|
Components and Circuits For discussions about component types, alternatives and availability, circuit configurations and modifications etc. Discussions here should be of a general nature and not about specific sets. |
|
Thread Tools |
29th Nov 2021, 6:16 pm | #1 |
Rest in Peace
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chard, South Somerset, UK.
Posts: 7,457
|
Choosing an LCR meter
Although I do have a few instruments for measuring L and C - separate ones for each type - they are now quite old, as in 30 years or more - and their calibration is somewhat suspect. In the meantime, or course, technology in this field has come a long way: integrated LCR meters, of which there appear to be many available by different manufacturers at widely different prices.
So, I'm asking for advice & recommendations: an LCR meter for less than £40, battery or a.c. mains powered. All replies will be much appreciated; thank you. Al. / Nov. 29th. |
29th Nov 2021, 6:55 pm | #2 |
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 27,788
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
For amateur use, just buy one of the cheap Chinese component analysers from an eBay seller. They are available cased and uncased - the uncased ones are perfectly usable and you can always fit them in a box of some sort. They start at about £10.
|
29th Nov 2021, 7:25 pm | #3 |
Octode
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Bristol, UK.
Posts: 1,642
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
I'll second Paul's advice, the Chinese testers seem pretty accurate and are very cheap. But a word of warning if you've not used one before - the chips in these can be instantaneously destroyed if you connect the tester to a larger undischarged capacitor. You can buy replacement programmed chips, but it's a hassle you can do without. But you have to look pretty hard to find any tester that won't be damaged in this way - I understand that most of the Peak models won't cope with it. They don't like it up 'em!
Mike |
29th Nov 2021, 7:30 pm | #4 |
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 27,788
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
At least if you blow one up you can just buy another one
|
29th Nov 2021, 7:40 pm | #5 |
Heptode
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 719
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
As always, you get what you pay for. The Chinese TC-1 type testers are within +/- 10% over a reasonable range of LCR values. And they can test other stuff - I find them handy for a sanity check on pinout of fets/bjts/diodes etc.
If you want more accuracy (like 1% or better) or multifrequency operation then you need to spend £100 or more (the sky's the limit) - so it all depends on what you want to measure, and for what frequency of operation. |
29th Nov 2021, 9:39 pm | #6 |
Dekatron
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cottingham, East Yorkshire, UK.
Posts: 5,737
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
Well worth considering the popular MK328 Multi tester - LCR/transistors etc:
UK Suppliers: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/193819085...IAAOSwbERdHGKP (Cheaper from Banggood etc) Worth reading this, regarding the MK328 LCR Meter v Peak Atlas: https://www.vintage-radio.net/forum/...d.php?t=176122 The spec is attached. (You don't always 'get what you pay for' - sometimes you get more).
__________________
David. BVWS Member. G-QRP Club member 1339. |
29th Nov 2021, 10:06 pm | #7 |
Heptode
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 719
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
David, correct me if I'm wrong, but the MK328 and the TC-1 are both copies of the same idea, described in:
https://www.mikrocontroller.net/arti..._.28English.29 and https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/$20-lcr-esr-transistor-checker-project/ My comment about getting what you pay for is about LCR meter accuracy, not all the other (nice to have) measurement capabilities the atmega-based tester has. |
29th Nov 2021, 10:29 pm | #8 |
Heptode
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 898
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
If you have a computer at your work bench, then a soundcard with some software like REW is a very convenient tool to have on hand, especially with a USB soundcard like a Focusrite 2i2. Although often used for audio bandwidth testing out to 90kHz bandwidth, it is an excellent LCR meter as it plots the impedance (magnitude and phase) over the circa 5Hz to 90kHz bandwidth, which can highlight a lot more about a passive part than just a single frequency measurement from a typical LCR tester. That is especially the case for passive parts that show up inherent resonance or phase shift characteristics within that bandwidth (even at the low frequency end for iron-core inductors and transformers).
Like modern VNA impedance analyser's, calibration only requires a reference resistor like a 0.1% 0.5W style, rather than also requiring reference C and/or L. If you have a reasonable soundcard already then this is effectively a zero $ option to consider. |
30th Nov 2021, 12:53 am | #9 |
Dekatron
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Oxford, UK.
Posts: 4,942
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
I know this is an expensive option, but it is designed and manufactured in the UK and with excellent specification
https://www.peakelec.co.uk/acatalog/...nce-meter.html Note I don't have one (yet) but I'd sure like one. Craig
__________________
Doomed for a certain term to walk the night |
30th Nov 2021, 10:30 am | #10 | |
Dekatron
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cottingham, East Yorkshire, UK.
