Power-Z FL001T or another universal USB meter

Just a few days ago I posted a review of an advanced “USB tester,” but the package actually contained more than just that: it also included its closest equivalent, a tester from Power-Z. The two testers have a lot in common, even the price is the same, but are they really that similar in use?


Unfortunately, this model is no longer available in the store; only the UT100 is.

Since the ZY1276 and FL100T are very similar, I’ll inevitably compare them from time to time as we go along.

The specifications listed by the manufacturer are largely similar for both devices, but there are some differences:
1. The FL001 can be powered through a separate connector rather than from the source being tested.
2. It connects to a computer by cable, not Bluetooth like the 1276.
3. The controls are significantly different.
4. No PD (Power Delivery) support.

Anyway, let’s take things in order, starting with the packaging.

In this case, I ordered just the tester itself, without any extras. Actually, there is one extra: this tester comes with metal panels already installed, rather than fiberglass ones, though the fiberglass panels were included too—they were just packed separately.
There was also a little tin box, but without a window or a “cradle”; the tester was simply inside in a bag.


If you buy the version without the metal panels, it costs less, so this version actually works out cheaper than the previous one. Personally, though, I prefer the metal, even if I’m unhappy with the case design in both versions, as I mentioned earlier.
The screen is covered with a protective film, and it even had a “QC” stamp on it.


This model is slightly larger than the 1276, both in length and thickness.


1, 2. The short sides have USB-A connectors in the same arrangement: male and female, respectively.
3. The long sides are a little different. One side has USB Type-C and microUSB inputs, then a mode-selection rocker switch, followed by another microUSB port for powering the tester separately and connecting it to a computer.
4. The other side has only a USB Type-C output.


Since there’s a separate power connector, the voltage measurement range can start at zero when using separate power, or at 3.8 V when powered directly. The current rating is the same as the 1276 in both cases: 5 A.


This is where I got a little confused. The photo above clearly shows the words “USB PD Charging Detector.”
But the model chart says this version doesn’t have PD functionality.


Google Translate makes it a little easier to understand, but the image came out really long.


It comes apart just like the other one, and in this case you’ll have to do it anyway to remove the protective film.
By the way, the tester was assembled very poorly: everything was loose, and the screws and standoffs weren’t tightened properly. It feels like the protective panels were swapped in a hurry.


Even the USB connectors are the same as on the 1276, and at least the male connector is made by Molex, so I doubt there’ll be any quality issues.


However, there are pads under the standoffs on both sides of the board.


I don’t know what purpose they serve here, but they’re partly why the case is thicker.


Remove the bottom panel in the same way, and you can immediately see that the boards are quite different.


In fact, this is a completely different tester. The only things they seem to have in common are the voltage regulator and the shunt.



1. SE8533-HF low-dropout voltage regulator.
2. Near the connector for connecting to a computer are a fuse and a power-switching circuit. By the way, when you switch to power from this connector, the display gets a little dimmer.
3. Here’s a significant difference: it uses a TM7707 ADC with a stated resolution of 24 bits. To its right is the R1A voltage reference (ADR391RT/AUJ or LM4041AIM3-1.2).
4. The microcontroller is from the same manufacturer as the one in the 1276, but it’s a different model: STM32F072.


Let’s put everything back together and take a look at the software.
A welcome screen appears when you turn it on.


The idea is that you can change this screen using the manufacturer’s software. You can also change the font colors.


And end up with something like this, but I ran into a few problems with it, which I'll discuss in the relevant section.


When you turn it on, you find that there's quite a lot in common, though there are some differences, which is to be expected.
1. The digits are arranged and sized differently, and the controls work differently too. For example, to start a capacity test, you first have to select the desired memory slot.
2, 3, 4. Also, in almost all modes you can not only invert the image (long press), but rotate it as well (short press), which is very handy. For example, the 1276 could only rotate the display in one mode.


1. The virtual oscilloscope is noticeably simpler. Automatic resolution selection works the same way, but there's no data-line tracking function. On the plus side, you can rotate the image here too. The color scheme was initially set to inverted, which looked not only unusual but also extremely inconvenient, so I used the more familiar option from then on.
2. Cable resistance measurement is available too, but only in one mode. There's no four-wire test option here.
3, 4. There's a simplified display mode, and the mode with the screen completely off has been replaced with a low-brightness, black-and-white mode. If you enable image inversion, it flickers noticeably.


A closer look at the modes.
1, 2. Working with various "smart" chargers: current, voltage, power, QC operating mode, and so on are displayed. Normal and inverted views.
3. Simplified display mode.
4, 5. Capacity measurement. To start the process, click once to enable recording, turn the selector to choose a memory slot, then click once more to start recording. Not very convenient overall.
6. The virtual "oscilloscope" is less informative and, as I mentioned, doesn't display the voltage on the data lines.


Measuring cable resistance. It may seem inconvenient at first, but in essence it's not much different from the first mode on the 1276 tester, and it even comes with illustrations :)


The tester supports six types of "fast" chargers. But I still couldn't figure out two things:
1. Where's PD, which is listed on the tester's case?
2. Why does the tester freeze when I try to select a mode manually? To be fair, I tested it with an MTK QC charger.


