×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.
2

A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

(OP)
More than 1000 miles, actually.

I am still struggling with my Fluke Scopemeter Series II 190-204 and I have told you about the very limited waveform memory, the problems with the USB stick, the outdated PC software, funny copy-and-paste effects when porting (patching, actually) SW from earlier 2-channel versions to four channels, ground leads coming loose from the probes and other problems. You have seen lots of that already.

But this thing, that happened this week, is so bad that I have a problem believing it myself. I did measurements on a ferry on the Norwegian west coast. Knowing that there are problems with the USB store, I was cautious and stored only the more important measurements and I stored them in internal memory. I had 14 recordings in the scope when I returned home to write a report.

When I got back home, I could only retrieve data from six out of the 14 recordings that I had stored. The bitmaps could all be retrieved - but not the data. I needed to transfer data to FV5 to do zooming, cursor measurements, FFT etcetera. But that is not possible if you do not get the waveform data.

I have been very careful with my comments before and I have had lots of patience with Fluke. But I feel that I have to tell the truth about Fluke Corporation and its oscilloscope division now. There's no competence left any more. As an example, there was a meeting in Stockholm in August 24 where top officers from Fluke, Netherlands were to inform representatives from Scandinavia about the Scopemeter. One guy asked how to compensate the probes. The Fluke officers told him that it is done in software. That little capacitor used to adjust frequency response was unknown to both of the Fluke officers and, since the manual says it is on the probe, they never found it on the BNC connector, where it is in reality.

OK. I have vented now. Look at http://www.gke.org/pub/files/How%20reliable%20is%20the%20FLUKE%20Series%20II%20Scopemeter.pdf
There you can see that the problem isn't in the PC program (not this time). It is in the scope itself. When I retrieve a waveform on the scope, I can zoom it if data are available and not if only the bit map is available. That is why there are windows saying that zoom isn't available.

BTW. If you need to educate Fluke salespeople about the probe compensation, it is here: http://gke.org/pub/files/Using%20the%20Scopemeter%20190%20math%20function%201.pdf  The compensation is described in the appendix.

Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

The only solution at this point is a refund. In fact, Fluke should be willing to pay you handsomely to get that product out of your hands. So a straight-up refund should be perfectly acceptable to all parties.

Then you're left to find something that actually works.
 

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Start looking for a THS730 on ebay!

And no, you can't have mine!!
 
  

----------------------------------
  
If we learn from our mistakes I'm getting a great education!
 

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

(OP)
I had a THS720 once. Loved it.

I have a refund offer from Fluke. But I need the four channels and the battery life. So I decided to keep the 190-204. But I am starting to reconsider that. If I spend two or three days on a job and come back without results, I could just as well have gone without it. It did cost me 1721 km car travel, two hotel nights and - worst - a bad reputation with the customer, which thinks it is I that screwed it up.

Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

You're keeping that POS for battery life?!?!  Just drop a few gel cells in the bottom of a pack and wire in an inverter.

Keith Cress
kcress - http://www.flaminsystems.com

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

(OP)
As I said, I am starting to reconsider. Especially after this 'adventure' that has cost me three days, a long car travel, two hotel nights and my customer's trust.

I have small portable PCs (Eee) with long battery life and affordable spare batteries and use them together with Picoscope and TiePie USB scopes. My Scopemeter 199 is still OK and I use my LeCroy WS 324 on the bench and there are some other scopes available. So, I am OK with scopes and don't really need this (as you call it) POS.

Why did I buy it then?

I think that I fell for the advertisments. And the fact that my customers (industrial, automation and drives) expect that I shall have the latest and most advertised (not best, but visible in the trade magazines) equipment.

I thought that Fluke had some technical competence left and that their claims about quality and technology were to be trusted. I am sorry I was so dumb.

 

Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

You have rather more patience than I have Gunnar.
  

----------------------------------
  
If we learn from our mistakes I'm getting a great education!
 

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

OMG. Cancel the 'Joke alert'...

Google: minidso.com - and then click on translate.

Follow the links. They even publish the schematic. They speak of loading four different firmware loads. Cool gadget.

 

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

(OP)
Nice!

But not quite up to what I need. BW is on the low side. But it would easily have done what I needed on that ferry last week. I think that I shall put one as a 'life-boat' in the Scopemeter carrying case.

