Fluke 5790A MetCal or SureCal Procedure

Started by Hawaii596, 01-19-2016 -- 14:53:45

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages1
User actions

Hawaii596

01-19-2016 -- 14:53:45
Anyone know if there is out there, a MetCal or SureCal procedure for calibration of Fluke 5790A's.  I have the 792A with 20+ years of history, and all the needed standards.  About to have the need to calibrate numerous units per year.  Just wondering if anyone knows if there is an automated procedure available.  Otherwise, I will be generating some very complex spreadsheets to deal with the various correction factors, etc.

Or, in absence of an automated procedure, does anyone have spreadsheets as above developed they might be able to share?
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind."
Lord Kelvin (1824-1907)
from lecture to the Institute of Civil Engineers, 3 May 1883

silv3rstr3

#1
01-20-2016 -- 07:38:11
I'm sure Fluke has one but they don't release that to the public.  They charge around 7 or 8 grand to get ours calibrated at a primary level.  I know people that could write a procedure for it but that's also going to be expensive and time consuming.
"They are in front of us, behind us, and we are flanked on both sides by an enemy that out numbers us 29:1. They can't get away from us now!!"
-Chesty Puller

Hawaii596

#2
01-20-2016 -- 09:01:12
I may have around eight to ten units to be calibrated.  And although it is now out of cal, I have a 792A (with all the adapters and shunts, etc.) with about 10 or so Fluke Primary Lab cals going back to the early 90's. So I can establish a drift rate and calculate the various uncertainties.  After running the numbers, I also did a detailed review/comparison of the uncertainties of various primary labs and NMI's (National Measurement Institutes - NIST, etc.).  NIST is a little better than Fluke.  the Swiss NMI has quite a lot better numbers than NIST for a similar price.  NPL (UK) has quite a bit better numbers than Fluke also, but they are really expensive.  It would be interesting to me to have my 792A cal'd to better uncertainties than NIST.  In practicality though, I will likely send it to either Fluke or NIST.  I do think I may opt for NIST.  Pretty exciting to me to be able to set up this part of the lab.  I am already working on the ability to do 8508A's and 5720A/5725A.  Need to get accredited though before going too much further.

The 5790A cals are for an internal dept., and don't need accreditation.  But I can at least do up all the uncertainty budgeting and prep for accreditation on them (a good thing - as the internal business will pay for the ability to do accredited 5790A's.
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind."
Lord Kelvin (1824-1907)
from lecture to the Institute of Civil Engineers, 3 May 1883

N79

#3
01-20-2016 -- 18:54:26
I'd recommend sending your 792A to Fluke instead of NIST, given that a full cal on a 792A at NIST runs around $45K or so and it's less than $10k at Fluke. If you're going to only use it for the 5790 cal, I would think Fluke's uncertainties would be sufficient. If you're planning on calibrating other 792s with it, you may need to opt for the better uncertainties NMIs can provide.

I would NOT trust a drift rate calculation on the 792A, especially on the amplified ranges.
Print
Go Up Pages1
User actions