|
So I have a 3457a on the way that passes the self tests. What are the odds of it actually working when I get it? What should I look for as a general failure for these devices? I always assume anything I purchase off ebay is going to be in need of repair. Hopefully I'm wrong this time, but I have to say I've never purchased used gear that didn't need some repair. The device is in good cosmetic condition and the seller showed that it passed self tests. No actually readings however. It was last calibrated in 98. Ohh and my apologizes to anyone that was also bidding on the same unit. There was a few.
Thanks in advance,
Jeff
|
On 29 December 2012 03:39, Jeff Machesky <jeff@...> wrote: So I have a 3457a on the way that passes the self tests. What are the
odds of it actually working when I get it? What should I look for as a
general failure for these devices? I always assume anything I purchase
off ebay is going to be in need of repair. Hopefully I'm wrong this
time, but I have to say I've never purchased used gear that didn't need
some repair. The device is in good cosmetic condition and the seller
showed that it passed self tests. No actually readings however. It
was last calibrated in 98. Ohh and my apologizes to anyone that was
also bidding on the same unit. There was a few.
Thanks in advance, I had one, and it was a good meter. I sold it to a friend, who has never used it, and now I need it, so he is going to sell it back to me. Neither of us can remember what I charged him for it first time around. I did write some software to control that meter. It's only been tested on Solaris with the NI GPIB card, but being command line driven, it should be fairly portable. But I suspect there are much nicer interfaces. I looked up the price the other day to get Agilent to calibrate it. The cost was about ?126 (around $200 I guess). Which is quite reasonable. That price included delivery and collection costs, but not tax. I never had any problems with mine, and when my mate and I were discussing me having it back yesteday or the day before, he done a few quick checks and confirmed it still worked fine. You seem to get quit a lot of meter for your money on that. The 3458A which gives an extra digit costs about 10x as much used. There is a newer Agilent meter than the 3457A, which tends to fetch more, but I recall at one time noticing the calibration cost on that was very most (?40 or so). Dave
|
On 29 December 2012 03:39, Jeff Machesky <jeff@...> wrote: So I have a 3457a on the way that passes the self tests. What are the
odds of it actually working when I get it? I'd think pretty good. Anyway, this might interest you - a review of the 3457A. Part 1 seems pretty good - I've not seen part 2, but I'm going to take a look. Dave
|
Thanks Dave, I actually have watched those videos. Bit drawn out like most of his videos..but still good. Too much detail is not always a bad thing.
As for the 3457A, if it works I plan on getting it calibrated by Agilent within the year. From what I understand it's about a $200 US investment. The meter was last calibrated in '98, so I'll be curious to see how accurate it is when I get it. Crossing my fingers that it works. The Fluke 8050A that I purchased for $25 and repaired is working a treat. Well within it's rated spec even after having the front end blown out of it. The best part about it is that the case is in excellent condition with hardly any signs of aging.
I should know on Thursday if all went well. I plan on purchasing some voltage references from the well known site as a basic test of the 3457A. I may even calibrate it based on those references if it's way out and later getting it NIST traceable calibrated.
Thanks,
Jeff
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 12/29/2012 10:01 AM, David Kirkby wrote:
On 29 December 2012 03:39, Jeff Machesky <jeff@... <mailto:jeff%40codebest.com>> wrote:
So I have a 3457a on the way that passes the self tests. What are the
odds of it actually working when I get it? I'd think pretty good. Anyway, this might interest you - a review of
the 3457A. Part 1 seems pretty good - I've not seen part 2, but I'm
going to take a look.
Dave
|
Watching these videos has sparked my interest in my 3457A and raised some
questions.
As for calibration, the Agilent website lists a per incident calibration at
$204.22 and an End of Support date of 4/1/2003. It would be interesting to
send it directly to Agilent and see what the data is 'As Received' versus
'As Completed'. If it has a total failure of the back up battery and you
loose the calibration constants, then do your on 'House CAL', send it in,
and see how well you did. When I hit CALNUM? and hit Enter, I get '98'.
Now for the questions:
What is the latest firmware for the 3457A? When I hit REV? and Enter, I get
'6,0'.
Also, what options were available for the 3457A? I could not find anything
in the manual other than some mounting brackets and such, no internal
'electronic' options, although there is a box on the back of the DMM to
check for 'STD' or 'OPT 700', what ever that is. When I hit OPT? and Enter,
I get '0'
Thanks in advance.
Joe
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: hp_agilent_equipment@... [mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@...] On Behalf Of Jeff Machesky Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 2:01 PM To: hp_agilent_equipment@... Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way Thanks Dave, I actually have watched those videos. Bit drawn out like most of his videos..but still good. Too much detail is not always a bad thing. As for the 3457A, if it works I plan on getting it calibrated by Agilent within the year. From what I understand it's about a $200 US investment. The meter was last calibrated in '98, so I'll be curious to see how accurate it is when I get it. Crossing my fingers that it works. The Fluke 8050A that I purchased for $25 and repaired is working a treat. Well within it's rated spec even after having the front end blown out of it. The best part about it is that the case is in excellent condition with hardly any signs of aging. I should know on Thursday if all went well. I plan on purchasing some voltage references from the well known site as a basic test of the 3457A. I may even calibrate it based on those references if it's way out and later getting it NIST traceable calibrated. Thanks, Jeff On 12/29/2012 10:01 AM, David Kirkby wrote:
On 29 December 2012 03:39, Jeff Machesky <jeff@...
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com>> wrote:
So I have a 3457a on the way that passes the self tests. What are the
odds of it actually working when I get it? I'd think pretty good. Anyway, this might interest you - a review of
the 3457A. Part 1 seems pretty good - I've not seen part 2, but I'm
going to take a look.
Dave
------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links
|
On 29 December 2012 20:01, Jeff Machesky <jeff@...> wrote: Thanks Dave, I actually have watched those videos. Bit drawn out like
most of his videos..but still good. Too much detail is not always a bad
thing. I thought the bit showing the noise on the DVM was a bit silly when it was connected to a DC power supply. As for the 3457A, if it works I plan on getting it calibrated by Agilent
within the year. From what I understand it's about a $200 US investment.
The meter was last calibrated in '98, so I'll be curious to see how
accurate it is when I get it. I think the calibration service you chose might dictate whether you get data about the condition when sent. When I send mine in for cal, I'd like to know what was out and by how much. But I'm not going to pay extra for a calibration service that provides that. As far as I'm concerned, if Agilent calibrate it, then it is OK. For me personally, it makes no difference whatsoever if it has ISO, NIST or whatever calibration. But I'd prefer Agilent to someone else. I have calibration certificate here for an Agilent VNA calibration kit. It was done by a calibration house in the USA. But from what I can gather from reading the documentation, the equipment to calibrate them is not available commerically. So it makes me wonder how a lab can calibrate a cal kit, when the equipment to do it can't be bought. I suspect there is a fairly cosy realationship between some test equipment dealers and calibration facilities. I plan on purchasing some
voltage references from the well known site as a basic test of the
3457A. I may even calibrate it based on those references if it's way out
and later getting it NIST traceable calibrated. I don't know if there are pots in there you can adjust with a trimmer, or if it is all done electronically. You might find it is impossible to calibrate yourself. I never had any reason to look inside mine. Dave
|
According to the manual, there are only two 'adjustments' that can be made
on a 3457A, Input Offset Amplifier adjustment and AC Converter Frequency
Response, both needed only if there is a 'HARDWARE ERR' failure message
after 'TEST' is selected and then only if it is a specific 'AUXERR' or 16 or
256 is seen. Otherwise, all the calibrations are done from the front panel
with specific inputs from the front panel.
The CALNUM? is incremented by 'several digits' with a 'complete
calibration', one for each calibration point entered, per the manual.
