3458. I want better accuracy than the 34401 and less cost than a 3458. What are these new Fluke meters which you speak of???
Depending on your measurement range of interest the Agilent 34420A is a pretty good one. When I saw the subject line my immediate thought was: "An Agilent 3458A/002". I think the Fluke 8508 is the meter of which they speak, but as with any Danaher'ed company, be on the lookout for specmanship with it...
Have you considered the Keithley 2001? Runs about $4,200...
http://www.keithley.com/products/dcac/dmm/highper/?mn=2001 (http://www.keithley.com/products/dcac/dmm/highper/?mn=2001)
Fluke 8508A-01 is the way to go.....
Quote from: metrologygeek on 06-20-2012 -- 15:21:59
Depending on your measurement range of interest the Agilent 34420A is a pretty good one. When I saw the subject line my immediate thought was: "An Agilent 3458A/002". I think the Fluke 8508 is the meter of which they speak, but as with any Danaher'ed company, be on the lookout for specmanship with it...
Can you please tell me what "specmanship" is??
Does anyone know the price of these 2 meters?
Fluke 8508A-01 Agilent 34420A
Also how do there specs compare? I think I am going to look into the Kiethley meter $4000 seems pretty reasonable depending on it's specs.
Quote from: USMCPMEL on 06-20-2012 -- 13:59:26
I may be needing a new meter for the lab and I was wondering what else is out there? I have seen the new Flukes and I am thinking there has to be something better than that accuracy wise that is not gonna cost you the bank like the 3458A does???
There is nothing that can replace the 3458A! For one it is the only meter on the market that can be used as a supper accurate digitizer. And for traceability, Agilent will repair them to the component, no board swapping and loss of all your historical data.
There are a lot of good meters out there, but none as reliable and as feature packed as the 3458A. 34410A, 34420A ad the Fluke 8508A are all good meters, but pound for pound 3458A is still king of the hill. I really like it when an instrument can stand the test of time.
Pound for Pound Dollar for Dollar
http://us.flukecal.com/products/data-acquisition-and-test-equipment/bench-multimeters/8845a8846a-65-digit-precision-multime
This has my vote. We recently got a 46 here and it is a nice meter!
if you need the accy of an 8508 or the 3458, then break out the check book. there are plenty of 6 1/2 digit multimeters out there that will meet 99% of what you need. the 8846 by fluke, 34401/34410/34411...by agilent. http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-4038EN.pdf
the Agilent 34420A is a micro-ohm meter but its around $4K new. 8508 around 13K in fedlog. the 2001 is only 7 1/2 digits so comparing it to 8 1/2 digit meters is not really a comparison. the 2002 is 8 1/2 digits and costs Price: $5,660.00. http://www.keithley.com/products/dcac/dmm/highper/?mn=2002
with respect to an in between a 34401 and 3458 that is...
3458A is still the shizzzzzzzz
If you are looking for High Accuracy at a lot cost, I have heard from a couple of my customers Transmille is making some very good meters.
http://www.transmille.co.uk/8000_multi_menu.htm
I was there when a customer was evaluating one. They unboxed it and it came up to 5ppm of thier 10V cell within 20 min.
QuoteQuote from: metrologygeek on Yesterday at 13:21:59
Depending on your measurement range of interest the Agilent 34420A is a pretty good one. When I saw the subject line my immediate thought was: "An Agilent 3458A/002". I think the Fluke 8508 is the meter of which they speak, but as with any Danaher'ed company, be on the lookout for specmanship with it...
QuoteCan you please tell me what "specmanship" is??
"Specmanship" is jargon that's often used in the field of testing to mean the manipulation of data to improve the specifications of a product or process beyond what it is capable of achieving except under uniquely controlled conditions. Or for more money. Or under some other very special circumstances.
Attached is a comparison of the accuracies of the 3458AOPT002 vs the 8508A. The 3458AOPT002 tolerances were developed using the 90 day relative specs. The 8508A specs are 1 year absolutes. If the TAR is greater than 1, then the 8508A is more accurate, and if less than 1, the 3458A is more accurate. For example, the 10 VDC test point is accurate to ±2.65 ppm, the test ratio is 0.78:1, therefore the 8508A specification at 10 VDC is ±3.4 ppm.
Thank you WestCost.. I was just looking in the other blogs for similuar data you posted.
Quote from: WestCoastCal on 06-21-2012 -- 15:18:59
Attached is a comparison of the accuracies of the 3458AOPT002 vs the 8508A. The 3458AOPT002 tolerances were developed using the 90 day relative specs. The 8508A specs are 1 year absolutes. If the TAR is greater than 1, then the 8508A is more accurate, and if less than 1, the 3458A is more accurate. For example, the 10 VDC test point is accurate to ±2.65 ppm, the test ratio is 0.78:1, therefore the 8508A specification at 10 VDC is ±3.4 ppm.
