Vintage equipment voltage measurement

Gentlemen,

One of the drawbacks of attempting to fix vintage stuff is the expected voltage readings given in the service manuals of the day. The manuals usually state that the readings given were measured with analogue VMs of a certain ohms-per-volt rating - most commonly IME 20k. Consequently if you measure with a modern DVM with stupendously high Zin you're screwed and will get unrealistically high values. That's never worried me as I keep a vintage AVO for just such circs. All the British service manuals seem to reference 20k OpV AVOs. However, I'm currently TS on a mid 70s Tek scope the manual for which states the readings given are valid for a meter with a Zin of between 100k and 200k (specifically a Triplett 630NS see link).

Anyone come up with a solution to the problem of making voltage readings on high impedance parts of a circuit with a meter of a different Zin to that used by the people who wrote the service manual?

Never heard of an analogue meter with such a high Zin, but here it is:

formatting link

--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via  
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other  
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of  
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet  
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
Reply to
Cursitor Doom
Loading thread data ...

Put the appropriate resistance across the test leads.

Reply to
jurb6006

Cursitor Doom wrote

If it is available look a the circuit under test, and see if the high impedance does make a real difference.

Else use the scope probe... Do not some of them modern Di Gital makes also display volts? If meter impdance is too high and no other way add a resistor in parallel to your meter?

Reply to
<698839253X6D445TD

100-200k is 5-10v scale on a 20k/V meter. Or use a digital & add your R. High R meters give a more realistic reading than old analogues on high R circuitry.

NT

Reply to
tabbypurr

Why not ignore the voltage notes and just fix it?

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
Reply to
John Larkin

You're obviously not a service engineer. ;-)

-- This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

Reply to
Cursitor Doom

Oh, I see. I didn't quite understand what Clive was getting at. Would that do the trick, d'ya rechnung?

-- This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

Reply to
Cursitor Doom

I'm an engineer, not a service technician.

This is an electronic design group. I think there is an electronic repair group. The engineering approach to fixing things is to probe around, understand how it's supposed to work, and figure out why it doesn't.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
Reply to
John Larkin

Spot on!

Reply to
Tom Gardner

Good Lord!! I've only been reading your comments on this group for the last 20+ years and never really noticed that before! ;-)

-- This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

Reply to
Cursitor Doom

This thread is cross-posted to both ...

Reply to
Andy Burns

What's so hard about putting a resistor in parallel with your meter?

Reply to
mike

The engineering approach to climbing Mt. Everest is to find out where it is. Learn to climb stuff. Get a bunch of money. Buy the stuff and hire the people you need to climb it. Go to where it is. And then climb it using the stuff.

Reply to
bitrex

Never even occurred to me.

-- This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

Reply to
Cursitor Doom

That's what you get when people lack basic understanding of the matter.

Reply to
Rob

Resistance used depends on the range:

formatting link

better explanation:

formatting link

John

Reply to
John Robertson

I've only recently discovered that I invariably overlook simpler solutions. Fortunately I'm only a hobbyist and don't do this for a living!

--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via  
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other  
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of  
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet  
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
Reply to
Cursitor Doom

And that is clearly true for more than just electronics!

Reply to
Tom Gardner

Or you could just read the question:

I'm currently TS on a mid 70s Tek scope the manual for which states the readings given are valid for a meter with a Zin of between 100k and 200k (specifically a Triplett 630NS see link).

Reply to
mike

Even better would be to understand why they specified VOMs with 20k/V sensi tivity, and the implications with modern instruments.

Back in those days, the commonly-available multimeters were 1k/V and 20k/V VOMs and 11 Meg VTVMs. The cheaper 1k/V would load down the circuit and gi ve an erroneously low voltage reading. With the 20k/V VOM and the VTVM, th is error was usually smaller than the inaccuracy in the analog meter moveme nt.

Resistors had 10%-20% tolerance, and the power line voltage could easily va ry by 10%, so the values in the service manuals were approximate, not a spe cification with a precision of 0.1V. Significant discrepancies could be a hint of the source of a problem (for example, a positive voltage on the con trol grid and a very low plate voltage might be due to a leaky coupling cap acitor).

A modern DMM without modification is fine as it is if you understand what y ou are doing.

Reply to
jfeng

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.