Interestingly, when I sent my two 3458A's to Agilent for calibration, the
CALNUM incremented by only 1. However, when I calibrated one of them before
sending it to Agilent, (since I lost the data in the DALLAS CALRAM chip that
I was removing) the CALNUM went from 1 to something like 34 or something. I
don't recall. It seems that if you have the appropriate software to run the
complete calibration protocol, it only increments by '1' instead of by all
the data points entered. Such software exists for the 3457A but I have
never seen it available 'on theBay'. I suspect Agilent would have that
software and equipment to do that calibration and, thus, an Agilent
calibration may only increment the CALNUM? by 1.
When getting an Agilent calibration of the 3458A, you get 'As Received' and
'As Completed' data. Very helpful to me in that the only two points my
'House CAL' of the one 3458A failed were the two 'midrange' AC Voltage
values. All else 'PASSED'.
I agree with Dave. If it's HP/Agilent, I prefer Agilent to do the CAL. If
it's Solartron, I prefer AMETEK (Solartron), etc.
I believe that having some 'basic' professionally calibrated instruments
(DMM's, Noise Sources, Power Sensors, Frequency Standards (unless you have a
GPSDO, CS Standard, etc.) etc.), that you can then use as 'transfer
standards' to do your own 'in house' calibration of other instruments, is
very important if you want to set up a reliable workshop.
Of course, you will also need a 'stable' source of the various signals that
you will use to be 'measured' by the various 'DUT's', such as resistance,
voltage, current, frequency, etc. The 3458A is relatively easy to
calibrate, requiring only 10.000000 VDC, 10000.000 ohms, and some AC voltage
at various frequencies, IIRC. I have never CAL'd a 3457A but the 3478A is a
multi-step process.
This whole thing can become very 'addictive'. Be careful.
Joe
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: hp_agilent_equipment@... [mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@...] On Behalf Of David Kirkby Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 5:53 PM To: hp_agilent_equipment@... Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way On 29 December 2012 20:01, Jeff Machesky <jeff@... <mailto:jeff%40codebest.com> > wrote: Thanks Dave, I actually have watched those videos. Bit drawn out like
most of his videos..but still good. Too much detail is not always a bad
thing. I thought the bit showing the noise on the DVM was a bit silly when it was connected to a DC power supply. As for the 3457A, if it works I plan on getting it calibrated by Agilent
within the year. From what I understand it's about a $200 US investment.
The meter was last calibrated in '98, so I'll be curious to see how
accurate it is when I get it. I think the calibration service you chose might dictate whether you get data about the condition when sent. When I send mine in for cal, I'd like to know what was out and by how much. But I'm not going to pay extra for a calibration service that provides that. As far as I'm concerned, if Agilent calibrate it, then it is OK. For me personally, it makes no difference whatsoever if it has ISO, NIST or whatever calibration. But I'd prefer Agilent to someone else. I have calibration certificate here for an Agilent VNA calibration kit. It was done by a calibration house in the USA. But from what I can gather from reading the documentation, the equipment to calibrate them is not available commerically. So it makes me wonder how a lab can calibrate a cal kit, when the equipment to do it can't be bought. I suspect there is a fairly cosy realationship between some test equipment dealers and calibration facilities. I plan on purchasing some
voltage references from the well known site as a basic test of the
3457A. I may even calibrate it based on those references if it's way out
and later getting it NIST traceable calibrated. I don't know if there are pots in there you can adjust with a trimmer, or if it is all done electronically. You might find it is impossible to calibrate yourself. I never had any reason to look inside mine. Dave
|
On 30 December 2012 00:40, J. L. Trantham <jltran@...> wrote: When getting an Agilent calibration of the 3458A, you get 'As Received' and
'As Completed' data. Very helpful to me in that the only two points my
'House CAL' of the one 3458A failed were the two 'midrange' AC Voltage
values. All else 'PASSED'. What do you use as a "House CAL" that is almost good enough for the 8.5 digit 3458A? That's a seriously accurate (and seriously expensive), multi-meter. Dave.
|
I had a Solartron 7081 that I had sent to AMETEK for repair and calibration.
I used it as a ‘transfer’ standard. My AC source was a 3326A fed via Coax
to a 50 ohm terminator read first by the Solartron then fed to the 3458A and
the ‘Solartron value’ entered into the 3458A. The 10 VDC was a 731B and the
10K resistor was a Leeds and Northrup 10 K resistor, both read by the 7081,
and then feeding those measurements into the 3458A. I was amazed at how
well it worked.
Now I have a Fluke 5100B that should be much better at the AC stuff and not
bad at the rest of it as well. Although the Fluke 5100B is only 5 ? digits,
it is fairly stable and should be a good ‘source’ to be read by the 3458A or
the 7081, as long as everything is ‘warmed up’ and you are quick, giving it
little time to change.
Joe
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: hp_agilent_equipment@... [mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@...] On Behalf Of David Kirkby Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 7:04 PM To: hp_agilent_equipment@... Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way On 30 December 2012 00:40, J. L. Trantham <jltran@... <mailto:jltran%40att.net> > wrote: When getting an Agilent calibration of the 3458A, you get 'As Received' and 'As Completed' data. Very helpful to me in that the only two points my
'House CAL' of the one 3458A failed were the two 'midrange' AC Voltage
values. All else 'PASSED'. What do you use as a "House CAL" that is almost good enough for the 8.5 digit 3458A? That's a seriously accurate (and seriously expensive), multi-meter. Dave. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
Wow, lots of replies all of a sudden. I'm already prepping the wife for the $200 + price tag of calibration. Funny how when I was single I would have about $800 in cash in my wallet at all times and now I beg for 20 bucks, Hmm. Sad part is I make about 4 times the money. In any event I've not received to much feedback on the "Self Test OK" message the seller had posted. Any comments? I'm too much of a skeptic when it comes to eBay purchases. It's just a convenient place to purchase such goods. Any feedback would be appreciated as to possible pitfalls regarding this device. I like to prep for issues rather then build myself up for failure. What do they say...it's better to be pleasantly surprised then let down.
Thanks,
Jeff
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 12/29/2012 5:40 PM, J. L. Trantham wrote:
According to the manual, there are only two 'adjustments' that can be made
on a 3457A, Input Offset Amplifier adjustment and AC Converter Frequency
Response, both needed only if there is a 'HARDWARE ERR' failure message
after 'TEST' is selected and then only if it is a specific 'AUXERR' or 16 or
256 is seen. Otherwise, all the calibrations are done from the front panel
with specific inputs from the front panel.
The CALNUM? is incremented by 'several digits' with a 'complete
calibration', one for each calibration point entered, per the manual.
Interestingly, when I sent my two 3458A's to Agilent for calibration, the
CALNUM incremented by only 1. However, when I calibrated one of them before
sending it to Agilent, (since I lost the data in the DALLAS CALRAM chip that
I was removing) the CALNUM went from 1 to something like 34 or something. I
don't recall. It seems that if you have the appropriate software to run the
complete calibration protocol, it only increments by '1' instead of by all
the data points entered. Such software exists for the 3457A but I have
never seen it available 'on theBay'. I suspect Agilent would have that
software and equipment to do that calibration and, thus, an Agilent
calibration may only increment the CALNUM? by 1.
When getting an Agilent calibration of the 3458A, you get 'As Received' and
'As Completed' data. Very helpful to me in that the only two points my
'House CAL' of the one 3458A failed were the two 'midrange' AC Voltage
values. All else 'PASSED'.
I agree with Dave. If it's HP/Agilent, I prefer Agilent to do the CAL. If
it's Solartron, I prefer AMETEK (Solartron), etc.
I believe that having some 'basic' professionally calibrated instruments
(DMM's, Noise Sources, Power Sensors, Frequency Standards (unless you have a
GPSDO, CS Standard, etc.) etc.), that you can then use as 'transfer
standards' to do your own 'in house' calibration of other instruments, is
very important if you want to set up a reliable workshop.