Posts: 5,737
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
Quote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Br3L1B80ow He states: Quote: 'I'm the creator of the original version of this tester; it uses an ATMega8 and a 2x16 character LCD as told in the video. I started this project in early 2009: After seeing a similar commercial tester (Atlas DCA 55), I thought it would be an interesting project to try building a similar device myself. As far as I remember (it's so long ago...), my first version could only detect bipolar transistors, diodes, MOSFETs and resistors. For this reason, I called it "Transistor tester". But the component detection - by only applying different currents by two different resistors on each pin and checking how the voltages change - worked far better than I had imagined'. 'I thought the project may be useful to others and decided to release it. I released the code completely free to everyone in a German microcontroller forum: At that time I was 16, was programming C for only about 2 years, and didn't even know about open source licenses. So it's completely OK for me that others make money of the project. I'm really pleased and impressed that this project got that popular and developed further by the community. Many features shown in the video were added by the community and not by me: Inductor detection, Vloss and ESR measurement for capacitors, the battery voltage display, and several more. Since the community versions completely surpassed it, I stopped active maintenance of the original version at some point in 2012'. End quote. None of the LCR meters test below a certain range, for example capacitors below 30pF. However, to measure below that is simple. Just check the actual value of say a 100pF capacitor, then put it in parallel with the low value capacitor under test, read off the total value and subtract the higher value parallel one from the total. I have two of the bare modules I bought for a fiver each some years ago, which I boxed up. Another one which was kindly gifted to me as a kit by a forum member, along with a 3D printed case, and have an actual MK328, which comes with a plug-in ZIF socket for use if preferred to the test leads. And I also have an aging 'All Digital Electric' L/C meter. They all give very similar results in terms of accuracy. I'm not trashing other makes or models, but as a hobbyist, I can't think why I'd want to buy anything more expensive than an MK328, which - on 'shoot outs' - does better than others which cost three or four times as much. Same applies to multi-meters. Others may disagree, which is fine. To calibrate it, you short the three test leads together and the display talks you through the steps. One big criticism of the MK328 is the lack of instructions. If needed, the User Manual can be found at this link: http://115.28.16.44:81/file/3533.pdf Pic 1: Bare MK328 PCB (fully functional). Pic 2: Complete MK328 as they come.
__________________
David. BVWS Member. G-QRP Club member 1339. |
|
30th Nov 2021, 11:54 am | #11 |
Octode
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 1,046
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
I have Atlas and Der-ee LCR testers. The extra speed of the Der-ee is something. It's Taiwan-made:
https://www.deree.com.tw/de-5000-lcr-meter.html It's around £100, but I believe there are copies out there. I can't vouch for how good the clones are. The Der-ee is an absolute joy to use: fast and accurate. My advice is to save up the extra dough and get a Der-ee. You won't look back. I can't remember when the Atlas was last used... |
30th Nov 2021, 4:25 pm | #12 |
Heptode
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 719
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
Just out of interest, I measured several capacitors, inductors and resistors on 3 LCR meters I have: a HP4275A, which can measure impedance at frequencies of 10KHz to 10MHz; a DE-5000 which can measure from 100Hz to 100KHz and a TC-1 chinese atmega-based component tester. Caps and inductors were measured at 100KHz on the HP and DE-5000 with the exception of the 100uF which was measured at 10KHz.
The HP and DER meters were o/c and s/c calibrated before use; the atmega TC-1 has no cal capability. All readings were actual digits displayed. Results: Nominal value HP4275A DE-5000 TC-1 15pF 13.8165pF 13.90pF - 47pF 46.932pF 47.05pF 42pF 1200pF 1056.74pF 1056.9pF 1037pF 6200pF 6.1342nF 6.124nF 6.021nF 1.5uF 1570.8nF 1561.2nF 1555nF 2.2uF 2.2096uF 2.26uF 2.261uF 100uF 70.81uF 70.5uF 87.75uF 1uH 933.90nH 0.977uH 0.21ohm 10uH 8.3362uH 8.395uH 0.01mH 100uH 85.536uH 85.48uH 0.09mH 1mH 841.2uH 842.6uH 1.01mH 4.7mH 3.9952mH 3.994mH 4.1mH 10ohm 10.015 10.022 10.6 100ohm 99.936 99.81 103.8 1K 996.5 994.1 1001 10K 9.966 9.965 9.798 100K 99.36 99.33 103.1 1M 1.0024 1.0028 1.004 10M 10.056 10.063 9.814 From the above it can be seen that the HP4275 and DE-5000 are in pretty good agreement. The TC-1 is not able to measure accurately below 100pF and its inductance measurement capability is primitive but it is far from useless. |
30th Nov 2021, 7:11 pm | #13 |
Rest in Peace
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chard, South Somerset, UK.
Posts: 7,457
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
Thank you all for your posts: informative & useful.