Price is on par with the Fluke mains adapter...

Talking of which - did I mention that it is made with real low grade single-sided laminate? And the no plated-through holes? And that it breaks easily?

Read about it here: http://gke.org/pub/files/The%20Fluke%20BC%20190%20Battery%20charger.pdf

Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

In view of the Argus product that you have mentioned many times
http://www.gke.org/pub/files/ARCUS%20leaflet%20English.pdf

May I respectfully suggest that you provide a brief disclosure statement discussing any potential commercial conflict of interest you have.

I'm not saying you do or you don't, just asking. And if you do, that certainly does not prevent you from presenting facts and opinions, but it's just good practice to make sure that it's out in the open imo.

Thanks.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Sorry, that should have been "Arcus" (not "Argus")

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

By the way, I hope it's not viewed as a big legalistic deal.  I have often seen people start posts with a one-liner something like "disclosure, I am affiliated with a company/product that might be viewed as a competitor to the product discussed in this thread".  

Usually I just read on by that statement and judge the rest on its content.  But I give the person credit for making every attempt to avoid any appearance of impropriety. The term "appearance of impropriety" is something that I learned when I worked in the government.... it means you have to not just be ethical, but also conduct yourself in a manner above question.  Whether or not that standard applied here I'm not sure but I do use it in my interactions with motor vendors: I avoid accepting any gifts/favors of substantial value.  It's not that I think those gifts would influence my decisions about technical recommendations for vendor selection, but I want to be above question.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

ePete,

I have the same thing at work - every year we have to do an online 'ethics exam' whose primary purpose appears to be to give the company the right to say 'you knew it was wrong and you did it anyway' in the event that someone accepts a gift. I have no problem if a contract company takes me out for a working lunch and picks up the tab or perhaps lands a bottle of something grape-based or malt-based on my desk for Christmas, but anything beyond that is straying into dangerous territory. An engineer who worked here until recently is the daughter of a senior engineer at a company were working with on a big contract. She was nothing to do with the project as it wasn't her discipline, but she disclosed the relationship just to be in the clear.

All that said, Gunnar is one of the most straight-forward people here and I'm sure there's no suggestion of deliberate non-disclosure. If we have a budget surplus I might even be tempted to look at the Arcus unit.
  

----------------------------------
  
If we learn from our mistakes I'm getting a great education!
 

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Quote:

All that said, Gunnar is one of the most straight-forward people here and I'm sure there's no suggestion of deliberate non-disclosure
I agree.  It is not intended as a negative comment.  It is an honest suggestion for the path forward (since many people read this forum other than those who know Skogsgurra).  Just include the one-liner in front is my suggestion fwiw.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

(OP)
Pete,

That is just ridiculous.

I haven't sold more than one Arcus, and that was to a friend. I use it in my daily work and find it useful. We developped it for our own needs, but I am happy if anyone finds it useful and wants one.

This has nothing to do with our Arcus - it is about a company which used to have good products and a good reputation and which has thrown all of that overboard.

Why do you bring that Arcus up? It isn't even close in bandwidth or application. Please tell me your reason.
 

Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

[quote]That is just ridiculous. [QUOTE]
I thought I presented a rational basis for my suggestion.

Quote:

I haven't sold more than one Arcus, and that was to a friend. I use it in my daily work and find it useful. We developped it for our own needs, but I am happy if anyone finds it useful and wants one.
I did not know that. At present, I have no way of verifying that. You offer this product for sale as evidenced by brochure describing all its benefits and including your contact information.  What relevance is past sales success: if an order came in for 200, you would reject it on the basis that it is only available to  friends?

Quote:

This has nothing to do with our Arcus - it is about a company which used to have good products and a good reputation and which has thrown all of that overboard.
No one here can or should speak to your motives. I have not discussed impropriety. I have discussed avoiding the appearance of impropriety.

Quote:

...Arcuis...It isn't even close in bandwidth or application.
Hence the words "...could be viewed as a competitor..."

Quote:

Why do you bring that Arcus up?
Explained in detail above. I thought it was a simple suggestion and you are free to do as you see fit with it.  (apparently for you it is better to attack the person who brough the suggestion that to include the simple one-liner as I think most vendors would).

