Thanks for the video! Just bought 1587 fc, looks like might have been a good idea. Would you kindly do video on motor insulation testing?
@three-phase562
8 ай бұрын
The Fluke 1587FC is a solid insulation multimeter for general maintenance work 👍. Are you looking at anything specific with the motor testing? I have one video showing a motor test from a panel using the MIT420/2. kzitem.info/news/bejne/w2l-loGnrnpyhYYsi=bsO-r9bpi8187r78 I have another test of a motor on the bench using the PM5203. kzitem.info/news/bejne/t5-lrm2tZn6foGksi=--49UV1xqDuAvYgK
@ducembarr7057
8 ай бұрын
Oh, I should have searched better! By the way, if you search " three phase channel " in general you tube search your channel does not come up . Might consider adding something to the channel name that's more unique. You put up very good 👍 info, should be more popular!
@three-phase562
8 ай бұрын
@@ducembarr7057 Thanks for the info, I have never searched for my own channel name. It is a very small channel, so likely it wouldn't turn up in general searches anyway, but I will think about something to add to the name.. If there is anything specific you want to know, then ask and I will help out if I can.
@mistake920
4 ай бұрын
Thank you very much for doing such a specific comparison between the two models! Does the A version also give higher (almost doube?) values like the B version does, compared to other, more expensive insulation testers? Im on the market for such a tester for testing heating elements. Currently using an old analogue Made in USSR, that seems to work fine, but I have not compared it to other meters, so I do not know how accurate it is. It still does the job though. Like you said, I can tell if there is a faulty insulation, but the actual value I get - I cannot be sure how accurate is it.
@three-phase562
4 ай бұрын
For the insulation test function the A and B versions have a similar accuracy, its just that the B version can measure higher resistance values where the A version will just show over-range. For the continuity function, the B version appears to have an issue with reading high in certain situations where as the A version is much more stable. If you want to carry out condition monitoring of motors etc over a period of time, trending the readings you get, then the B version with the extended test range is a better option. If you are predominantly wanting to show an installation is safe to energise or fault finding, then the A version will achieve that. Due to their nature, insulation testers are never the most accurate devices anyway in comparison to more usual multi-meter measurement functions. Thanks for watching, glad you found the video useful.
@mistake920
4 ай бұрын
@@three-phase562 Thanks again for taking the time to reply! For my application, the resistance value is more important, since it is directly related to the ammount of moisture in the insulation material used (generaly Magnesium Oxide powder or fine sand, which is very hydrophilic). Which is why, the fact that the ut505b gives much higher value is worrying. Does the A version have that same issue? I wanted to compare it to my hand-crank megaohmeter. When I hook my old analogue meter to the multimeter to check the output voltage, the neadle stays at 10 MegaOhms no matter the voltage, which tells me it is pretty accurate. Do you have one of those analogue hand-crank type meters? They are pretty neat in doing more detailed manual readings like that you can "control" the output voltage by the crank revolutions and watch the behaviour of that neadle. Not that big of a resolution in the higher values though, mine goes up to 2 Gohm but from 500 Mohm and up to the 2 Gohm the movement of the neadle is like 1 cm.
@three-phase562
4 ай бұрын
@@mistake920 You can test the accuracy of the insulation tester against a set of resistors, just be mindful of the voltage rating of them, so you may have to use resistors in series. If you work to a particular pass value for your heaters, then you can make up a resistor to match that value. The insulation testing function of the UT505A and UT505B are comparable with regard to accuracy, it is the continuity/resistance function where the UT505B goes out of specification against my winding simulator. The UT505B has a higher insulation resistance measurement capability than the UT505A, if your existing meter goes up to 2 GOhm, the UT505A will not match that unless you test at 1000V. At 250V test, the UT505A measures up to 250 MOhm, where as the UT505B measures up to 50 GOhm, depends if you want that range or not. At 500V, UT505A measures up to 500 MOhm and the UT505B measures up to 100 GOhm. Alternatively you could look at something like the Extech MG302, or one of its clones, that measures up to 4 GOhm across all the test voltages and was more accurate than both the UT505A and UT505B in my tests. I have crank style insulation testers, but they are all vintage era, circa pre 1970.
@mistake920
4 ай бұрын
Thanks for the info. It seems the only real upgrade that such an unit offers, for my application, is the ease of use. I hope Uni T releases a new model soon since these two are a few years old. They realy reised the quality of their producs in the last 2 years.
@DiagnoseDoc
8 ай бұрын
Hi! Im looking for a cost-effective Alternative Device Instead of the Fluke 1587. I saw, that the Extech MG302 is very good, accurate. What do you know about the MG320? Is it a new Version? Is it as good as the 302? I want to Test Electric Motors in EVs with it. Thanks ;)
@three-phase562
8 ай бұрын
The MG320 has a higher measurement capability up to 20GOhm at 1000V in comparison to the 4GOhms of the MG302. It has a 50V test voltage and the DAR/PI test, that the MG302 does not have. The MG302 has wireless connectivity for data collection and download of readings that the MG320 does not have. I have not tested the MG320 so cannot state what its performance is like. I believe that both of these units are rebrands from CEM, which can be a bit hit and miss with their quality, although all of the Extech test equipment I have purchased have been fine, it has been the CEM rebrands for other manufacturers where I have seen the issues. If you are just after a pass or fail test, then the MG320 should be fine. If you are more after diagnostics and condition monitoring then a tester with connectivity can be beneficial. If the EV motors are random wound stators then it is unlikely they will show a DAR or PI, this test is more appropriate for form wound stators.
@DiagnoseDoc
8 ай бұрын
I would buy the MG320 or the UT505B. What would you recommend? Thanks ;)
@DiagnoseDoc
8 ай бұрын
Diagnostics would be important, yes!
@three-phase562
8 ай бұрын
@@DiagnoseDoc For me, the UT505B is better quality and accessories than the MG320. Would depend on where you are and availability of the different testers though. You also need to be wary of the continuity function on the UT505B. On my simulator and one motor I tested there appears to be an accuracy issue, which can be solved with a capacitor in parallel. I haven't had opportunity to test it on other motors. Price range does vary considerably with the UT505B though, so you need to shop around, MG320 price seems to be more stable.
Пікірлер: 16