On e-bay there is the Proster BM4070 for sale at between £30 to £40 and I am tempted. Any thoughts on this particular item, please? Al. / Nov. 30th. |
1st Dec 2021, 11:14 am | #14 |
Heptode
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 719
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
|
5th Dec 2021, 4:13 pm | #15 |
Diode
Join Date: Dec 2021
Location: Grosseto, Italy
Posts: 1
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
Anyone experienced with MASTECH ms5308? I'm divided between Der EE DE-5000 and this Mastech.
|
6th Dec 2021, 1:11 am | #16 |
Rest in Peace
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chard, South Somerset, UK.
Posts: 7,457
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
One BM4070 now ordered.
Al. / Dec. 6th. |
8th Dec 2021, 7:37 pm | #17 |
Rest in Peace
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chard, South Somerset, UK.
Posts: 7,457
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
LCR meter now received.
This post is only for the purpose of reporting the results of an inspection and measurements I made to ascertain the functionality and accuracy of this instrument. Hopefully, other members will find it informative & useful. In this post, I use the letters L, C and R as convenient abbreviations for inductance, capacitance and resistance. Brand. This instrument was advertised as the manufacturer 'Proster'. On this item, that name did not appear: the abbreviation (or name?) 'SZBJ' was displayed. With regard to what follows, I do not know the relevance of that difference, (if any) but a survey of the www shows both are Chinese firms of a substantial size & appear to be professional. Obviously, there may be some close association between them. Initial inspection. This instrument came with an instruction leaflet. The English is very poor and confusing, particularly the sub-section on measurement of L. This instrument features a 'set zero' rotary control (as would be expected). However, that control is only functional on the C ranges, which I found somewhat puzzling. Measurement checks & assessments. First, a bit of background is relevant & necessary. When making a check on measurement accuracy & calibration on any instrument, it is obviously necessary to have 'known good' standards to use. I have two main instruments here which I use when necessary: an HP LCR meter, model 4332A; a Marconi LCR bridge, model 868B. Also a Hatfield decade R box and two Fluke DMMs. I have a range of L, C and R components whose values are known & which I keep in reserve for calibration checks only on those instruments - typically annually. Those instruments and components were used to check the calibration and accuracy of this newly-acquired LCR meter. Measurement accuracy & results. This instrument has a claimed accuracy of "x% +/- 5 digits"., were x is in the range 0.8 to 5 depending on which type of component is being measured and also the range selected. But I am a bit puzzled over the "5 digits" part. ( I can only assume that if a component is '100' in reality, in addition to the stated +/- x% error, '5' should be added, so that '100' will be displayed in the range 100 +/- x%, plus 5. ) R & C measurements were good: within the claimed accuracy. But there were significant errors in measurements of L. Examples: 300 uH displayed as 360 uH; 400 uH displayed as 450 uH; 500 uH displayed as 570 uH; 320 displayed as 400 uH. These are only a few errors: there were many more in this range and also in the mH and H ranges. The inductance of the test leads? A 'real' 10 uH coil displayed 10.7 uH; 2 uH displayed 2.0 uH. Incidentally, I did consider if the R of any particular coil was relevant, but comparative tests ruled that possible confusing parameter out. Conclusion. In writing a report on an instruments such as this, there a much more that could be written, but the above will do as a 'starter' for any further possible discussion. In conclusion, I am somewhat disappointed: mainly on account of the L measurement. O.K., I can imagine someone saying: "But it was cheap compared to high-quality professional instruments, therefore . . .". Be that as it may: this instrument states its accuracy but for L, it falls sadly short. Al. / Dec. 8th. |
9th Dec 2021, 4:08 am | #18 |
Heptode
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 898
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
Not to say that the meter isn't just intrinsically inaccurate for L measurement, but for some ranges it may depend on its measurement frequency (assuming it uses just a single test frequency but maybe changes that for each range).
My 100uH grade 2 ref inductor measures dead accurate down to about 300Hz, but below that the REW software calculation has a harder time due to the dominant DCR of the inductor (0.54 ohm). If the measurement frequency was down at circa 100Hz, and possibly even 1kHz, then L values down at 300-500uH may be tough for that meter (given it may autorange to 20mH FSD ?). For my 10uH grade 2 reference, DCR becomes dominant below 10kHz. So on the other hand if the test frequency is relatively high, then inductor first self-resonance may be a concern for that meter. |
9th Dec 2021, 9:12 am | #19 |
Heptode
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 719
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
Most of the cheap LCR meters I've seen measure at about 300Hz. Which is fine for mH values but e.g. a 100uH inductor has an impedance of only 0.18 ohms. So it's hard to distinguish from the DC resistance.
Conversely a 100pF cap has an impedance of 5.3Mohm at 300Hz so again measuring small values is not easy. Measuring low LC values accurately needs kelvin connections and the ability to choose a test frequency, but you can't really expect that on sub-£100 meters. |
9th Dec 2021, 7:14 pm | #20 | |
Rest in Peace
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chard, South Somerset, UK.
Posts: 7,457
|
Re: Choosing an LCR meter
Quote:
Al. |
|