I (like everyone on the forum I assume) have a certain sense of right and wrong and interjects when they feel necessary to preserve balance and fairness.  I have paid attention to all your Fluke posts for the reason of fairness.  When I asked questions, I found all the complaints legitimate to the extent I could validate. However, if your sense of fairness does not compell you to include a simple disclaimer, I can tell you my sense of fairness certainly compels me to continue to take an interest in these threads.

Since you are so interested in my motivations, I have to ask about yours. Fluke has offered your money back, yet you keep using the product and posting complaints about it. Please explain how this is logical.  And if you have no aspirations to make money on Arcus or other products competing with Fluke, what harm would it do to include the simple disclosure?

Personally I was happy to offer a simple suggestion for you to accept or reject as you plase. Since you responded as you did, including labeling my suggestion as ridiculous and asking my motivations, my sense of fairness drives me to respond in a similar tone.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

I have spoken my peace. Feel free to do as you please.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Quote:

..Arcus...It isn't even close in bandwidth or application.
I forgot to mention, it is not just one Fluke instrument you have badmouthed.  It seems the whole company (I'm sure I can dig up some quotes if you disagree).
 

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

One thing I will say is that these threads you have posted provide useful information for people who may own Flukes.   Personally I would much rather that my concern be addressed with a simple harmless disclosure statement than that the threads be lost due to red-flag.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

(OP)
Pete

I have trodden very carefully in this matter.

There is a long thread in Pat's Pub/The technical side of the pub where I started to discuss if it was at all suitable to reveal how bad the 190-204 scopemeter is. I was told by reputable members to be very careful and also that I should tell everything that I discovered in this instrument. That thread was started in May or June. You can go there and see for yourself.

I have had a rather intense e-mail conversation with the technical marketing manager and the marketing manager at Fluke Netherlands and also with people in the same position in Everett, WA.

I have explained to them how critical the situation is and some of these people understand it very well while some (the salespeople) do not want to understand. During this conversation, that has been going on for around four months, I have noticed that there is a complete lack of understanding when it comes to technical issues and that all programmers seem to have left the company. The software has been patched by consultants to work with four channels and there are some surprising side effects that reveal that QA/QC doesn't exist at all.

I have been invited to visit Fluke, Netherlands - but on my own expense - and I didn't accept that.

I have written about the last experience to five fluke officers (the ones I communicate with since May/July) and I haven't got any reaction from them.

In July or August, I told them that I would publish my findings in my file archive and I had no reaction from Fluke Corporation. So, I started telling about my experience with the 190-204. I am also working on a much more detailed report about what is wrong with this instrument and I have an open invitation to meet the guys in Holland and discuss these matters. In all, I think that I have put a few hundred hours on this. That includes detailed check of all functions and also the time lost when the instrument doesn't work as intended.

The problem, as I see it, is that Fluke has new owners and that the new owners have reduced personnel to such an extent that all detailed knowledge and competence has moved from the company. Some people at Fluke know that, but those who decide do not want to understand, or cannot understand. That is why I, after lots af consideration, do this.

I hope that the top brass will understand and that Fluke once again will become a company that you can buy equipment from without risking your blood pressure and your reputation.

Also, I think that my reports can be of value to those that are looking for portable oscilloscopes. See it as product reviews.

If you think this is, as you say, "badmouthing", I beg you to reconsider.

Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Quote:

Why do you bring that Arcus up? It isn't even close in bandwidth or application. Please tell me your reason.

I'd like to explore that further.

First bandwidth:
Fluke Scopemeter 190-204 is advertised as 200MHz bandwidth, 2.5 GSamples/sec sample rate.
Acrus is advertised as 30 k-samples per second.  
At first glance it sounds like you are saying these two products don't deserve to be compared because yours has so much lower of a bandwidth.
But that's without looking at thread248-298340: FLUKE 190_204 Scopemeter. Data on USB seem to be lost  where it was clearly stated by you "But when you want to measure current waveforms with 10 MHz components, a 200 microsecond resolution (fastest in RECORDER mode) is pathetic"
200 microsecond as you know is 5 khz sample rate.  
Trying to claim these products are not overlapping on basis of sample rate / bandwidth now seems to me a very gray area.

Now what about application.
You have posted waveforms from vfd output using both instruments (I gather neither capable of capturing very fast rise-times).   This seems like an overlap in application to me.