Of course, you will also need a 'stable' source of the various signals that
you will use to be 'measured' by the various 'DUT's', such as resistance,
voltage, current, frequency, etc. The 3458A is relatively easy to
calibrate, requiring only 10.000000 VDC, 10000.000 ohms, and some AC voltage
at various frequencies, IIRC. I have never CAL'd a 3457A but the 3478A is a
multi-step process.
This whole thing can become very 'addictive'. Be careful.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of David Kirkby
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 5:53 PM
To: hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way
On 29 December 2012 20:01, Jeff Machesky <jeff@... <mailto:jeff%40codebest.com>
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com> > wrote:
Thanks Dave, I actually have watched those videos. Bit drawn out like
most of his videos..but still good. Too much detail is not always a bad
thing. I thought the bit showing the noise on the DVM was a bit silly when it
was connected to a DC power supply.
As for the 3457A, if it works I plan on getting it calibrated by Agilent
within the year. From what I understand it's about a $200 US investment.
The meter was last calibrated in '98, so I'll be curious to see how
accurate it is when I get it. I think the calibration service you chose might dictate whether you
get data about the condition when sent.
When I send mine in for cal, I'd like to know what was out and by how
much. But I'm not going to pay extra for a calibration service that
provides that. As far as I'm concerned, if Agilent calibrate it, then
it is OK. For me personally, it makes no difference whatsoever if it
has ISO, NIST or whatever calibration. But I'd prefer Agilent to
someone else.
I have calibration certificate here for an Agilent VNA calibration
kit. It was done by a calibration house in the USA. But from what I
can gather from reading the documentation, the equipment to calibrate
them is not available commerically. So it makes me wonder how a lab
can calibrate a cal kit, when the equipment to do it can't be bought.
I suspect there is a fairly cosy realationship between some test
equipment dealers and calibration facilities.
I plan on purchasing some
voltage references from the well known site as a basic test of the
3457A. I may even calibrate it based on those references if it's way out
and later getting it NIST traceable calibrated. I don't know if there are pots in there you can adjust with a trimmer,
or if it is all done electronically. You might find it is impossible
to calibrate yourself.
I never had any reason to look inside mine.
Dave
|
If the 'SELF TEST OK' message appears, there is no need to make any
'adjustments'. Just do the 'front panel CAL' if needed.
As I said, I would check it out, assume it is the best instrument in your
collection, send it to Agilent for CAL and see what you get.
I would appreciate knowing what 'REV?' and 'OPT?' says when you get a
chance. 'CALNUM?' would be interesting as well.
In the 3458A, the firmware is in an EPROM (6 EPROM's for the older units)
and can be removed, a socket placed, and easily upgraded by purchasing the
latest pre-programmed EPROM (or EPROM's for the older units) from Agilent.
The only problem is they have a $50 minimum for this $18 part for the later
units.
My wife thinks I am going to appear on an episode of 'Hoarders'.
Joe
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: hp_agilent_equipment@... [mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@...] On Behalf Of Jeff Machesky Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 8:01 PM To: hp_agilent_equipment@... Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way Wow, lots of replies all of a sudden. I'm already prepping the wife for the $200 + price tag of calibration. Funny how when I was single I would have about $800 in cash in my wallet at all times and now I beg for 20 bucks, Hmm. Sad part is I make about 4 times the money. In any event I've not received to much feedback on the "Self Test OK" message the seller had posted. Any comments? I'm too much of a skeptic when it comes to eBay purchases. It's just a convenient place to purchase such goods. Any feedback would be appreciated as to possible pitfalls regarding this device. I like to prep for issues rather then build myself up for failure. What do they say...it's better to be pleasantly surprised then let down. Thanks, Jeff On 12/29/2012 5:40 PM, J. L. Trantham wrote:
According to the manual, there are only two 'adjustments' that can be made
on a 3457A, Input Offset Amplifier adjustment and AC Converter Frequency
Response, both needed only if there is a 'HARDWARE ERR' failure message
after 'TEST' is selected and then only if it is a specific 'AUXERR' or
16 or
256 is seen. Otherwise, all the calibrations are done from the front panel
with specific inputs from the front panel.
The CALNUM? is incremented by 'several digits' with a 'complete
calibration', one for each calibration point entered, per the manual.
Interestingly, when I sent my two 3458A's to Agilent for calibration, the
CALNUM incremented by only 1. However, when I calibrated one of them
before
sending it to Agilent, (since I lost the data in the DALLAS CALRAM
chip that
I was removing) the CALNUM went from 1 to something like 34 or
something. I
don't recall. It seems that if you have the appropriate software to
run the
complete calibration protocol, it only increments by '1' instead of by all
the data points entered. Such software exists for the 3457A but I have
never seen it available 'on theBay'. I suspect Agilent would have that
software and equipment to do that calibration and, thus, an Agilent
calibration may only increment the CALNUM? by 1.
When getting an Agilent calibration of the 3458A, you get 'As
Received' and
'As Completed' data. Very helpful to me in that the only two points my
'House CAL' of the one 3458A failed were the two 'midrange' AC Voltage
values. All else 'PASSED'.
I agree with Dave. If it's HP/Agilent, I prefer Agilent to do the CAL. If
it's Solartron, I prefer AMETEK (Solartron), etc.
I believe that having some 'basic' professionally calibrated instruments
(DMM's, Noise Sources, Power Sensors, Frequency Standards (unless you
have a
GPSDO, CS Standard, etc.) etc.), that you can then use as 'transfer
standards' to do your own 'in house' calibration of other instruments, is
very important if you want to set up a reliable workshop.
Of course, you will also need a 'stable' source of the various signals
that
you will use to be 'measured' by the various 'DUT's', such as resistance,
voltage, current, frequency, etc. The 3458A is relatively easy to
calibrate, requiring only 10.000000 VDC, 10000.000 ohms, and some AC
voltage
at various frequencies, IIRC. I have never CAL'd a 3457A but the 3478A
is a
multi-step process.
This whole thing can become very 'addictive'. Be careful.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of David Kirkby
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 5:53 PM
To: hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way
On 29 December 2012 20:01, Jeff Machesky <jeff@...
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com>
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com> > wrote:
Thanks Dave, I actually have watched those videos. Bit drawn out like
most of his videos..but still good. Too much detail is not always a bad
thing. I thought the bit showing the noise on the DVM was a bit silly when it
was connected to a DC power supply.
As for the 3457A, if it works I plan on getting it calibrated by Agilent
within the year. From what I understand it's about a $200 US investment.
The meter was last calibrated in '98, so I'll be curious to see how
accurate it is when I get it. I think the calibration service you chose might dictate whether you
get data about the condition when sent.
When I send mine in for cal, I'd like to know what was out and by how
much. But I'm not going to pay extra for a calibration service that
provides that. As far as I'm concerned, if Agilent calibrate it, then
it is OK. For me personally, it makes no difference whatsoever if it
has ISO, NIST or whatever calibration. But I'd prefer Agilent to
someone else.
I have calibration certificate here for an Agilent VNA calibration
kit. It was done by a calibration house in the USA. But from what I
can gather from reading the documentation, the equipment to calibrate
them is not available commerically. So it makes me wonder how a lab
can calibrate a cal kit, when the equipment to do it can't be bought.
I suspect there is a fairly cosy realationship between some test
equipment dealers and calibration facilities.
I plan on purchasing some
voltage references from the well known site as a basic test of the
3457A. I may even calibrate it based on those references if it's way out
and later getting it NIST traceable calibrated. I don't know if there are pots in there you can adjust with a trimmer,
or if it is all done electronically. You might find it is impossible
to calibrate yourself.
I never had any reason to look inside mine.
Dave
------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links
|
Thanks Joe. Gives me a bit of piece of mind. I may have overlooked your details in the post. So I assume the self test OK message pretty much rules out failures I need to worry about ? My apologizes for being such a cynic.
