What is the next best thing to a Agilent 3458A?

[WestCoastCal]

Attached is a comparison of the accuracies of the 3458AOPT002 vs the 8508A.  The 3458AOPT002 tolerances were developed using the 90 day relative specs.  The 8508A specs are 1 year absolutes. If the TAR is greater than 1, then the 8508A is more accurate, and if less than 1, the 3458A is more accurate.  For example, the 10 VDC test point is accurate to ±2.65 ppm, the test ratio is 0.78:1, therefore the 8508A specification at 10 VDC is ±3.4 ppm.

[CalLabSolutions]

Thank you WestCost.. I was just looking in the other blogs for similuar data you posted.

[Squidley]

Attached is a comparison of the accuracies of the 3458AOPT002 vs the 8508A.  The 3458AOPT002 tolerances were developed using the 90 day relative specs.  The 8508A specs are 1 year absolutes. If the TAR is greater than 1, then the 8508A is more accurate, and if less than 1, the 3458A is more accurate.  For example, the 10 VDC test point is accurate to ±2.65 ppm, the test ratio is 0.78:1, therefore the 8508A specification at 10 VDC is ±3.4 ppm.

Doesn't seem to be an honest comparision to compare the 90day specs of the 3458 vs the 1 year of the 8508... should compare 90 to 90...

[Bryan]

Attached is a comparison of the accuracies of the 3458AOPT002 vs the 8508A.  The 3458AOPT002 tolerances were developed using the 90 day relative specs.  The 8508A specs are 1 year absolutes. If the TAR is greater than 1, then the 8508A is more accurate, and if less than 1, the 3458A is more accurate.  For example, the 10 VDC test point is accurate to ±2.65 ppm, the test ratio is 0.78:1, therefore the 8508A specification at 10 VDC is ±3.4 ppm.

Doesn't seem to be an honest comparision to compare the 90day specs of the 3458 vs the 1 year of the 8508... should compare 90 to 90...

Relative vs Absolute will also skew in favor of the 3458.

[Certi-Cal]

I may be needing a new meter for the lab and I was wondering what else is out there? I have seen the new Flukes and I am thinking there has to be something better than that accuracy wise that is not gonna cost you the bank like the 3458A does???

There is nothing that can replace the 3458A!  For one it is the only meter on the market that can be used as a supper accurate digitizer.  And for traceability, Agilent will repair them to the component, no board swapping and loss of all your historical data.

There are a lot of good meters out there, but none as reliable and as feature packed as the 3458A.   34410A, 34420A ad the Fluke 8508A are all good meters, but pound for pound 3458A is still king of the hill.  I really like it when an instrument can stand the test of time.

All Keithley meters I've used were unreliable.  I've been told in no uncertain terms that where DC Volts and Ohms measurements are concerned, both the Datron 1281 and Fluke 8508A are more stable than the 3458A (the Datron by an  order of magnitude).  I would think you should be able to get hold of demo units and arrive at your own conclusions.

Presumably you've considered transfer measurements if your budget comes up short?

[USMCPMEL]

I want to be able to use my 5520A to calibrate some higher end multimeters like the 34970A and 34401A and several others if I had a 3458A I could use it as a comparison standard to achieve the accuracies I am looking for. I do not understand why Fluke did not beef up the specs on the 5522A???

[jimmyc]

because then it would be a 5720.  the 5522 actually has a worse capacitance spec than the 5520 due to the input protection fuses.  (if i heard the sales pitch correctly)

[Bryan]

I want to be able to use my 5520A to calibrate some higher end multimeters like the 34970A and 34401A and several others if I had a 3458A I could use it as a comparison standard to achieve the accuracies I am looking for. I do not understand why Fluke did not beef up the specs on the 5522A???

I don't know if you are familiar with the webinars Fluke has available but they did do one on characterizing 5520/5522, used the 8508A of course since they are selling themy're archived somewhere on their site.

[CalLabSolutions]

We have several procedures that will use a Standard DMM like the 3458A or 8508A to characterize the source, 5520 or 5500. Then calibrate the DUT.   We are just finishing up one that uses 3458A and 9100 to calibrate the 34401A. 

*If you have the hardware and the vision, we will figure out how to do it in software. http://www.callabsolutions.com

[measure]

Quote from: metrologygeek on Yesterday at 13:21:59
Depending on your measurement range of interest the Agilent 34420A is a pretty good one. When I saw the subject line my immediate thought was: "An Agilent 3458A/002". I think the Fluke 8508 is the meter of which they speak, but as with any Danaher'ed company, be on the lookout for specmanship with it...

Can you please tell me what "specmanship" is??

"Specmanship" is jargon that's often used in the field of testing to mean the manipulation of data to improve the specifications of a product or process beyond what it is capable of achieving except under uniquely controlled conditions. Or for more money. Or under some other very special circumstances.

I would alter (with regards) your definition somewhat to read:
"Specmanship" is jargon often used in the field of testing/instrumentation to refer to the manipulation of data to seemingly improve the specifications of a product or process beyond what it is capable of achieving, except under uniquely controlled conditions, for more money, or under some other very special circumstances.

[CalibratorJ]

Aw come on, no one manipulates their data to seemingly improve their specs

Meh, decided to remove the example in point. I am sure I would get bashed by the Fluke folks anyway....

[metrologygeek]

I would alter (with regards) your definition somewhat to read:
"Specmanship" is jargon often used in the field of testing/instrumentation to refer to the manipulation of data to seemingly improve the specifications of a product or process beyond what it is capable of achieving, except under uniquely controlled conditions, for more money, or under some other very special circumstances.

I'm good with that.

[rjf1957]

Re Transmille, we just got a quote for an 8081 4ppm 8½ Digit Multimeter for $11,169. Not bad. One neat feature is that it will measure voltage and current simultaneously for easier shunt calibration.

We like the 8508A/01 for the ratioing capability, HV ohms, 2x scale, etc. The 3458A because, as Michael pointed out, is a digitizer, does voltage ratioing, 1x scale, etc.

Different tools depending on the job at hand.

[CalLabSolutions]

Different tools depending on the job at hand.

I think that says it all, the right tool for the job!  And if you are going to do everything, you need everything. 

Back to the start of this thread, and the topic of looking for a new meter. I think you should start with a list of measurements you need that new meter to do, along with the required accuracy.  Then you can shop for the meter that meets your needs at the price you can afford.  And at that point you can also decide if you would like to expand capabilities and if it is in your budget.  (Usually budget has more to do with it than requirements, otherwise we would buy all three.)

[RFCAL]

If one knows how to use the 3458A properly,you will not need another system voltmeter. And no, I don't work for Agilent.