Maybe I am missing something. Feel free to educate me.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

(OP)
Pete

We were typing at the same moment.

Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

I was composing yours while mine posted.   

Let me make it clear again, I am not suggesting for you to stop providing information on this topic.  I am just suggesting for you to include a small disclosure statement in this thread and any future thread on this topic.   

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

I withdraw the comment about "badmouthing".  It was not intended as a characterization of your tone so much as a clarification of the scope of your criticism (not just one Fluke instrument but wider concerns with the company).  My point was that if your criticism extends beyond the Fluke 190-204, then the any discussion of whether your Arcus overlaps/competes should include comparison against the entire Fluke line.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

I know my suggestion might be viewed as a criticism.  But if I try to put myself into your shoes (to the extent I understand your shoes), that's the way I would do it.  And that is the way that many other people who dabble in selling things do it on this forum and others.

At this point, I will sign off of this topic unless further discussion is brought related to the points I raised.
 

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

(OP)
The word "dabble" is very well chosen and describes quite well my shoes. I still cannot see how Arcus or GKE in any way could benefit from the decline of giant Fluke corporation.

On the contrary, we all lose from that negative development and I am trying to make Fluke understand that they need to do something if they want to stay in business. We have seen bean counters destroy companies before, recent HP comes to mind, and if I can stop that in this case, I would be happy.

You may find that strange. But those who know me better understand.

Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

(OP)
I had a look at the tread where this was first discussed. There, I have antecipated exactly the situation with the ferry. A snippet:

"Skogsgurra (Electrical)     
2 Jul 11 3:15
MJ

The product can be used. And it is sound in many respects. I also need it. But I cannot trust it. It drives blood pressure. I need to take care so I do not come back home from foreign travels without results. Such a situation would cost more than the instrument. A few times more.

My first problem with this device was when I found out it has insufficient data storage. Its predecessor had ridiculously few storage places, only 15 waveforms could be stored. This new device, that was released end of 2010, still doesn't have more than 15 places. Nowhere in the ads or the specs available before you buy can this be seen. Memory shortage? Today? That is something you wouldn't even care to think about.

Memory is not expensive today. Why disappoint customers like that? Probably because the patch needed to increase number of places was too difficult or just didn't work and management either had no idea or didn't think it was a problem.

It may sound funny, but I find the instrument useful. My USD 7000 that I paid were available and I see no point in getting them back. So, returning it isn't anything I have contemplated. If they could start the SW over from scratch and produce a system that works well and that I can trust, then I would love to have this device changed.

So, I guess that my primary reaction was surprise and disappointment. My second reaction was, I think, another "surprise wave": How can this well-known company fail like this?

The reason I started this thread was because I thought it is an interesting case and also that I needed your opinion. I have received several interesting views already. And I think there will be more."


It is almost prophetical. I came 'back home from foreign travels without results' exactly as I had feared.


 

Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

I'll place my two cents on the table.

Unfortunately, in my opinion,it's not only Fluke who've gone down this path. I used to have a venerable Tek THS 720P. Bloody brilliant bit of kit. Did what I needed, and with the appropriate probes was also quite safe. Not the greatest software interface with the old wavestar, but it got reports done. My biggest complaint with it was it had an absolute crap role mode and magnification with a simple x10 mode.

The memory may be getting a little hazy but I do believe that I bought a couple of these back in 1997, or thereabouts. Were the hell have we gone since then?

Nowdays I've got a Fluke 435 that I use for power monitoring, but it's absolutely crap as a scope, admittedly not that it's made for it. For looking at waveshapes and doing a decent roll mode I lug (yes it's heavy) around a yokogawa DL 708.  

Why is it that since the mid 90s that there hasn't been any great innovation  applied to the field? Tek have completey dropped the ball with no real replacement for the THS series; Fluke were never great for handhelds but have gotten even worse. I always hated the screen resolution of the flukes scopes.
 
I suspect that the link VE1BLL posted will be the future, and that in a few years time we'll be posting links to the new FFT download. I doubt we'll ever see the great bits of kit from HP, Yokogawa, Tek or Fluke; at least in our 'power electronics' field.
 

 

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Current Fluke management seems bent on following DuMont's destiny.

