"Err 1" on Fluke 1652

[jj4091]

My 'looking around' reminded me that I do have some WD40 "Specialist Contact Cleaner" - would that be 'safe' for this purpose (it's label implies that it ought to be)?

Kind Regards, John

Not sure as I have only ever used De-oxit, sounds like it should do though if it is supposed to be a contact cleaner.

 

[jj4091]

Not sure, but do know that if you use De-oxit, it should be followed with a product like Servisol 10 to re-lubricate surfaces.

It does sound like a dodgy connection somewhere, possibly a dry joint, but more likely a poor ribbon cable contact.

Never used or found a need for anything following De-oxit use. Lubricating following contact cleaning sounds like it might defeat the object. I suppose it may depend on the application it is needed for, though I can't think of one.

 

[securespark]

I'm thinking about any contacts with moving parts.

 

[JohnW2]

Not sure, but do know that if you use De-oxit, it should be followed with a product like Servisol 10 to re-lubricate surfaces.

As others have said, that sounds a bit odd, at least in the situation we're talking about. A connection between a ribbon cable and its socket, once established, does not need any 'lubrication' and, as also has been implied by others, the presence of a lubricant on the contacts might be counter-productive (most 'contact cleaners' boast about being 'quick drying and leaving no residue'). However, as you've subsequently said, it might be different in a situation (e.g. switch) in which there were 'moving parts' - but, even then, I would be wary about ('persistent') lubricant ion contact surfaces.

It does sound like a dodgy connection somewhere, possibly a dry joint, but more likely a poor ribbon cable contact.

I agree. For what it's worth, all the PCBs look pristine in all respects (on both sides), with no visible signs of any dry joints.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Not sure as I have only ever used De-oxit, sounds like it should do though if it is supposed to be a contact cleaner.

It is. I'll give it a try and, at the same time, will very carefully examine the ribbon cables.

Kind Regards, John

 

[RandomGrinch]

I would still be tempted to check the functionality of the relays on the main board.

Given the swap of the control board provided a 'temporary' fix, they may be an unlikely culprit; but it wouldn't hurt to rule them out?

...For anyone familiar with a Seaward Europa Plus...
De, de, ding... De, de, ding... De, de, ding.... Wait for it... Ding ...... Beeeeeeeeeep

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

As others have said, that sounds a bit odd, at least in the situation we're talking about. A connection between a ribbon cable and its socket, once established, does not need any 'lubrication' and, as also has been implied by others, the presence of a lubricant on the contacts might be counter-productive (most 'contact cleaners' boast about being 'quick drying and leaving no residue'). However, as you've subsequently said, it might be different in a situation (e.g. switch) in which there were 'moving parts' - but, even then, I would be wary about ('persistent') lubricant ion contact surfaces.

Counter intuitive, but my experience suggests a lubricant does help. Theory is, that a thin film of lubrication denies moisture the chance to get between contacts and contact points. You lubricate car batter lugs, despite the large current demands. I designed a crude gadget which shows when my caravan is set perfectly level, using a brass bob weight making contact with for points of contact. The contact was so light, the tiniest amount of oxide would prevent it working. A bit of contact lubricant and it is fine after many years.

 

[JohnW2]

I would still be tempted to check the functionality of the relays on the main board. .... Given the swap of the control board provided a 'temporary' fix, they may be an unlikely culprit; but it wouldn't hurt to rule them out?

It certainly would hurt and there are lots of other things that I'd like to be able to 'rule out' - but in the absence of a circuit diagram that would be very difficult, probably next-to-impossible, at least for me.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Counter intuitive, but my experience suggests a lubricant does help. Theory is, that a thin film of lubrication denies moisture the chance to get between contacts and contact points. You lubricate car batter lugs, despite the large current demands. I designed a crude gadget which shows when my caravan is set perfectly level, using a brass bob weight making contact with for points of contact.

Indeed, we've all done it (certainly Vaseline on car battery terminals) but, as you say, it doesn't really make intuitive sense to put a film of 'insulating material' on things which are meant to be in good electrical contact!

In any event, this is irrelevant to my present situation. Even if a 'lubricant' is desirable, that will only be in relation to the long-term (prevention of corrosion) and would offer no benefit in terms of 'immediate performance'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[RandomGrinch]

If you haven't already seen this, reply #7 is quite interesting:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/repair/fluke-1651-err1-when-using-continuity-mode/
Whether it can be trusted or not is another matter.
It may be that swapping boards could have allowed the tables to match, within the allowable tolerances?
Cleaning up every possible contact in the board could have the same effect!

Edit: actually reading that again, it sounds as if the data that was in the tables has probably been wiped from both boards now

 

[JohnW2]

If you haven't already seen this, reply #7 is quite interesting:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/repair/fluke-1651-err1-when-using-continuity-mode/
Whether it can be trusted or not is another matter.

Thanks. If all true, it sounds like 'bad news', particular given that, as you go on to say ...

Edit: actually reading that again, it sounds as if the data that was in the tables has probably been wiped from both boards now

... given that what we are being told is:

As soon as you swap boards with another tester then the values are out of the window and the process needs to be repeated. Without the procedure, without the equipment and without realising the procedure is also written wrong for some of the steps you literally CANNOT produce a working tester any other way, there is no magic fix, there is no secret, the secret is having the equipment and the procedure and taking the tester through the learning process for it to write values of it's own specific to those boards inside. ... So unless the relays engage on startup then it really is a waste of time unless you have the above to put them right again, you can't simply plant other settings into them as they're setting unique to another tester and no 2 are ever the same, because the interpretation of the applied and produced values are self taught.

One might have hoped that they would revert to some 'default calibration constants' if its 'tables' went wrong, but perhaps that would not be possible. The only thing which makes me wonder whether what we are being told is totally true is ...

It may be that swapping boards could have allowed the tables to match, within the allowable tolerances?

... since it would seem unlikely (in view of what is being said) that one could ever get away with swapping boards - but I certainly did, until I (perhaps foolishly!) decided to try changing a second board!)

Cleaning up every possible contact in the board could have the same effect!

It could!

... so it's probably back to eBay, I fear. I have to say that, given that (as I understand it) these this model has not been made for years, I'm rather surprised at the prices currently being paid. Over the past few days, those that have been sold have mainly gone for £220 - £250), which is appreciably more than the (I'm sure sub-£200) I paid 6 or so years ago for my current one. It seems odd that increasingly old electronic devices (with finite lifespans should be experiencing 'inflation'!

Thanks for your ongoing interest.

Kindest Regards, John

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

... so it's probably back to eBay, I fear. I have to say that, given that (as I understand it) these this model has not been made for years, I'm rather surprised at the prices currently being paid. Over the past few days, those that have been sold have mainly gone for £220 - £250), which is appreciably more than the (I'm sure sub-£200) I paid 6 or so years ago for my current one. It seems odd that increasingly old electronic devices (with finite lifespans should be experiencing 'inflation'!

Over the years, I have collected quite a bit of test gear - I wonder if now might be a good time to recover some of that investment?

 

[JohnW2]

Over the years, I have collected quite a bit of test gear - I wonder if now might be a good time to recover some of that investment?

Maybe - if what I've been looking at is anything to go by, the closer they get to the end of their useful life, the more they are worth

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

It does sound like a dodgy connection somewhere, possibly a dry joint, but more likely a poor ribbon cable contact.

It's amazing what one finds (and forgets that one has!) on one's shelves I found a bag containing several brand new ribbon cables which were exactly the right size and length, with the correct number of conductors and conductor spacing and the correct 'type' (connections on same side at both ends)!

In addition to use of the contact cleaner, I therefore also replaced all three ribbon cables (all of which are the same) with pristine new ones - but, unfortunately, none of that made any difference. I therefore fear that (per what we/he read elsewhere), the problem is that, as RandomGrinch wrote ....

Edit: actually reading that again, it sounds as if the data that was in the tables has probably been wiped from both boards now

... which is a situation from which one seemingly cannot recover without all the right kit to re-calibrate and re-create the tables.

As I said before, the only thing I find it difficult to understand about this is that, far from 'wiping the tables' and putting me into an essentially irrecoverable situation, my first 'board swap' got rid of the Err 1 and resulted in a machine that was almost working 'as normal'! Ah well- I think I've probably now got to the end of the line, since (unless anyone else has any clever ideas!) I can't see that there is anything I can do/try.

It's almost as frustrating at the demise of my previous 1652 (as described above), in that it seems to me that, after the first board swap, I probably have a machine which, in hardware terms, is cable of working normally, or 'almost normally', but that 'software/data issues' are rendering it unusable.

Anyway, thanks to everyone for your interest in this saga. For me, I guess it's "back to eBay" again!

Kind Regards, John

 

[scousespark]

Have you considered sending it to a repair company. May save you having to scrap your tester.