Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:42 PM - Re: Low cost Utility VOM (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
2. 08:47 PM - Re: Low cost Utility VOM (Bob Verwey)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Low cost Utility VOM |
At 04:54 PM 11/30/2020, you wrote:
>
>I recall (seemed like less than a year ago) Bob had mentioned a
>digital VOM from Ebay that he thought was particularly
>(surprisingly) accurate and reliable.
>
>I cannot seem to find the archive of that post but I know at the
>time I thought, " I should buy one for when I need it." I did not
>follow my advice.
>
>Well, I'm moving my project to the airport and I need to duplicate
>some of my tools. I'm not inlclined to buy another Fluke without
>first looking into one of the capable off brands alternatives.
>
>Any suggestions on purchases that are reliable over the longer term?
>(I've heard nothing necessarily good about the HF version wrt reliability).
>
>Thanks in advance for any comments.
>
>Dan Theis
You almost cannot go 'wrong' . . . the technology
for rudimentary measurements is an order of magnitude
better than our treasured legacy instruments and at
1/4 the price.
Close your eyes and throw a dart.
https://tinyurl.com/y2n5pfc6
https://tinyurl.com/yyrgmr2p
https://tinyurl.com/yxj3khuv
I would avoid instruments with lots
of 'cool' features like frequency,
capacitance and inductance measurements.
I have those capabilities on my workbench
and even there, those features are seldom
exercised. Similarly, you're not going to
need to measure transistor quality.
I prefer elastomeric push buttons as opposed
to rotary switches. These are relatively
'sealed' against intrusions. But if you go
for a rotary switch, pick on with a minimum
of range selections. More selections only
increased mechanical complexity/environmental
vulnerability.
Clip off the black probe and replace with insulated
alligator clip. Having black 'clip grounded' while probing
the system is much handier.
Check out the Holey Socks approach to protecting
the instrument while rattling around with the tools.
https://tinyurl.com/y5x2zugh
This soft case wads up to fit in your pocket
while the instrument is in use.
The very best part of this experiment is what
do you have to loose? If your selection proves
unworthy of a place of honor in your toolbox,
pitch the thing and try something else. It's
a cheap experiment.
I've purchased dozens of this genre' of
instrument over the years . . . the last one
I pitched was a radio shack device that I
purchased about 1975 for what I think was
about $45.00. Poor thing just gave up
the ghost. Gave it a respectful burial about
15 years ago. I don't think I've spent that
much money again since.
Sorry to have been ignoring you folks for the past
4 or 5 weeks. Dr. Dee and I are climbing out of
our bouts with the BigC. Dr. Dee is back at her
desk and I'm in what promises to be a long,
slow recovery of stamina. Not hurting, appetite
returning. O2 sats pretty good . . . but I'd
loose a sack race with a class of kindergartners. Been
off the EMS crew for couple months. Sure miss
those guys. Things are a bit better every day.
Bob . . .
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Low cost Utility VOM |
God speed with the recovery our revered mentor!
On Mon, 07 Dec 2020, 04:51 Robert L. Nuckolls, III, <
nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> At 04:54 PM 11/30/2020, you wrote:
>
>
> I recall (seemed like less than a year ago) Bob had mentioned a digital
> VOM from Ebay that he thought was particularly (surprisingly) accurate and
> reliable.
>
> I cannot seem to find the archive of that post but I know at the time I
> thought, " I should buy one for when I need it." I did not follow my
> advice.
>
> Well, I'm moving my project to the airport and I need to duplicate some of
> my tools. I'm not inlclined to buy another Fluke without first looking
> into one of the capable off brands alternatives.
>
> Any suggestions on purchases that are reliable over the longer term? (I've
> heard nothing necessarily good about the HF version wrt reliability).
>
> Thanks in advance for any comments.
>
> Dan Theis
>
>
> You almost cannot go 'wrong' . . . the technology
> for rudimentary measurements is an order of magnitude
> better than our treasured legacy instruments and at
> 1/4 the price.
>
>
> Close your eyes and throw a dart.
>
> https://tinyurl.com/y2n5pfc6
>
> https://tinyurl.com/yyrgmr2p
>
> https://tinyurl.com/yxj3khuv
>
>
> I would avoid instruments with lots
> of 'cool' features like frequency,
> capacitance and inductance measurements.
> I have those capabilities on my workbench
> and even there, those features are seldom
> exercised. Similarly, you're not going to
> need to measure transistor quality.
>
> I prefer elastomeric push buttons as opposed
> to rotary switches. These are relatively
> 'sealed' against intrusions. But if you go
> for a rotary switch, pick on with a minimum
> of range selections. More selections only
> increased mechanical complexity/environmental
> vulnerability.
>
> Clip off the black probe and replace with insulated
> alligator clip. Having black 'clip grounded' while probing
> the system is much handier.
>
> Check out the Holey Socks approach to protecting
> the instrument while rattling around with the tools.
>
> https://tinyurl.com/y5x2zugh
>
> This soft case wads up to fit in your pocket
> while the instrument is in use.
>
> The very best part of this experiment is what
> do you have to loose? If your selection proves
> unworthy of a place of honor in your toolbox,
> pitch the thing and try something else. It's
> a cheap experiment.
>
> I've purchased dozens of this genre' of
> instrument over the years . . . the last one
> I pitched was a radio shack device that I
> purchased about 1975 for what I think was
> about $45.00. Poor thing just gave up
> the ghost. Gave it a respectful burial about
> 15 years ago. I don't think I've spent that
> much money again since.
>
> Sorry to have been ignoring you folks for the past
> 4 or 5 weeks. Dr. Dee and I are climbing out of
> our bouts with the BigC. Dr. Dee is back at her
> desk and I'm in what promises to be a long,
> slow recovery of stamina. Not hurting, appetite
> returning. O2 sats pretty good . . . but I'd
> loose a sack race with a class of kindergartners. Been
> off the EMS crew for couple months. Sure miss
> those guys. Things are a bit better every day.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|