The only way to change that is to buy a majority position and fire the lot of them.

Gunnar, unless you have a billionaire friend, you are tilting at windmills.

 

Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Quote:

But those who know me better understand.
You respond as if you want to convince me of your character and your legitimate motivations.  That is really unrelated to my original comments. The question that is raised is not one of you, your character, your actual motivations and convincing me.  It is a question of the situation and the facts (you advertise a product which can very easily be interpretted as competing to the one you criticize) and what might be the appearance of impropriety to an impartial observer who doesn't even know you.   Believe it or not, my comment was not a criticism of you,  it was a suggestion based on what I perceive to be standard ethics and good practices which should place you in a stronger and more defensible position for discussions of this topic in any venue.   It is also a standard that any forum moderator on the planet would endorse/enforce.

Maybe you can mull this over between now and your next thread on this subject (if there is a next thread).  If there appears no disclosure statement in that next thread, there will be more discussion.

Thanks for your patience.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Pete, I think that you are the one that is out of line. Take a break, walk around the block, and get some perspective. There is an issue here. A serious issue with the suitability of a piece of equipment from a company which had an excellent name for quality equipment.
Your attack of an example that Gunnar used serves more to confuse the issue than any positive purpose. It brings to mind Bill Clinton's arguing about the definition of sexual intercourse. When you don't wish to confront the main issue, cause confusion by attacking minor points.
I don't believe that any of your comments on the propriety of some of Gunnar's examples is germane to the issue of the POS that Fluke has produced.
{end of Rant}

Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Quote:

Pete, I think that you are the one that is out of line.
I understand that you think what Gunnar has license to say whatever he wants about Fluke without disclosing his potential commerical conflict of interest. I unerstand you think it is "out of line" to suggest that in the future the conflict of interest be disclosed in accordance with standard practice.  I am not sure you could find many impartial observers to agree with that.

I am offended that you imply I am trying to cause confusion.

  

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Before someone jumps on me, let me clarify:
I understand that you think what Gunnar has license to say whatever he wants about Fluke without disclosing his potential commerical conflict of interest
should have been
I understand that you think what Gunnar has license to present facts and opinions about Fluke without disclosing his potential commerical conflict of interest

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Also,  I would recommend to drop critique of my suggestion from this thread and leave it to Gunnar to mull over my suggestion between now and the next thread (not next post... next thread).

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

#1 For once in your life hit "Preview Post" before "Submit Post".
#2 Reread some of the posts. Gunnar has addressed his perceived  "Conflict of interest" to the satisfaction of all of us and (if I remember correctly) even to your satisfaction at one time.
Now clicking on "Preview Post".
Now clicking on "Submit Post".
To quote Staples "THAT WAS EASY".

Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

sibeen,

The TPS series was the replacement (sort of) for the THS series. It was bigger, was a 'proper' scope, and for its day was a bloody good scope. It hasn't been updated at all in the last ten (?) years - even daft stuff like providing a USB or ethernet port instead of RS-232 - and its memory is poor by modern standards. It was a pretty unique range at the time it was released, and I do wonder if it might be the last-of-line.

As things stand right now I'd rather buy a decent mains-powered scope, add a few isolation amplifiers, and run an extension cable or carry a little generator. Last time I looked Agilent's scopes were ahead of Tek's equivalent product in performance and capability for a given price, but I wasn't quite as comfortable with the user interface. Perhaps just a case of getting familiar with it?
  

----------------------------------
  
If we learn from our mistakes I'm getting a great education!
 

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Gunnar has already fully disclosed his business interests with every single post. It's right there, on the line following his name (signature). It only needs one mouse click to land on his business webpage, where anyone can review his business areas. This is infinitely more disclosure of business interests than most.

So, even *if* the existance of ARCUS demands "disclosure" (a very dubious argument, given the totality of the circumstances), then the explicit business link already fulfills that purported obligation perfectly. There are no grounds for any complaint given the explicit (bolded and underlined) link that anyone with a functioning mouse finger can follow.

It gets better:

If Gunnar had explicitly highlighted the existence of ARCUS and represented it - or even implied it - as being a "competing" product to Fluke's apparently-frustrating gadget, then there might have been complaints about Gunnar "advertising" his product in connection with Fluke's failures. In this event, those complaints would actually have been far more legitimate than this unfounded complaint about "disclosure".