Doesn't seem to be an honest comparision to compare the 90day specs of the 3458 vs the 1 year of the 8508... should compare 90 to 90...
Quote from: Squidley on 06-21-2012 -- 21:24:22
Quote from: WestCoastCal on 06-21-2012 -- 15:18:59
Attached is a comparison of the accuracies of the 3458AOPT002 vs the 8508A. The 3458AOPT002 tolerances were developed using the 90 day relative specs. The 8508A specs are 1 year absolutes. If the TAR is greater than 1, then the 8508A is more accurate, and if less than 1, the 3458A is more accurate. For example, the 10 VDC test point is accurate to ±2.65 ppm, the test ratio is 0.78:1, therefore the 8508A specification at 10 VDC is ±3.4 ppm.
Doesn't seem to be an honest comparision to compare the 90day specs of the 3458 vs the 1 year of the 8508... should compare 90 to 90...
Relative vs Absolute will also skew in favor of the 3458.
Quote from: CalLabSolutions on 06-21-2012 -- 10:33:49
Quote from: USMCPMEL on 06-20-2012 -- 13:59:26
I may be needing a new meter for the lab and I was wondering what else is out there? I have seen the new Flukes and I am thinking there has to be something better than that accuracy wise that is not gonna cost you the bank like the 3458A does???
There is nothing that can replace the 3458A! For one it is the only meter on the market that can be used as a supper accurate digitizer. And for traceability, Agilent will repair them to the component, no board swapping and loss of all your historical data.
There are a lot of good meters out there, but none as reliable and as feature packed as the 3458A. 34410A, 34420A ad the Fluke 8508A are all good meters, but pound for pound 3458A is still king of the hill. I really like it when an instrument can stand the test of time.
All Keithley meters I've used were unreliable. I've been told in no uncertain terms that where DC Volts and Ohms measurements are concerned, both the Datron 1281 and Fluke 8508A are more stable than the 3458A (the Datron by an order of magnitude). I would think you should be able to get hold of demo units and arrive at your own conclusions.
Presumably you've considered transfer measurements if your budget comes up short?
I want to be able to use my 5520A to calibrate some higher end multimeters like the 34970A and 34401A and several others if I had a 3458A I could use it as a comparison standard to achieve the accuracies I am looking for. I do not understand why Fluke did not beef up the specs on the 5522A???
because then it would be a 5720. the 5522 actually has a worse capacitance spec than the 5520 due to the input protection fuses. (if i heard the sales pitch correctly)
QuoteI want to be able to use my 5520A to calibrate some higher end multimeters like the 34970A and 34401A and several others if I had a 3458A I could use it as a comparison standard to achieve the accuracies I am looking for. I do not understand why Fluke did not beef up the specs on the 5522A???
I don't know if you are familiar with the webinars Fluke has available but they did do one on characterizing 5520/5522, used the 8508A of course since they are selling themy're archived somewhere on their site.
We have several procedures that will use a Standard DMM like the 3458A or 8508A to characterize the source, 5520 or 5500. Then calibrate the DUT. We are just finishing up one that uses 3458A and 9100 to calibrate the 34401A.
*If you have the hardware and the vision, we will figure out how to do it in software. http://www.CalLabSolutions.com
Quote from: metrologygeek on 06-21-2012 -- 12:05:04
QuoteQuote from: metrologygeek on Yesterday at 13:21:59
Depending on your measurement range of interest the Agilent 34420A is a pretty good one. When I saw the subject line my immediate thought was: "An Agilent 3458A/002". I think the Fluke 8508 is the meter of which they speak, but as with any Danaher'ed company, be on the lookout for specmanship with it...
QuoteCan you please tell me what "specmanship" is??
"Specmanship" is jargon that's often used in the field of testing to mean the manipulation of data to improve the specifications of a product or process beyond what it is capable of achieving except under uniquely controlled conditions. Or for more money. Or under some other very special circumstances.
I would alter (with regards) your definition somewhat to read:
"Specmanship" is jargon often used in the field of testing/instrumentation to refer to the manipulation of data to
seemingly improve the specifications of a product or process beyond what it is capable of achieving, except under uniquely controlled conditions, for more money, or under some other very special circumstances.
Aw come on, no one manipulates their data to seemingly improve their specs
Meh, decided to remove the example in point. I am sure I would get bashed by the Fluke folks anyway....
QuoteI would alter (with regards) your definition somewhat to read:
"Specmanship" is jargon often used in the field of testing/instrumentation to refer to the manipulation of data to seemingly improve the specifications of a product or process beyond what it is capable of achieving, except under uniquely controlled conditions, for more money, or under some other very special circumstances.
