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

[Skogsgurra]

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Series II 190-204 and I have told you about the very limited waveform memory, the problems with the USB stick, the outdated PC software, funny copy-and-paste effects when porting (patching, actually) SW from earlier 2-channel versions to four channels, ground leads coming loose from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 reliable is the FLUKE Series II Scopemeter.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 the Scopemeter 190 math function 1.pdf

The compensation is described in the appendix.

Gunnar Englund

http://www.gke.org

--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

 

[VEBill]

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.

 

[ScottyUK]

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!

 

[Skogsgurra]

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

http://www.gke.org

--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

 

[itsmoked]

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

 

[Skogsgurra]

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

http://www.gke.org

--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

 

[ScottyUK]

You have rather more patience than I have Gunnar.


----------------------------------

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

 

[VEBill]

Joke alert:

DS-203 3.0" LCD Pocket Mini Oscilloscope (4 ch!!)

 

[VEBill]

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.

 

[VEBill]

...€141.85 with free S&H.

Manual is here:

http://www.elechouse.com/elechouse/images/product/DS203/DS203_Manual.pdf

What a crazy planet...

 

[Skogsgurra]

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 Fluke BC 190 Battery charger.pdf

Gunnar Englund

http://www.gke.org

--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

 

[electricpete]

In view of the Argus product that you have mentioned many times

http://www.gke.org/pub/files/ARCUS leaflet English.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)' ?

 

[electricpete]

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

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

 

[electricpete]

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)' ?

 

[ScottyUK]

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!

 

[electricpete]

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)' ?

 

[Skogsgurra]

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

http://www.gke.org

--------------------------------------
Half full - Half empty? I don't mind. It's what in it that counts.

 

[electricpete]

That is just ridiculous.

I thought I presented a rational basis for my suggestion.

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?

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.

...Arcuis...It isn't even close in bandwidth or application.

Hence the words "...could be viewed as a competitor..."

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)' ?

 

[electricpete]

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

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

 

[electricpete]

..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)' ?