.:

It's clear that there isn't any problem with Gunnar's existing explicit disclosure.

And it's clear that the proposed solution is actually far worse than even the inaccurately perception of the non-existent 'problem'.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

I look at it this way... even if the person has a reason to knock down the other company through bad press, do they have even the most remote of hopes in doing so?

This is like one guy saying Disney's rides are dangerous because of the accidents that have happened in the past.  That one guy's thoughts simply aren't going to amount to a hill of beans in the grand scheme of things when it comes to Disney.

Let's get back to real life, shall we?

 

Dan - Owner
http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Quote (waross):

#1 For once in your life hit "Preview Post" before "Submit Post". ..
...Now clicking on "Preview Post".
Now clicking on "Submit Post".
To quote Staples "THAT WAS EASY".  
The reason that I felt compelled to clarify my post was to avoid unnecessary acrimony in view of the fact that some have thus far has shown a propensity to completely misunderstand my meaning.   I don't appreciate your tone.

Quote (waross):

#2 Reread some of the posts. Gunnar has addressed his perceived  "Conflict of interest" to the satisfaction of all of us and (if I remember correctly) even to your satisfaction at one time.
Yes, I raised the question before.  And at that time, I gave the benefit of the doubt and felt it was addressed for that thread. Then the Fluke scopemeter complaints kept coming in a predictable way (3 threads with numerous complaints per thread) and it again raised my concern level.  For one thing there is no guarantee that everyone who reads this threads reads the other thread (how many times has a google search landed you on an eng-tips thread... it happens to me many times).   

You talk about addressing something to my "satisfaction".  I am not particularly interested in being a judge of anyone's motives and granting them approval based on my judgement.  I have suggested a simple one-liner disclosure which allows everyone to draw their own informed conclusions.   I certainly did not foresee that such a simple and obvious (?) suggestion made in a polite and respectful manner would meet such a response.

In view of the fact that you judge me to be out of line and apparently feel justified to insult me on that basis, I would suggest that before continuing your tirade you should reread my posts. I would submit that you have completely misunderstood my suggestion and my purpose in this thread.  

I have suggested to let this lie until the next thread.  I was hoping that time to digest these events would bring some understanding of what it was that I was actually suggesting (it is not painful to include such a one-liner disclosure in each thread where the subject arises, and it brings credit to the poster/author for being forthright).

Quote (VE1BLL):

Gunnar has already fully disclosed his business interests with every single post. It's right there, on the line following his name (signature). It only needs one mouse click to land on his business webpage, where anyone can review his business areas.
One mouse click takes me here: http://www.gke.org/
The language of that webpage is Swedish.  I am impressed that many members speak multiple languages, but Swedish is not one of mine and not the language of the forum. If such disclosures exist and are intended to envelope the criticisms made in these threads on an English forum,  then hiding them behind a Swedish-language web page would be tantamount to obscuring contract details with fine print.  I'm not by any means saying that's what happened... the comments in this paragraph are offered soley as an argument to rebut the claim that there already exists some full disclosure by virtue of a web-page link.

Quote:

There are no grounds for any complaint given the explicit (bolded and underlined) link that anyone with a functioning mouse finger can follow.
In spite of your description "explicit (bolded and underlined)", it still leads to a Swedish-language website.

Quote:

If Gunnar had explicitly highlighted the existence of ARCUS and represented it - or even implied it - as being a "competing" product to Fluke's apparently-frustrating gadget, then there might have been complaints about Gunnar "advertising" his product in connection with Fluke's failures. In this event, those complaints would actually have been far more legitimate than this unfounded complaint about "disclosure".
This comment assumes a simplistic view that advertisers can only influence us by saying "A is bad" and "B is good" at the same time and same place.   Advertisers can be far more subtle and it is certainly more effective in disguising motives when they say "A is bad" at a different time and location than saying "B is good".    Both types of comments (Fluke is bad, Arcus is good) can be found sprinkled throughout eng-tips in different threads and times.  (yes, I know they don't have identical capabilities, but there are certainly overlaps).   I am not by any means suggesting there is a motive.....this entire paragraph is soley in the context of responding to claims that there is no need for disclosure simply because these statements never appear together.


Quote:

therefore...