I'm good with that.
Re Transmille, we just got a quote for an 8081 4ppm 8½ Digit Multimeter for $11,169. Not bad. One neat feature is that it will measure voltage and current simultaneously for easier shunt calibration.
We like the 8508A/01 for the ratioing capability, HV ohms, 2x scale, etc. The 3458A because, as Michael pointed out, is a digitizer, does voltage ratioing, 1x scale, etc.
Different tools depending on the job at hand.
Quote from: rjf1957 on 06-29-2012 -- 08:24:46
Different tools depending on the job at hand.
I think that says it all, the right tool for the job! And if you are going to do everything, you need everything.
Back to the start of this thread, and the topic of looking for a new meter. I think you should start with a list of measurements you need that new meter to do, along with the required accuracy. Then you can shop for the meter that meets your needs at the price you can afford. And at that point you can also decide if you would like to expand capabilities and if it is in your budget. (Usually budget has more to do with it than requirements, otherwise we would buy all three.)
If one knows how to use the 3458A properly,you will not need another system voltmeter. And no, I don't work for Agilent.
Quote from: CalLabSolutions on 06-29-2012 -- 10:24:22
Quote from: rjf1957 on 06-29-2012 -- 08:24:46
Different tools depending on the job at hand.
I think that says it all, the right tool for the job! And if you are going to do everything, you need everything.
I agree that some times we need the right tool for the right job, but we can't get everything, cost too much money and space. I prefer to learn all the capabilities of the equipment on hand and manage with that
Quote from: RFCAL on 07-07-2012 -- 09:47:50
If one knows how to use the 3458A properly,you will not need another system voltmeter. And no, I don't work for Agilent.
I agree totally.
Also see measure's revised definition of specmanship.
Attached is a comparison between the Transmille 8081 90 day relative specs to the HP 3458AOPT002 90 day relative specs.
I included some Calibration Tolerance cell information as follows:
1. If the TAR value is 1.0:1, they are roughly the same accuracy. (There is a little "slop" in the ratio calculation due to resolution)
2. If the TAR value is greater than 1.0:1, then the Transmille 8081 is more accurate.
3. The EMU value is the ±error of the Transmille in units of measure.
4. If there is no TAR and EMU values, then either the corresponding ranges do not match up or I made a mistake (I haven't spent alot of time on this at all)
Conclusions:
DCV and ACI, the 8081 is more accurate.
ACV, the 3458A (Sub Sync sampled) is more accurate up to the 100 V range (with a couple exceptions).
DCI, the 8081 is more accurate up to 1 A.
Resistance, the instuments trade off with each other as to which is more accurate.
What is a Transmille? Never heard of them. How is thier track record?
Transmille is a manufacturer of precision meters and multi-function calibrators. A United kingdom version of Fluke.
http://www.transmillecalibration.com/ (http://www.transmillecalibration.com/)
I have talked to a lot of labs who have checked out their products. Then seem to be pretty good.
Mike
I haven't had time to read the entire thread, so I don't know if this is a re-run. There is the Keithley 2002, an 8.5 digit. It isn't quite as good as a 3458A, but has some pretty good specs (I think, lying between 34401A and 3458A specs). It is smaller footprint as well (half rack width).
Isn't the Transmille 8081 supposed to be an updated version of the Solartron 7081 (much in the same way the Fluke 8508A is an updated Datron 1281)?
Given the chance, I'd always go with Agilent products.
I'm a previous employee of the Roseville, CA calibration lab and I know, first hand, of the dedication and energy put into the quality and traceability of each piece.
Not sure; but, I would say that Transmille = Datron.
Quote from: jimmyc on 06-25-2012 -- 10:10:26
because then it would be a 5720. the 5522 actually has a worse capacitance spec than the 5520 due to the input protection fuses. (if i heard the sales pitch correctly)
Capacitance specs are the same between 5522A and 5520A, although one of the range's changed slightly: 5520A goes down to 190 pF, 5522A goes down to 220 pF.
Why can't Fluke just make a 5720A with amps to 20 like the 5520a????
I think rhe 5700/5720 should be able to use a 5220A amp to boost current. I have never tried it myself. It's menu allows you to specify one amp for voltage boost & another for current boost.
Quote from: Bryan on 10-29-2012 -- 12:15:54
I think rhe 5700/5720 should be able to use a 5220A amp to boost current. I have never tried it myself. It's menu allows you to specify one amp for voltage boost & another for current boost.
5725 amp only puts out 11A
Quote from: USMCPMEL on 10-26-2012 -- 13:32:06
Why can't Fluke just make a 5720A with amps to 20 like the 5520a????
Because then it would only be able to sell you one calibrator...
YOU KNOW THATS TRUE GRIFF!!!!