A&D EJ123?

[Rocketvapor]

It seems (just from reading forum threads) that the Force Balance FX120i is susceptible to electrical fields that might induce currents in the current driving electronics and might need extra precautions.
My Strain gage 54D2 is about 4 feet from my wifi modem, runs off the supplied wall wart, with a Fax/printer on the same strip,
and doesn't seem to have a drift problem. My environment is good enough for it but is marginal for the 182.

 

[RegionRat]

This is my weights of charges I did.
Target weight 40.0
39.92
39.88
39.92
38.22
39.84
Seems excessive?

I'm lined up with Krogen, the 38.22 is sticking out like a sore thumb?
Is that a typo?

If these are charges, we need to switch the discussion to a calibration or check weight.
ETA: we would also need to track the zero as well as the test value while recording times.

I have one of these and it doesn't throw numbers like these, so we are doing something wrong or the scale is unhappy.

Is it super dry where you are working? Are we looking at a severe static problem?
Is the HVAC system going wild or blowing on the work site?
I use this scale outside on battery power, and don't get drifts unless I let the temp swing get into the picture.

 

[XL105]

Sorry for the error in charge weight. It’s actually 39.92.
I’m trying to fix my outside wood boiler and my grandson decided to spread my sockets all over the yard. Lol. Its been a busy morning. I will reread the advice lil later, I have my hands full!


Recommendation for line conditioner?

 

[Ned Ludd]

I already spent more than I should! Someday I will own the 120i.
I really just wanted a good reliable .01 grain resolution scale.

0.01 gr resolution falls close to halfway between 0.001 and 0.0001 g (i.e. 0.0006 g) . Unfortunately, the cost differential between analytical balances with readability to 0.001 g and 0.0001 g is substantial. Do what you can with the room lighting, power supply, and try wiping down the inside of the balance pan area and wind screen with a dryer sheet. You might also give the manufacturer/supplier a call and find out whether they may have other suggestions.

From your description, the charge weights as initially weighed are varying proportionally to the wandering zero (tare value) when re-weighed, correct? If so, that suggests one could use the balance even with the wandering zero. For me personally, that would be maddening and I could not do it...my OCD is way too high. However, if one can live with that happening, the actual charge weights would be consistent once the tare/zero value was subtracted.

 

[RegionRat]

Sorry for the error in charge weight. It’s actually 39.92.
I’m trying to fix my outside wood boiler and my grandson decided to spread my sockets all over the yard. Lol. Its been a busy morning. I will reread the advice lil later, I have my hands full!


Recommendation for line conditioner?

No worries. Lets see if that is even necessary first.
Electrical Noise in the circuits typically causes a constant noise, or short term oscillation.
Null and gain issues are often due thermodynamics and can also be caused by software algorithms.

Without turning this into EE class, we are looking for null and gain stability, short and long term.
Things like linearity, bias, and uncertainty take more work. Lets keep this simple.

If you are game...
Lets do a run with about 30 samples of zero and a metallic test weight. The nickel idea was good for a test sample, or just use something close to your typical charge weight made of clean metal, and also the full scale cal weight you use to calibrate the scale.

With the null drift ON, see if the scale reads the calibration weight properly.

If not, calibrate the scale using the cal weight, then let the scale rest for a while with nothing on the platform.

After letting the scale rest, go ahead and zero the scale and weigh your pan, record that weight.
Then tare the scale so that the pan weight is the zero.

Note the rough time, the pan weight, and take five readings of the sample weight but also record if the null weight isn't zero, then tare the pan weight and proceed with a total of five samples. I will assume that if the zero doesn't repeat, you will write that down and tare before the next reading, so please note when/if you do this. otherwise I will assume you saw a zero with the pan.

After each five samples are checked, also grab the full scale cal weight value but make sure you have a zero.

Wait at least 30 minutes and repeat the five weight samples, note the time and any issues with a non-zero in the samples where the null required a re-zero, and the full scale weight value.

Do about 6 sessions over part of a day. If you have a thermometer, record the temp in the workshop. If you have an RH meter, record that too.

What this does for us is several things, but the main concept is to track the issues between null drift and gain drift with the auto-zero function turned on, and also tells us a little about the environment stability effects.

If you are game, take the data and we will try and read the tea leaves.

 

[XL105]

No worries. Lets see if that is even necessary first.
Electrical Noise in the circuits typically causes a constant noise, or short term oscillation.
Null and gain issues are often due thermodynamics and can also be caused by software algorithms.