I finally found a source of 500V AC to try and get my Tek 2465BDM DMM calibrated within reason. Sadly it keeps changing the impedance on me when it goes in to to the actually cal. Very annoying. But that's a topic for another group.
Thanks,
Jeff
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 12/29/2012 7:08 PM, J. L. Trantham wrote:
If the 'SELF TEST OK' message appears, there is no need to make any
'adjustments'. Just do the 'front panel CAL' if needed.
As I said, I would check it out, assume it is the best instrument in your
collection, send it to Agilent for CAL and see what you get.
I would appreciate knowing what 'REV?' and 'OPT?' says when you get a
chance. 'CALNUM?' would be interesting as well.
In the 3458A, the firmware is in an EPROM (6 EPROM's for the older units)
and can be removed, a socket placed, and easily upgraded by purchasing the
latest pre-programmed EPROM (or EPROM's for the older units) from Agilent.
The only problem is they have a $50 minimum for this $18 part for the later
units.
My wife thinks I am going to appear on an episode of 'Hoarders'.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Jeff Machesky
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 8:01 PM
To: hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way
Wow, lots of replies all of a sudden. I'm already prepping the wife for
the $200 + price tag of calibration. Funny how when I was single I would
have about $800 in cash in my wallet at all times and now I beg for 20
bucks, Hmm. Sad part is I make about 4 times the money. In any event
I've not received to much feedback on the "Self Test OK" message the
seller had posted. Any comments? I'm too much of a skeptic when it comes
to eBay purchases. It's just a convenient place to purchase such goods.
Any feedback would be appreciated as to possible pitfalls regarding this
device. I like to prep for issues rather then build myself up for
failure. What do they say...it's better to be pleasantly surprised then
let down.
Thanks,
Jeff
On 12/29/2012 5:40 PM, J. L. Trantham wrote:
According to the manual, there are only two 'adjustments' that can
be made
on a 3457A, Input Offset Amplifier adjustment and AC Converter Frequency
Response, both needed only if there is a 'HARDWARE ERR' failure message
after 'TEST' is selected and then only if it is a specific 'AUXERR' or
16 or
256 is seen. Otherwise, all the calibrations are done from the front panel
with specific inputs from the front panel.
The CALNUM? is incremented by 'several digits' with a 'complete
calibration', one for each calibration point entered, per the manual.
Interestingly, when I sent my two 3458A's to Agilent for calibration, the
CALNUM incremented by only 1. However, when I calibrated one of them
before
sending it to Agilent, (since I lost the data in the DALLAS CALRAM
chip that
I was removing) the CALNUM went from 1 to something like 34 or
something. I
don't recall. It seems that if you have the appropriate software to
run the
complete calibration protocol, it only increments by '1' instead of by all
the data points entered. Such software exists for the 3457A but I have
never seen it available 'on theBay'. I suspect Agilent would have that
software and equipment to do that calibration and, thus, an Agilent
calibration may only increment the CALNUM? by 1.
When getting an Agilent calibration of the 3458A, you get 'As
Received' and
'As Completed' data. Very helpful to me in that the only two points my
'House CAL' of the one 3458A failed were the two 'midrange' AC Voltage
values. All else 'PASSED'.
I agree with Dave. If it's HP/Agilent, I prefer Agilent to do the CAL. If
it's Solartron, I prefer AMETEK (Solartron), etc.
I believe that having some 'basic' professionally calibrated instruments
(DMM's, Noise Sources, Power Sensors, Frequency Standards (unless you
have a
GPSDO, CS Standard, etc.) etc.), that you can then use as 'transfer
standards' to do your own 'in house' calibration of other instruments, is
very important if you want to set up a reliable workshop.
Of course, you will also need a 'stable' source of the various signals
that
you will use to be 'measured' by the various 'DUT's', such as resistance,
voltage, current, frequency, etc. The 3458A is relatively easy to
calibrate, requiring only 10.000000 VDC, 10000.000 ohms, and some AC
voltage
at various frequencies, IIRC. I have never CAL'd a 3457A but the 3478A
is a
multi-step process.
This whole thing can become very 'addictive'. Be careful.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of David Kirkby
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 5:53 PM
To: hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way
On 29 December 2012 20:01, Jeff Machesky <jeff@... <mailto:jeff%40codebest.com>
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com>
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com> > wrote:
Thanks Dave, I actually have watched those videos. Bit drawn out like
most of his videos..but still good. Too much detail is not always a bad
thing. I thought the bit showing the noise on the DVM was a bit silly when it
was connected to a DC power supply.
As for the 3457A, if it works I plan on getting it calibrated by
Agilent
within the year. From what I understand it's about a $200 US
investment.
The meter was last calibrated in '98, so I'll be curious to see how
accurate it is when I get it. I think the calibration service you chose might dictate whether you
get data about the condition when sent.
When I send mine in for cal, I'd like to know what was out and by how
much. But I'm not going to pay extra for a calibration service that
provides that. As far as I'm concerned, if Agilent calibrate it, then
it is OK. For me personally, it makes no difference whatsoever if it
has ISO, NIST or whatever calibration. But I'd prefer Agilent to
someone else.
I have calibration certificate here for an Agilent VNA calibration
kit. It was done by a calibration house in the USA. But from what I
can gather from reading the documentation, the equipment to calibrate
them is not available commerically. So it makes me wonder how a lab
can calibrate a cal kit, when the equipment to do it can't be bought.
I suspect there is a fairly cosy realationship between some test
equipment dealers and calibration facilities.
I plan on purchasing some
voltage references from the well known site as a basic test of the
3457A. I may even calibrate it based on those references if it's
way out
and later getting it NIST traceable calibrated. I don't know if there are pots in there you can adjust with a trimmer,
or if it is all done electronically. You might find it is impossible
to calibrate yourself.
I never had any reason to look inside mine.
Dave
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
|
Another important consideration will be the onboard battery BT501.
See if you can determine its age.
Also, according to my manual (dated Feb 1988 ed 3) on page 6-26,
along with the list of the many updates applied to new revs,
they list a new battery and new resistors to replace the old one.
The original unit appears to have used a 2.9V model and has been
replaced by a 3.4V battery. If you plan on sending it in for cal,
you would probably want to put in a fresh battery.
You probably don't want to pay Agilent to do it for you and you don't
want to lose the new cal constants a week after calibration.
Hopefully that mod has been done already and all you will have to do
is source the replacement. You will probably need a second battery to
keep the NVRAM powered while you replace the old one.
Todd
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In hp_agilent_equipment@..., Jeff Machesky <jeff@...> wrote:
Wow, lots of replies all of a sudden. I'm already prepping the wife for
the $200 + price tag of calibration. Funny how when I was single I would
have about $800 in cash in my wallet at all times and now I beg for 20
bucks, Hmm. Sad part is I make about 4 times the money. In any event
I've not received to much feedback on the "Self Test OK" message the
seller had posted. Any comments? I'm too much of a skeptic when it comes
to eBay purchases. It's just a convenient place to purchase such goods.
Any feedback would be appreciated as to possible pitfalls regarding this
device. I like to prep for issues rather then build myself up for
failure. What do they say...it's better to be pleasantly surprised then
let down.
Thanks,
Jeff
On 12/29/2012 5:40 PM, J. L. Trantham wrote:
According to the manual, there are only two 'adjustments' that can be made
on a 3457A, Input Offset Amplifier adjustment and AC Converter Frequency
Response, both needed only if there is a 'HARDWARE ERR' failure message
after 'TEST' is selected and then only if it is a specific 'AUXERR' or
16 or
256 is seen. Otherwise, all the calibrations are done from the front panel
with specific inputs from the front panel.
The CALNUM? is incremented by 'several digits' with a 'complete
calibration', one for each calibration point entered, per the manual.