When a smartphone is connected to an MTK QC charger normally, the mode is identified as QC 2.0, and charging works without any problems.


Settings.
There are quite a lot of them, and a large number are for calibration. I wasn't too keen on the tree-style menu structure, though. You can access the settings menu during normal operation, rather than by "holding down a button while powering it on." Though I don't know why you'd need to go into this menu often.

I photographed almost all the items, and there's also a full description, though it's in Chinese.

In short, there are four main menus: System, Display, Calibration, and Test Parameters.
1. There's not much of interest in System. You can turn off the startup image, reset the settings, or reboot the tester.
2. The display settings let you adjust the backlight brightness and enable automatic shutoff.
3. The test parameter settings let you enable recording, but there are also some unclear options, such as Precision (on/off).
4. The calibration menu offers a lot of options: current and voltage zeroing, three current calibration modes (at three points)—IREFL, IREFM, IREFH—with three options in each: 1, 0.01, 0.0001, plus a self-test mode.


Testing.
First, let's measure current consumption.
1. Full brightness: 24–30 mA. It barely depends on the supply voltage, so I measured it at 5 V.
2. Screen in power-saving mode: about 15 mA.

There's no way to turn the display off manually; it only turns off on a timer. With the backlight off, consumption is about 12–13 mA, not much less than in "power-saving mode."


On the plus side, you can power it from an external source. In that case, the load on the device under test is practically zero.


Now let's check voltage measurement accuracy. I ran the fourth test using an external power supply.
I'd say that's pretty good.


I think you noticed that the test above doesn't include checks at 5 and 10 V, which I usually run. The ability to use an external power supply gave me the idea of running a more accurate test with a separate voltage reference source.
I connected the tester to the voltage reference and checked it at 2.5, 5, 7.5, and 10 V.


Now we can compare the results with those from a more accurate instrument I used before. I realize the voltage reference may have drifted a little over the past couple of years, but I doubt it has changed much.
The results aren't perfect, of course, but they're quite good overall, especially considering this is a relatively inexpensive instrument. For example, the one in the photo costs about 300–400 times more than the USB tester :)


Next came the current measurement accuracy test. I used the same method as last time. I increased the current in 10 mA steps at first, then in 100 mA, 200 mA, and 500 mA steps. Above 2 A, I used a more powerful load. I compiled the results in a table.


The results are good, but I think they could have been better.


Finally, as usual, I tested the accuracy of the capacity measurement.
The load current was 5.0132 A at the start and 5.0147 A at the end. The test ran for 30 minutes, so the result should be about 2.506975. I got 2.508—excellent.
The clock lost about 1 second in half an hour, though it's hard to tell here because the timer counts roughly 1-3-8-11 rather than 1-2-3-4.


I could end the review on this positive note, but there's also the software, which I wanted to try out.
It's supposed to let you measure current and voltage and plot graphs, as well as view PD operating modes, change the boot image, font colors, and so on.


But things didn't go as planned. I'll skip over how much time I wasted just trying to find the software—but it would have been nice if it actually worked. No such luck: the software launches, and you can install the STM driver from it. When you connect the tester, an input device appears in Device Manager. But the connection never gets established, and everything crashes with an error.
I tried it on another computer running Windows 10 x64 (mine runs Windows 7 x64). The software didn't show any errors there, but it still didn't work.


A comparison photo of the three testers. It was actually taken before the review, as you can tell from the protective film. I no longer have the small tester, though, so this is the best I can do :)


Comparison video review


To sum up.
Comparing the FL001T and ZY1276, here's how I see it:
1. Build quality and components are roughly on the same level.
2. The FL001T works out a little cheaper, since it already came with metal faceplates, while those were sold separately for the ZY1276.
3. In terms of hardware, the FL001T is roughly on par, perhaps a little better.
4. The FL001T doesn't support Power Delivery; the ZY1276 does.
5. The ZY1276 has better software features. For example, its "oscilloscope" is more informative and has a higher refresh rate, and cable testing is available in two modes.
6. The controls are a matter of debate. The FL001T has a "joystick," but its menu is less convenient to use, so overall they're about equal.
7. The FL001T can be powered externally, so it can measure voltage starting from zero while drawing virtually no power from the device under test.
8. The FL001T is focused primarily on measurement accuracy, as shown by its extensive calibration system. The ZY1276 puts more emphasis on software features.
9. In voltage measurement mode, the FL001T takes about 1 measurement per second, compared with around 3–4 on the ZY1276 in standard mode and 9–10 in simplified mode.
10. The FL001T can't dim the backlight on a timer and then turn it off completely. Instead, it has a separate "power-saving" mode.

To put it in a nutshell: the FL001T focuses on accuracy, while the ZY1276 focuses on extra features.

Unfortunately, both testers have problems connecting to a computer. The FL001T connects, but the software doesn't recognize it. The ZY1276 basically has no software of its own, apart from a very simple program made by enthusiasts.

I bought it through the intermediary yoybuy.com. The price, including shipping within China, was about 34.5 dollars; international shipping costs depend on the destination country. I can't calculate the exact service fees because the package contained 9 items from four sellers.

That's all. I'll be glad to answer questions and hear your comments and suggestions about the software.