Without turning this into EE class, we are looking for null and gain stability, short and long term.
Things like linearity, bias, and uncertainty take more work. Lets keep this simple.

If you are game...
Lets do a run with about 30 samples of zero and a metallic test weight. The nickel idea was good for a test sample, or just use something close to your typical charge weight made of clean metal, and also the full scale cal weight you use to calibrate the scale.

With the null drift ON, see if the scale reads the calibration weight properly.

If not, calibrate the scale using the cal weight, then let the scale rest for a while with nothing on the platform.

After letting the scale rest, go ahead and zero the scale and weigh your pan, record that weight.
Then tare the scale so that the pan weight is the zero.

Note the rough time, the pan weight, and take five readings of the sample weight but also record if the null weight isn't zero, then tare the pan weight and proceed with a total of five samples. I will assume that if the zero doesn't repeat, you will write that down and tare before the next reading, so please note when/if you do this. otherwise I will assume you saw a zero with the pan.

After each five samples are checked, also grab the full scale cal weight value but make sure you have a zero.

Wait at least 30 minutes and repeat the five weight samples, note the time and any issues with a non-zero in the samples where the null required a re-zero, and the full scale weight value.

Do about 6 sessions over part of a day. If you have a thermometer, record the temp in the workshop. If you have an RH meter, record that too.

What this does for us is several things, but the main concept is to track the issues between null drift and gain drift with the auto-zero function turned on, and also tells us a little about the environment stability effects.

If you are game, take the data and we will try and read the tea leaves.

I will give it a try, once my grandchildren leave tomorrow.
I will look at everything you all have suggested. And, I also am way to OCD to go that route Ludd.
Much appreciated.

Would it be worth running a dedicated electrical line and outlet? It wouldn’t be overly difficult to do so.

 

[JimSC]

A few years I bought one of the "123" scales also, mine is a Tree 123. That board was marketed under about half a dozen names and all have the 123 in the name. Mine drifts like a son of a gun, it was and still is unusable. Different circuits, different houses. My RCBS Chargemaster and my A&D can be plugged in to the same outlet and have no problem. No amount of line filtering, calibrating, or warming up solves it. I bit the bullet and bought a A&D 120 and never looked back

 

[RegionRat]

Would it be worth running a dedicated electrical line and outlet? It wouldn’t be overly difficult to do so.

That won't hurt a thing and wouldn't take much of your time to test.

 

[rwj]

Would it be worth running a dedicated electrical line and outlet? It wouldn’t be overly difficult to do so.

I’m not familiar with that model scale… but suggest you determine if it can be powered by a battery pack before investing in a dedicated house circuit.

 

[XL105]

Last night I calibrated the scale, using the weight I verified at work. 1.970g
Edit* I did two calibrations, one with the 1.970g, but I did another one using 49.999g. I did because the manual states I need to calibrate using 2/3 of weight capacity of scale, and the 49g is the biggest verified weight I have.
After calibration I put the weight on the scale it read 1.973, I left the weight on the scale, with scale on over night. Got up at 0400, prior to grandkids waking.
The scale read 1.968g
This is the test I had time to run.
Target weight 39.40 varget
Through the whole process my tare weight with the pan stayed at -101.88, and returned to zero when pan was placed on it.
After first round of achieving target weight of 39.40 this the readings
39.36, 39.34, 39.40, 39.36, 39.34
Did not re-zero
39.36, 39.36, 39.44, 39.36, 39.36
Zeroed scale, verified with check weight 1.970g
Zeroed, and tare pan
39.38, 39.34, 39.40, 39.34, 39.34
Zeroed scale, verified with check weight 1.970g
This round I zeroed every charge
39.34, 39.36, 39.42, 39.34, 39.34

I wiped everything down with dryer sheets last night and this morning.
Temp and humidity were consistent throughout the whole process 65, 48%
I did turn off my dehumidifier this morning, it’s in an different room and not on the same circuit. But figured it wouldn’t hurt to have it off. Furnace did not run at at all.

I decided to check my charges to Scott Parker tuned scale. They are very close to the weights the 123 gave me.
I guess I confused why none of the charges are at the target weight of 39.40, at any point during this experiment?

 

[XL105]

Even the FX 120 will vary overnight, I don’t know if that’s because the toilet getting flushed at 0200 does it or what , nevertheless I re zero in the AM and move forward.
I had a Creedmoor sports scale for a short period of time that drifted similar to what you’re describing that drove me back to my beam scales and ultimately to the FX120. I still shoot like a fish but at least my charges are accurate.

I edited my last thread and included me verifying using Scott Parker tuned scale.

 

[Kracken McGraw]

I think your overthinking this, you have purchased a nice scale. Your test variation would only be like 1-6 tiny grains of something like a H-4895 powder.
Look at Jackie Schmidt’s wonderful targets that he posts using a Chargemaster link when he has his rifles shooting a proven tune that it likes.

 

[XL105]

I think your overthinking this, you have purchased a nice scale. Your test variation would only be like 1-6 tiny grains of something like a H-4895 powder.
Look at Jackie Schmidt’s wonderful targets that he posts using a Chargemaster link when he has his rifles shooting a proven tune that it likes.

OCD my brother.

 

[XL105]

I would use the SP beam scale for charges and sell the 123 or use it in gram mode for weighing primers or brass.

I was really hoping this scale would help dial in my charges. Maybe it was a mistake in purchasing it.
I will see what others think about my results. I can see if I can return the scale with minimal out of pocket loss, if others agree with your assessment.

 

[Kracken McGraw]

I can see if I can return the scale with minimal out of pocket loss,

I got a fx120i Tuesday and Cambridge sent it quick and packaged nice. It looks to be the one just playing with it in the office, haven’t made it to the reloading room yet. More cash-Rabbit Hole.

 

[XL105]

I got a fx120i Tuesday and Cambridge sent it quick and packaged nice. It looks to be the one just playing with it in the office, haven’t made it to the reloading room yet. More cash-Rabbit Hole.

That’s out of my price range currently. I have looking here for a used 120 and v3, but it’s just too much today.

I weighed the 5 charges on the SP beam, at 39.40. Put them on the 123, all came in at 39.34. Not sure why all charges came in the same weight after using SP, but won’t when using the 123.
I think I made a mistake in buying the 123 scale. This is disappointing.
Maybe someone can talk me off the edge.

 

[jimmymac]

How do you know the beam scale is correct? If all 5 charges weigh 39.4 on the beam and they all show 39.34 on the electronic scale what makes you think there is a problem? I don’t think either scale is capable of resolving to the 2nd decimal place with any consistency. How is it even possible to get to the 2nd decimal place on a beam scale? You can’t shoot the difference and are making more out of this than need be. If the electronic scale is drifting and it makes you crazy, get rid of it and go back to the beam scale until you can afford a better electronic scale. I have a FX-120. I will never use a beam scale again.

 

[XL105]

How do you know the beam scale is correct? If all 5 charges weigh 39.4 on the beam and they all show 39.34 on the electronic scale what makes you think there is a problem? I don’t think either scale is capable of resolving to the 2nd decimal place with any consistency. How is it even possible to get to the 2nd decimal place on a beam scale? You can’t shoot the difference and are making more out of this than need be. If the electronic scale is drifting and it makes you crazy, get rid of it and go back to the beam scale until you can afford a better electronic scale. I have a FX-120. I will never use a beam scale again.

Scott sends a check weight with his scales. I verify if with that. The check weight is 89.7. It reads 89.72 on the 123. Yet the two scales are different when throwing a charge, and the 123 is rarely consistent, when throwing charges.

 

[JimSC]

I use a rather unorthodox method of weighing charges but it works for me. I throw the initial charge on my old RCBS 750 Chargemaster then verify and adjust on the A&D 120. Straight off the CM most (80%) of the charges are within .02 grains and rarely are any over or under more than .04 grains. Maybe you could work out something similar

Also for a good cheap lightweight scale for verification is the

Amazon.com

I have had one as a backup for years now and for weighing bullets and primers in my office and living room and I swear it is every bit as accurate, repeatable, and drift free as my A&D 120. If my A&D died I would not hesitate to use it as my main scale for matches until I replaced the A&D. It's size is it's only limitation

 

[Longtrain]

I’ve used mine for a few years now and have found it very accurate and repeatable. I did get rid of the fluorescent lights for LED strips, which made a big difference in floating. I found that a good hour warm up seems to minimize that too.
Generally, my pan weights 147.80 grains, taring it out, 0.00 may float to 0.02, usually I wait a few seconds and it will zero out to 0.00 again, then I add a charge to weigh.
I do have check and calibration weights, which helps to keep things in check.