Interestingly, when I sent my two 3458A's to Agilent for calibration, the
CALNUM incremented by only 1. However, when I calibrated one of them
before
sending it to Agilent, (since I lost the data in the DALLAS CALRAM
chip that
I was removing) the CALNUM went from 1 to something like 34 or
something. I
don't recall. It seems that if you have the appropriate software to
run the
complete calibration protocol, it only increments by '1' instead of by all
the data points entered. Such software exists for the 3457A but I have
never seen it available 'on theBay'. I suspect Agilent would have that
software and equipment to do that calibration and, thus, an Agilent
calibration may only increment the CALNUM? by 1.
When getting an Agilent calibration of the 3458A, you get 'As
Received' and
'As Completed' data. Very helpful to me in that the only two points my
'House CAL' of the one 3458A failed were the two 'midrange' AC Voltage
values. All else 'PASSED'.
I agree with Dave. If it's HP/Agilent, I prefer Agilent to do the CAL. If
it's Solartron, I prefer AMETEK (Solartron), etc.
I believe that having some 'basic' professionally calibrated instruments
(DMM's, Noise Sources, Power Sensors, Frequency Standards (unless you
have a
GPSDO, CS Standard, etc.) etc.), that you can then use as 'transfer
standards' to do your own 'in house' calibration of other instruments, is
very important if you want to set up a reliable workshop.
Of course, you will also need a 'stable' source of the various signals
that
you will use to be 'measured' by the various 'DUT's', such as resistance,
voltage, current, frequency, etc. The 3458A is relatively easy to
calibrate, requiring only 10.000000 VDC, 10000.000 ohms, and some AC
voltage
at various frequencies, IIRC. I have never CAL'd a 3457A but the 3478A
is a
multi-step process.
This whole thing can become very 'addictive'. Be careful.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of David Kirkby
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 5:53 PM
To: hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way
On 29 December 2012 20:01, Jeff Machesky <jeff@...
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com>
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com> > wrote:
Thanks Dave, I actually have watched those videos. Bit drawn out like
most of his videos..but still good. Too much detail is not always a bad
thing. I thought the bit showing the noise on the DVM was a bit silly when it
was connected to a DC power supply.
As for the 3457A, if it works I plan on getting it calibrated by Agilent
within the year. From what I understand it's about a $200 US investment.
The meter was last calibrated in '98, so I'll be curious to see how
accurate it is when I get it. I think the calibration service you chose might dictate whether you
get data about the condition when sent.
When I send mine in for cal, I'd like to know what was out and by how
much. But I'm not going to pay extra for a calibration service that
provides that. As far as I'm concerned, if Agilent calibrate it, then
it is OK. For me personally, it makes no difference whatsoever if it
has ISO, NIST or whatever calibration. But I'd prefer Agilent to
someone else.
I have calibration certificate here for an Agilent VNA calibration
kit. It was done by a calibration house in the USA. But from what I
can gather from reading the documentation, the equipment to calibrate
them is not available commerically. So it makes me wonder how a lab
can calibrate a cal kit, when the equipment to do it can't be bought.
I suspect there is a fairly cosy realationship between some test
equipment dealers and calibration facilities.
I plan on purchasing some
voltage references from the well known site as a basic test of the
3457A. I may even calibrate it based on those references if it's way out
and later getting it NIST traceable calibrated. I don't know if there are pots in there you can adjust with a trimmer,
or if it is all done electronically. You might find it is impossible
to calibrate yourself.
I never had any reason to look inside mine.
Dave
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
Todd, the battery is already on my list of to do items. The security seal on the meter I've got on the way appears to have not been broken. I assume this is from the last cal back in 98. The fact that it has a seal on the case might be a sign that someone had done work internally, perhaps just the offsets.
I have two options, check the battery and replace as needed when I get the meter or wait until just before sending it off for cal knowing that if I loose the cal data it's not the end of the world. I assume Agilent isn't going to charge more because the cal data was lost? I think either way I need to know what the voltage is of the battery and what type of battery it is. Replacement of course would be done with a current limited power source in place to act as the battery while it's being changed. A bench supply with the voltage matched should do the trick. I'm hoping it will already have the 3.4v battery to make my life a bit easier. Not that I mind replacing a couple resistors.
Thanks,
Jeff
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 12/30/2012 9:11 AM, tmicallef1 wrote:
Another important consideration will be the onboard battery BT501.
See if you can determine its age.
Also, according to my manual (dated Feb 1988 ed 3) on page 6-26,
along with the list of the many updates applied to new revs,
they list a new battery and new resistors to replace the old one.
The original unit appears to have used a 2.9V model and has been
replaced by a 3.4V battery. If you plan on sending it in for cal,
you would probably want to put in a fresh battery.
You probably don't want to pay Agilent to do it for you and you don't
want to lose the new cal constants a week after calibration.
Hopefully that mod has been done already and all you will have to do
is source the replacement. You will probably need a second battery to
keep the NVRAM powered while you replace the old one.
Todd
--- In hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>, Jeff Machesky <jeff@...> wrote:
Wow, lots of replies all of a sudden. I'm already prepping the wife for
the $200 + price tag of calibration. Funny how when I was single I
would
have about $800 in cash in my wallet at all times and now I beg for 20
bucks, Hmm. Sad part is I make about 4 times the money. In any event
I've not received to much feedback on the "Self Test OK" message the
seller had posted. Any comments? I'm too much of a skeptic when it comes
to eBay purchases. It's just a convenient place to purchase such goods.
Any feedback would be appreciated as to possible pitfalls regarding this
device. I like to prep for issues rather then build myself up for
failure. What do they say...it's better to be pleasantly surprised then
let down.
Thanks,
Jeff
On 12/29/2012 5:40 PM, J. L. Trantham wrote:
According to the manual, there are only two 'adjustments' that can
be made
on a 3457A, Input Offset Amplifier adjustment and AC Converter
Frequency
Response, both needed only if there is a 'HARDWARE ERR' failure
message
after 'TEST' is selected and then only if it is a specific
'AUXERR' or
16 or
256 is seen. Otherwise, all the calibrations are done from the
front panel
with specific inputs from the front panel.
The CALNUM? is incremented by 'several digits' with a 'complete
calibration', one for each calibration point entered, per the manual.
Interestingly, when I sent my two 3458A's to Agilent for
calibration, the
CALNUM incremented by only 1. However, when I calibrated one of them
before
sending it to Agilent, (since I lost the data in the DALLAS CALRAM
chip that
I was removing) the CALNUM went from 1 to something like 34 or
something. I
don't recall. It seems that if you have the appropriate software to
run the
complete calibration protocol, it only increments by '1' instead
of by all
the data points entered. Such software exists for the 3457A but I have
never seen it available 'on theBay'. I suspect Agilent would have that
software and equipment to do that calibration and, thus, an Agilent
calibration may only increment the CALNUM? by 1.
When getting an Agilent calibration of the 3458A, you get 'As
Received' and
'As Completed' data. Very helpful to me in that the only two points my
'House CAL' of the one 3458A failed were the two 'midrange' AC Voltage
values. All else 'PASSED'.
I agree with Dave. If it's HP/Agilent, I prefer Agilent to do the
CAL. If
it's Solartron, I prefer AMETEK (Solartron), etc.
I believe that having some 'basic' professionally calibrated
instruments
(DMM's, Noise Sources, Power Sensors, Frequency Standards (unless you
have a
GPSDO, CS Standard, etc.) etc.), that you can then use as 'transfer
standards' to do your own 'in house' calibration of other
instruments, is
very important if you want to set up a reliable workshop.
Of course, you will also need a 'stable' source of the various
signals
that
you will use to be 'measured' by the various 'DUT's', such as
resistance,
voltage, current, frequency, etc. The 3458A is relatively easy to
calibrate, requiring only 10.000000 VDC, 10000.000 ohms, and some AC
voltage
at various frequencies, IIRC. I have never CAL'd a 3457A but the
3478A
is a
multi-step process.