It's clear that there isn't any problem with Gunnar's existing explicit disclosure
I would suggest that both supporting bullets leading up to "therefore" have been refuted.  Which makes it an opinion.  And while your opinion is certainly valued, it does not match mine.    I would be glad to enroll the moderator to give another opinion if the people involved in this thread don't think my suggestion to wait to the next thread is reasonable.   I have a suspicion that may easily result in deleting of one or more threads, which is not my intention.  But I am losing patience to defend a reasonable suggestion against this onslaught.
 

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Quote:

Let's get back to real life, shall we?
Right.   Wait until the next thread, and then do the right thing.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Pete - by way of real-world counter-example, I sucessfully navigated the Chinese (!) MiniDSO website with sufficient (trivial!) mouse driving skills (hint: Google Translate) to quickly and easily find all sorts of technical details about the MiniDSO gadget referenced above. Your Swedish-language excuse is a non-starter.

You're just being silly.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

(OP)
Disclosure: "I and my son have developed a recorder for process signals. It has ten channels and samples with twelve bit resolution with just below 5 kSa/s and channel. We have included very special trigger functions that aid in finding intermittent failures in paper and steel mills as well as in power plants and other applications like railway bridges, meat processing and dairies. The trigger options include the usual window in and also window out as well as a unique sum-of-three-channels and a math function on which one can trig in real time. There is also a window-out trig working over several channels, which is very useful when looking for elevated ground potential in up to ten different places. There is also a counter function and several innovative cursor measurement functions using the three cursors. One of them is an automatic tangent seeker that can be used to find the slope of a trace. There are probably several other features that escape my mind. I use this recorder, named ARCUS, to help finding out and putting right problems in the mentioned industries and applications. I am so sorry that we did that.

I understand that I have no right to have any opinion about anything that may be remotely associated with this kind of equipment or the activities I have been performing at ASEA/ABB and Siemens and other companies for the last fifty or so years. This is in full analogy with an author that has written a book. It is self-evident that such a person never shall have the right to have an opinion about any written material - how bad it ever may be - and that he shall keep quiet so he doesn't disturb sensitive souls."

I will copy this text into every post if that is what the EngTips readers find appropriate. Do you?

Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

You have specifically attacked one specific product by name repeatedly. Many forums would not permit that, whether you have conflict of interest or not.   Having a conflict of interest makes it even dicier.

I told you what I suggested you include.

Your latest post is an obvious attempt to mock my suggestion.

I'm done.  I will let the moderator sort it out.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)'  ?

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

Now you know why its called a fluke - if you get it home and all the data is there then it will be a fluke - sorry to hear of your trials, usually find fluke to be pretty good equipment.

With the price of laptops and tablets etc would it be a better idea to take and download any data off of the fluke to a more trusted item of equipment? not to bothered if its local but the 1000 mile trip is a pain.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

(OP)
Problem is, as I have discovered now, that waveforms are not stored even in internal memory. It is really amazing.

Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

"How to design an oscilloscope without using any high speed memory whatsoever"

All they store are the 1024 (?) data points representing what's shown on the screen. And they can do that in the FPGA, and shift it out for display. Everything else is *not* 'thrown away' - it's never captured in the first place! The entire device is display, not capture, oriented.

The above is my guess at what's been going on. I once invented envisioned a radar system using the same approach.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

(OP)
No, that's not true. I could retrieve data from internal memory and use it to zoom and do FFT etcetera. There are two representation of data stored: Screen and Waveform. It is Waveform data that is needed if you want to do more than just print the traces.

I could use the internal memory for waveforms initially. But I could not store waveforms on the USB stick.

After some use, There were memory places (15 in all) from where I couldn't retrieve waveforms any more - the 1000 miles trip was such an occasion.

Now, it seems that I cannot retrieve waveforms from any memory place. Only screen dumps (bitmaps).

I have done resets and that doesn't change anything. Nor does a complete memory delete. I shall now remove the battery and see if that makes internal memory work again.

Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

RE: A 1000 miles trip with data lost on return. Fluke Scopemeter again.

(OP)
No, didn't work.

Rugged: Your solution doesn't work if there are no data in memory. So, I need to get the internal memory working with waveforms - like it did initially.

As I said, I have lost all patience with this device and with Fluke as a company. It goes back next week.

Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources