ESR Meter Suggestions

[Hugo Holden]

Well in the UK the gold standard is the "Peak" which measures at 100Khz

https://www.peakelec.co.uk/acatalog/esr70-capacitor-esr-meter.html

but I think you will think its too expensive.....

One interesting thing is that in use, a capacitor in an SMPS, operating at 100kHz, experiences a rise time on the leading waveform edges of up to 23 times that frequency, because the 100kHz is a square wave in an SMPS, not a sine wave and the odd harmonics create the rising edge. So the only realistic way to assess the capacitor is with a square wave pulse, with a fast rise, which is the way the Bob Parker meter does it. The 100kHz sine wave method is nowhere near as good as the fast rise pulse method, so I would not regard the Atlas Peak meter as "Gold Standard", not even close.

 

[g4ugm]

One interesting thing is that in use, a capacitor in an SMPS, operating at 100kHz, experiences a rise time on the leading waveform edges of up to 23 times that frequency, because the 100kHz is a square wave in an SMPS, not a sine wave and the odd harmonics create the rising edge. So the only realistic way to assess the capacitor is with a square wave pulse, with a fast rise, which is the way the Bob Parker meter does it. The 100kHz sine wave method is nowhere near as good as the fast rise pulse method, so I would not regard the Atlas Peak meter as "Gold Standard", not even close.

Who says it uses a sine wave?

 

[Hugo Holden]

Who says it uses a sine wave?

Well if that model uses a square wave, then that is perfect and would be hard to beat.

There are some sine wave 100kHz test units out there, but I'm not certain of the models & types.

I looked up the data sheet for the Peak meter, it said "Industry standard 100kHz" . The only ESR meter I have (other than the Bob Parker pulse meter) is a GME 236, which uses 100kHz sine wave.

Is there anywhere on a Peak-Atlas data sheet or manual that says what the test waveform is, and if it is a square wave or sine ?

Just as an experiment, I put a 3.3R resistor on my Parker meter (it measures it at 3.3R) and put the scope across the resistor, the rise time on the small level square wave pulse is about 50nS, if that were 1/2 of a sine wave it would correspond to a test frequency of 10 MHz, but it is like comparing apples and pears as the two test methodologies, Parker pulse vs sine wave test, are quite different.

 

[Hugo Holden]

...probably with meters though of any type, the ideal meter might relate to the application for the component, if a capacitor was used in a circuit where its filtering sine waves around 100kHz or less, it would seem sensible to use a meter that tested it around this frequency range. For a circuit fast rise pulses, where it was important the capacitor performed well, then perhaps a meter using this method might be better at identifying a defective capacitor. I think 100kHz got settled on for the sine wave meters as manufacturers test this way.

In all fairness there is no perfect single meter for every component or task. It is like a DVM, many malfunction on the Ohms range, even the venerable Fluke 75, if you try to measure the DC resistance of a large inductor, it will indicate it is open circuit when it is not, leading a person up the garden path and in that case it is better to go for an analog meter.

 

[GiGaBiTe]

I have found the cheap meters and I have two pretty useless for testing ESR on PSU capacitors. I think they simply don't pump enough current through the device and report low ESR and high capacitance, but after replacing apparently "good" capacitors the PSU they were in worked.

I've had decent luck with this one $20 Ebay special component tester:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/353170986688

The only problem I've found with it is that 47uF capacitors aren't detected at all, which is weird. I have to double them up in series to test them.

You can infer electrical leakage on a capacitor based on its capacitance values. If it's far above its 20% tolerance, you know it's bad.

 

[Chuck(G)]

Looks like it's a repackaged LCR_TC1.

 

[Hugo Holden]

It raises another interesting question.

A lot of modern day meters have all sorts of functionality and test modes built into them for transistors, inductors, capacitors, voltage, current, temperature, hfe tests etc etc.

Sometimes I wonder if too much was asked from one instrument and compromises might have been made.

I have separate instruments for each task for checking capacitors and inductors, dedicated to those tasks. I somehow get the feeling that all the attention and effort was put in for the particular application to test the one type of component. Of course some people prefer one instrument that does "everything".

 

[Chuck(G)]

I keep one of those LCR_TC1 devices on my benchtop as a quick test of "what the heck is this thing with strange house numbers on it?" It's actually pretty accurate for most things, though it couldn't identify a tunnel diode or a UJT. But, say, telling an SCR from a TO-220 BJT, no problem. Or telling a 3.3V zener from a 1N4148, same deal.

 

[the3dfxdude]

I have no idea about the design & performance of other ESR meters, except for the Bob Parker ones (and the sine wave types I have tested made by GME)

I have no knowledge of the performance of any of the ESR meters from Asia. Also it is not about where an item of test equipment is made, could be Asia, Australia, USA, Germany, Timbuktu or anywhere else in the world. The real question is, is it any good ? I can promise that the Bob Parker meter is an excellent machine, due to the combination of the pulse operating principle and the physical execution of it, especially for the kit from Altronics, which is really a bargain for $103 AU dollars.

I've heard the best stuff's made in Japan.

I've heard of Bob Parker's kit. Anyway, I don't remember how much my meter costs or who makes it, but it looks like it uses a 100khz sine wave. When I started buying my own lab equipment for home a little while ago, I kept my budget low, as I didn't think I could spend much money then. Now some time has passed, and already have done some upgrading as I need better, perhaps I've learned my lesson that I should budget in more quality. On this subject, my meter has seemed to perform well enough, but what do I know. New caps measure pretty close enough to spec, and bad ones seem to measure out bad. But maybe I have not seen yet the benefit of quality meter precision enough to know the difference. My in-lab experience has been limited at my job due to my role, and don't know anyone where I am at now that does this full time to get suggestions. But since it is still my hobby and interest, I've landed here lately and trying to practice more with stuff I got at home to figure things out.