This whole thing can become very 'addictive'. Be careful.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of
David Kirkby
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 5:53 PM
To: hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way
On 29 December 2012 20:01, Jeff Machesky <jeff@...
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com>
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com> > wrote:
Thanks Dave, I actually have watched those videos. Bit drawn out
like
most of his videos..but still good. Too much detail is not
always a bad
thing. I thought the bit showing the noise on the DVM was a bit silly when it
was connected to a DC power supply.
As for the 3457A, if it works I plan on getting it calibrated by
Agilent
within the year. From what I understand it's about a $200 US
investment.
The meter was last calibrated in '98, so I'll be curious to see how
accurate it is when I get it. I think the calibration service you chose might dictate whether you
get data about the condition when sent.
When I send mine in for cal, I'd like to know what was out and by how
much. But I'm not going to pay extra for a calibration service that
provides that. As far as I'm concerned, if Agilent calibrate it, then
it is OK. For me personally, it makes no difference whatsoever if it
has ISO, NIST or whatever calibration. But I'd prefer Agilent to
someone else.
I have calibration certificate here for an Agilent VNA calibration
kit. It was done by a calibration house in the USA. But from what I
can gather from reading the documentation, the equipment to calibrate
them is not available commerically. So it makes me wonder how a lab
can calibrate a cal kit, when the equipment to do it can't be bought.
I suspect there is a fairly cosy realationship between some test
equipment dealers and calibration facilities.
I plan on purchasing some
voltage references from the well known site as a basic test of the
3457A. I may even calibrate it based on those references if it's
way out
and later getting it NIST traceable calibrated. I don't know if there are pots in there you can adjust with a trimmer,
or if it is all done electronically. You might find it is impossible
to calibrate yourself.
I never had any reason to look inside mine.
Dave
|
It would be interesting to see if a newer rev is out there. My 3457A is s.n. prefix 2703, with rev 6,0 and option 0, CALNUM=34. I wonder if that's a default number for anything less than a full cal at Agilent? The last calibration was at least 6 years ago and performed by what was then Boeing Military Airplane Company's metrology lab. I need to open it up and check the battery condition. Steve On Dec 29, 2012, at 8:08 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@...> wrote: If the 'SELF TEST OK' message appears, there is no need to make any
'adjustments'. Just do the 'front panel CAL' if needed.
As I said, I would check it out, assume it is the best instrument in your
collection, send it to Agilent for CAL and see what you get.
I would appreciate knowing what 'REV?' and 'OPT?' says when you get a
chance. 'CALNUM?' would be interesting as well.
In the 3458A, the firmware is in an EPROM (6 EPROM's for the older units)
and can be removed, a socket placed, and easily upgraded by purchasing the
latest pre-programmed EPROM (or EPROM's for the older units) from Agilent.
The only problem is they have a $50 minimum for this $18 part for the later
units.
My wife thinks I am going to appear on an episode of 'Hoarders'.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: hp_agilent_equipment@...
[mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@...] On Behalf Of Jeff Machesky
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 8:01 PM
To: hp_agilent_equipment@...
Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way
Wow, lots of replies all of a sudden. I'm already prepping the wife for
the $200 + price tag of calibration. Funny how when I was single I would
have about $800 in cash in my wallet at all times and now I beg for 20
bucks, Hmm. Sad part is I make about 4 times the money. In any event
I've not received to much feedback on the "Self Test OK" message the
seller had posted. Any comments? I'm too much of a skeptic when it comes
to eBay purchases. It's just a convenient place to purchase such goods.
Any feedback would be appreciated as to possible pitfalls regarding this
device. I like to prep for issues rather then build myself up for
failure. What do they say...it's better to be pleasantly surprised then
let down.
Thanks,
Jeff
On 12/29/2012 5:40 PM, J. L. Trantham wrote:
According to the manual, there are only two 'adjustments' that can be made
on a 3457A, Input Offset Amplifier adjustment and AC Converter Frequency
Response, both needed only if there is a 'HARDWARE ERR' failure message
after 'TEST' is selected and then only if it is a specific 'AUXERR' or
16 or
256 is seen. Otherwise, all the calibrations are done from the front panel
with specific inputs from the front panel.
The CALNUM? is incremented by 'several digits' with a 'complete
calibration', one for each calibration point entered, per the manual.
Interestingly, when I sent my two 3458A's to Agilent for calibration, the
CALNUM incremented by only 1. However, when I calibrated one of them
before
sending it to Agilent, (since I lost the data in the DALLAS CALRAM
chip that
I was removing) the CALNUM went from 1 to something like 34 or
something. I
don't recall. It seems that if you have the appropriate software to
run the
complete calibration protocol, it only increments by '1' instead of by all
the data points entered. Such software exists for the 3457A but I have
never seen it available 'on theBay'. I suspect Agilent would have that
software and equipment to do that calibration and, thus, an Agilent
calibration may only increment the CALNUM? by 1.
When getting an Agilent calibration of the 3458A, you get 'As
Received' and
'As Completed' data. Very helpful to me in that the only two points my
'House CAL' of the one 3458A failed were the two 'midrange' AC Voltage
values. All else 'PASSED'.
I agree with Dave. If it's HP/Agilent, I prefer Agilent to do the CAL. If
it's Solartron, I prefer AMETEK (Solartron), etc.
I believe that having some 'basic' professionally calibrated instruments
(DMM's, Noise Sources, Power Sensors, Frequency Standards (unless you
have a
GPSDO, CS Standard, etc.) etc.), that you can then use as 'transfer
standards' to do your own 'in house' calibration of other instruments, is
very important if you want to set up a reliable workshop.
Of course, you will also need a 'stable' source of the various signals
that
you will use to be 'measured' by the various 'DUT's', such as resistance,
voltage, current, frequency, etc. The 3458A is relatively easy to
calibrate, requiring only 10.000000 VDC, 10000.000 ohms, and some AC
voltage
at various frequencies, IIRC. I have never CAL'd a 3457A but the 3478A
is a
multi-step process.
This whole thing can become very 'addictive'. Be careful.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of David Kirkby
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 5:53 PM
To: hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way
On 29 December 2012 20:01, Jeff Machesky <jeff@...
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com>
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com> > wrote:
Thanks Dave, I actually have watched those videos. Bit drawn out like
most of his videos..but still good. Too much detail is not always a bad
thing. I thought the bit showing the noise on the DVM was a bit silly when it
was connected to a DC power supply.
As for the 3457A, if it works I plan on getting it calibrated by Agilent
within the year. From what I understand it's about a $200 US investment.
The meter was last calibrated in '98, so I'll be curious to see how
accurate it is when I get it. I think the calibration service you chose might dictate whether you
get data about the condition when sent.
When I send mine in for cal, I'd like to know what was out and by how
much. But I'm not going to pay extra for a calibration service that
provides that. As far as I'm concerned, if Agilent calibrate it, then
it is OK. For me personally, it makes no difference whatsoever if it
has ISO, NIST or whatever calibration. But I'd prefer Agilent to
someone else.
I have calibration certificate here for an Agilent VNA calibration
kit. It was done by a calibration house in the USA. But from what I
can gather from reading the documentation, the equipment to calibrate
them is not available commerically. So it makes me wonder how a lab
can calibrate a cal kit, when the equipment to do it can't be bought.
I suspect there is a fairly cosy realationship between some test
equipment dealers and calibration facilities.
I plan on purchasing some
voltage references from the well known site as a basic test of the
3457A. I may even calibrate it based on those references if it's way out
and later getting it NIST traceable calibrated. I don't know if there are pots in there you can adjust with a trimmer,
or if it is all done electronically. You might find it is impossible
to calibrate yourself.
I never had any reason to look inside mine.
Dave
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
Steve, the one I'm getting appears to be start with 3114A for the serial number with STD (Standard) for options. I assume the serial number is above the bar code and under the model number. I've not received it yet, when I do I'll find out how many cals were done on it.
You figure it counts one cal number for each range. So is there 34 total cals to do the entire device ?
Thanks,
Jeff
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 12/30/2012 3:13 PM, Steve wrote:
It would be interesting to see if a newer rev is out there. My 3457A is s.n. prefix 2703, with rev 6,0 and option 0, CALNUM=34. I wonder if that's a default number for anything less than a full cal at Agilent? The last calibration was at least 6 years ago and performed by what was then Boeing Military Airplane Company's metrology lab. I need to open it up and check the battery condition.
Steve
On Dec 29, 2012, at 8:08 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@... <mailto:jltran%40att.net>> wrote:
If the 'SELF TEST OK' message appears, there is no need to make any
'adjustments'. Just do the 'front panel CAL' if needed.
As I said, I would check it out, assume it is the best instrument in your
collection, send it to Agilent for CAL and see what you get.
I would appreciate knowing what 'REV?' and 'OPT?' says when you get a
chance. 'CALNUM?' would be interesting as well.
In the 3458A, the firmware is in an EPROM (6 EPROM's for the older units)
and can be removed, a socket placed, and easily upgraded by purchasing the
latest pre-programmed EPROM (or EPROM's for the older units) from Agilent.
The only problem is they have a $50 minimum for this $18 part for the later
units.
My wife thinks I am going to appear on an episode of 'Hoarders'.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Jeff Machesky
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 8:01 PM
To: hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way
Wow, lots of replies all of a sudden. I'm already prepping the wife for
the $200 + price tag of calibration. Funny how when I was single I would
have about $800 in cash in my wallet at all times and now I beg for 20
bucks, Hmm. Sad part is I make about 4 times the money. In any event
I've not received to much feedback on the "Self Test OK" message the
seller had posted. Any comments? I'm too much of a skeptic when it comes
to eBay purchases. It's just a convenient place to purchase such goods.
Any feedback would be appreciated as to possible pitfalls regarding this
device. I like to prep for issues rather then build myself up for
failure. What do they say...it's better to be pleasantly surprised then
let down.
Thanks,
Jeff
On 12/29/2012 5:40 PM, J. L. Trantham wrote:
According to the manual, there are only two 'adjustments' that can
be made
on a 3457A, Input Offset Amplifier adjustment and AC Converter
Frequency
Response, both needed only if there is a 'HARDWARE ERR' failure
message
after 'TEST' is selected and then only if it is a specific
'AUXERR' or
16 or
256 is seen. Otherwise, all the calibrations are done from the
front panel
with specific inputs from the front panel.
The CALNUM? is incremented by 'several digits' with a 'complete
calibration', one for each calibration point entered, per the manual.
Interestingly, when I sent my two 3458A's to Agilent for
calibration, the
CALNUM incremented by only 1. However, when I calibrated one of them
before
sending it to Agilent, (since I lost the data in the DALLAS CALRAM
chip that
I was removing) the CALNUM went from 1 to something like 34 or
something. I
don't recall. It seems that if you have the appropriate software to
run the
complete calibration protocol, it only increments by '1' instead
of by all
the data points entered. Such software exists for the 3457A but I have
never seen it available 'on theBay'. I suspect Agilent would have that
software and equipment to do that calibration and, thus, an Agilent
calibration may only increment the CALNUM? by 1.
When getting an Agilent calibration of the 3458A, you get 'As
Received' and
'As Completed' data. Very helpful to me in that the only two points my
'House CAL' of the one 3458A failed were the two 'midrange' AC Voltage
values. All else 'PASSED'.
I agree with Dave. If it's HP/Agilent, I prefer Agilent to do the
CAL. If
it's Solartron, I prefer AMETEK (Solartron), etc.
I believe that having some 'basic' professionally calibrated
instruments
(DMM's, Noise Sources, Power Sensors, Frequency Standards (unless you
have a
GPSDO, CS Standard, etc.) etc.), that you can then use as 'transfer
standards' to do your own 'in house' calibration of other
instruments, is
very important if you want to set up a reliable workshop.
Of course, you will also need a 'stable' source of the various
signals
that
you will use to be 'measured' by the various 'DUT's', such as
resistance,
voltage, current, frequency, etc. The 3458A is relatively easy to
calibrate, requiring only 10.000000 VDC, 10000.000 ohms, and some AC
voltage
at various frequencies, IIRC. I have never CAL'd a 3457A but the
3478A
is a
multi-step process.
This whole thing can become very 'addictive'. Be careful.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of
David Kirkby
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 5:53 PM
To: hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way
On 29 December 2012 20:01, Jeff Machesky <jeff@...
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com>
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com>
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com> > wrote:
Thanks Dave, I actually have watched those videos. Bit drawn out
like
most of his videos..but still good. Too much detail is not
always a bad
thing. I thought the bit showing the noise on the DVM was a bit silly when it
was connected to a DC power supply.
As for the 3457A, if it works I plan on getting it calibrated by
Agilent
within the year. From what I understand it's about a $200 US
investment.
The meter was last calibrated in '98, so I'll be curious to see how
accurate it is when I get it. I think the calibration service you chose might dictate whether you
get data about the condition when sent.
When I send mine in for cal, I'd like to know what was out and by how
much. But I'm not going to pay extra for a calibration service that
provides that. As far as I'm concerned, if Agilent calibrate it, then
it is OK. For me personally, it makes no difference whatsoever if it
has ISO, NIST or whatever calibration. But I'd prefer Agilent to
someone else.
I have calibration certificate here for an Agilent VNA calibration
kit. It was done by a calibration house in the USA. But from what I
can gather from reading the documentation, the equipment to calibrate
them is not available commerically. So it makes me wonder how a lab
can calibrate a cal kit, when the equipment to do it can't be bought.
I suspect there is a fairly cosy realationship between some test
equipment dealers and calibration facilities.
I plan on purchasing some
voltage references from the well known site as a basic test of the
3457A. I may even calibrate it based on those references if it's
way out
and later getting it NIST traceable calibrated. I don't know if there are pots in there you can adjust with a trimmer,
or if it is all done electronically. You might find it is impossible
to calibrate yourself.
I never had any reason to look inside mine.
Dave
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
|
Steve,
Thanks for the data. Mine is also 2703A prefix with REV?:6,0 and
CALNUM?:98. Not a multiple of 34. Would be interesting to see what the
CALNUM increments by after an Agilent CAL.
I, too, need to look at the battery condition. I have not looked at the
manual regarding replacing the battery. Has anyone done that without losing
the CAL Constants?
Joe
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: hp_agilent_equipment@... [mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@...] On Behalf Of Steve Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2012 4:14 PM To: hp_agilent_equipment@... Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way It would be interesting to see if a newer rev is out there. My 3457A is s.n. prefix 2703, with rev 6,0 and option 0, CALNUM=34. I wonder if that's a default number for anything less than a full cal at Agilent? The last calibration was at least 6 years ago and performed by what was then Boeing Military Airplane Company's metrology lab. I need to open it up and check the battery condition. Steve On Dec 29, 2012, at 8:08 PM, "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@... <mailto:jltran%40att.net> > wrote: If the 'SELF TEST OK' message appears, there is no need to make any
'adjustments'. Just do the 'front panel CAL' if needed.
As I said, I would check it out, assume it is the best instrument in your
collection, send it to Agilent for CAL and see what you get.
I would appreciate knowing what 'REV?' and 'OPT?' says when you get a
chance. 'CALNUM?' would be interesting as well.
In the 3458A, the firmware is in an EPROM (6 EPROM's for the older units)
and can be removed, a socket placed, and easily upgraded by purchasing the
latest pre-programmed EPROM (or EPROM's for the older units) from Agilent.
The only problem is they have a $50 minimum for this $18 part for the later units.
My wife thinks I am going to appear on an episode of 'Hoarders'.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of Jeff Machesky Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 8:01 PM
To: hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com> Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way
Wow, lots of replies all of a sudden. I'm already prepping the wife for
the $200 + price tag of calibration. Funny how when I was single I would
have about $800 in cash in my wallet at all times and now I beg for 20
bucks, Hmm. Sad part is I make about 4 times the money. In any event
I've not received to much feedback on the "Self Test OK" message the
seller had posted. Any comments? I'm too much of a skeptic when it comes
to eBay purchases. It's just a convenient place to purchase such goods.
Any feedback would be appreciated as to possible pitfalls regarding this
device. I like to prep for issues rather then build myself up for
failure. What do they say...it's better to be pleasantly surprised then
let down.
Thanks,
Jeff
On 12/29/2012 5:40 PM, J. L. Trantham wrote:
According to the manual, there are only two 'adjustments' that can be
made on a 3457A, Input Offset Amplifier adjustment and AC Converter Frequency
Response, both needed only if there is a 'HARDWARE ERR' failure message
after 'TEST' is selected and then only if it is a specific 'AUXERR' or
16 or
256 is seen. Otherwise, all the calibrations are done from the front
panel with specific inputs from the front panel.
The CALNUM? is incremented by 'several digits' with a 'complete
calibration', one for each calibration point entered, per the manual.
Interestingly, when I sent my two 3458A's to Agilent for calibration,
the CALNUM incremented by only 1. However, when I calibrated one of them
before
sending it to Agilent, (since I lost the data in the DALLAS CALRAM
chip that
I was removing) the CALNUM went from 1 to something like 34 or
something. I
don't recall. It seems that if you have the appropriate software to
run the
complete calibration protocol, it only increments by '1' instead of by
all the data points entered. Such software exists for the 3457A but I have
never seen it available 'on theBay'. I suspect Agilent would have that
software and equipment to do that calibration and, thus, an Agilent
calibration may only increment the CALNUM? by 1.
When getting an Agilent calibration of the 3458A, you get 'As
Received' and
'As Completed' data. Very helpful to me in that the only two points my
'House CAL' of the one 3458A failed were the two 'midrange' AC Voltage
values. All else 'PASSED'.
I agree with Dave. If it's HP/Agilent, I prefer Agilent to do the CAL.
If it's Solartron, I prefer AMETEK (Solartron), etc.
I believe that having some 'basic' professionally calibrated instruments
(DMM's, Noise Sources, Power Sensors, Frequency Standards (unless you
have a
GPSDO, CS Standard, etc.) etc.), that you can then use as 'transfer
standards' to do your own 'in house' calibration of other instruments,
is very important if you want to set up a reliable workshop.
Of course, you will also need a 'stable' source of the various signals
that
you will use to be 'measured' by the various 'DUT's', such as
resistance, voltage, current, frequency, etc. The 3458A is relatively easy to
calibrate, requiring only 10.000000 VDC, 10000.000 ohms, and some AC
voltage
at various frequencies, IIRC. I have never CAL'd a 3457A but the 3478A
is a
multi-step process.
This whole thing can become very 'addictive'. Be careful.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of David
Kirkby Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 5:53 PM
To: hp_agilent_equipment@...
<mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] 3457a on the way
On 29 December 2012 20:01, Jeff Machesky <jeff@...
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com> <mailto:jeff%40codebest.com>
<mailto:jeff%40codebest.com> > wrote:
Thanks Dave, I actually have watched those videos. Bit drawn out like
most of his videos..but still good. Too much detail is not always a
bad thing. I thought the bit showing the noise on the DVM was a bit silly when it
was connected to a DC power supply.
As for the 3457A, if it works I plan on getting it calibrated by
Agilent within the year. From what I understand it's about a $200 US
investment. The meter was last calibrated in '98, so I'll be curious to see how
accurate it is when I get it. I think the calibration service you chose might dictate whether you
get data about the condition when sent.
When I send mine in for cal, I'd like to know what was out and by how
much. But I'm not going to pay extra for a calibration service that
provides that. As far as I'm concerned, if Agilent calibrate it, then
it is OK. For me personally, it makes no difference whatsoever if it
has ISO, NIST or whatever calibration. But I'd prefer Agilent to
someone else.
I have calibration certificate here for an Agilent VNA calibration
kit. It was done by a calibration house in the USA. But from what I
can gather from reading the documentation, the equipment to calibrate
them is not available commerically. So it makes me wonder how a lab
can calibrate a cal kit, when the equipment to do it can't be bought.
I suspect there is a fairly cosy realationship between some test
equipment dealers and calibration facilities.
I plan on purchasing some
voltage references from the well known site as a basic test of the
3457A. I may even calibrate it based on those references if it's way
out and later getting it NIST traceable calibrated. I don't know if there are pots in there you can adjust with a trimmer,
or if it is all done electronically. You might find it is impossible
to calibrate yourself.
I never had any reason to look inside mine.
Dave
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Machesky" <jeff@...> To: <hp_agilent_equipment@...> Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2012 2:31 PM Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] Re: 3457a on the way Todd, the battery is already on my list of to do items. The security
seal on the meter I've got on the way appears to have not been broken. I
assume this is from the last cal back in 98. The fact that it has a seal
on the case might be a sign that someone had done work internally,
perhaps just the offsets.
I have two options, check the battery and replace as needed when I get
the meter or wait until just before sending it off for cal knowing that
if I loose the cal data it's not the end of the world. I assume Agilent
isn't going to charge more because the cal data was lost? I think either
way I need to know what the voltage is of the battery and what type of
battery it is. Replacement of course would be done with a current
limited power source in place to act as the battery while it's being
changed. A bench supply with the voltage matched should do the trick.
I'm hoping it will already have the 3.4v battery to make my life a bit
easier. Not that I mind replacing a couple resistors.
Thanks,
Jeff
Why not just apply AC power while changing the battery. Just use an ungrounded soldering iron. Or is there some other thing I am not thinking about?
|
Tom, you may have a valid point. I'll have to look at the schematics. I think it's a bit safer however to use a battery substitution voltage then to have the entire instrument up and running. Heaven forbid something falls..etc.
Thanks,
Jeff
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 12/30/2012 4:59 PM, Tom Miller wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Machesky" <jeff@... <mailto:jeff%40codebest.com>>
To: <hp_agilent_equipment@... <mailto:hp_agilent_equipment%40yahoogroups.com>>
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2012 2:31 PM
Subject: Re: [hp_agilent_equipment] Re: 3457a on the way
Todd, the battery is already on my list of to do items. The security
seal on the meter I've got on the way appears to have not been broken. I
assume this is from the last cal back in 98. The fact that it has a seal
on the case might be a sign that someone had done work internally,
perhaps just the offsets.
I have two options, check the battery and replace as needed when I get
the meter or wait until just before sending it off for cal knowing that
if I loose the cal data it's not the end of the world. I assume Agilent
isn't going to charge more because the cal data was lost? I think either
way I need to know what the voltage is of the battery and what type of
battery it is. Replacement of course would be done with a current
limited power source in place to act as the battery while it's being
changed. A bench supply with the voltage matched should do the trick.
I'm hoping it will already have the 3.4v battery to make my life a bit
easier. Not that I mind replacing a couple resistors.
Thanks,
Jeff
Why not just apply AC power while changing the battery. Just use an
ungrounded soldering iron.
Or is there some other thing I am not thinking about?
|
--- In hp_agilent_equipment@..., "J. L. Trantham" <jltran@...> wrote: [...] In the 3458A, the firmware is in an EPROM (6 EPROM's for the older units)
and can be removed, a socket placed, and easily upgraded by purchasing the
latest pre-programmed EPROM (or EPROM's for the older units) from Agilent.
The only problem is they have a $50 minimum for this $18 part for the later
units.
My wife thinks I am going to appear on an episode of 'Hoarders'.
Joe Hi Joe, I think Agilent will waive the $50 minimum order if you phone it in. The minimum only applies when ordering through their web site. Correct me if I'm wrong... Jay
|
