Panel Meter for 6 Digit Digital Stopwatch and Timer Applications

6-Digit Stopwatch & Timer Panel Meter Frequently Asked Questions

What's the difference between A-A mode and A-B mode for timing an event?

A-A mode uses a single channel (Channel A) for both the start and stop pulse — useful when one sensor sees both the start and end of an event. A-B mode uses two separate channels, so the start pulse can come from one sensor or source and the stop pulse from an entirely different one, which is necessary whenever start and stop events are physically separate (such as two photodetectors at different points along a path).

How is pulse width measured with this meter?

By tying the A and B channels together and starting the stopwatch on one polarity edge while stopping it on the opposite polarity edge of the same signal — this measures the duration a single pulse stays in one logic state, i.e., its width.

Does the meter require the Extended counter for basic stopwatch timing, or only for rate calculation?

Basic A-A and A-B stopwatch timing works on the Standard counter. The "Rate Based on 1/Time" mode — which mathematically inverts a measured time interval into a speed or rate reading — specifically requires the Extended counter's additional arithmetic capabilities.

What's the finest timing resolution this meter can achieve, and does that apply across the entire timing range?

0.2 µs is the finest resolution, but resolution isn't fixed across the whole range — the meter can time intervals from 1 µs up to 999,999 hours, and resolution transitions from sub-microsecond at the short end to coarser increments (down to 1 hour resolution) as the measured interval grows very large.

Can start and stop pulses come from relay contacts on another Laureate meter, rather than dedicated sensors?

Yes — this is a documented application: the dual relay board in a separate Laureate analog panel meter or digital counter can generate the actual start and stop pulse edges, for example as a monitored temperature crosses two alarm setpoints, letting this stopwatch meter time the interval between those two process events.

Why would someone use this meter instead of an oscilloscope to time a pulse or interval?

An oscilloscope is well suited to viewing and timing pulses on a lab bench, but for a fixed, permanent installation needing ongoing digital timing accuracy plus control outputs (relays, analog retransmission, serial data), a dedicated timer meter is the more practical and cost-effective instrument, without needing an operator to read a scope display.

What kinds of measurements can this meter make on a pulsed laser or similarly pulsed system?

Documented capabilities include elapsed time, number of pulses, pulse width, pulse separation, duty cycle, and pulse repetition rate — using the same dual-channel timing architecture applied to different aspects of a repeating pulse train.

Does the meter trigger on both rising and falling edges, or only one?

Both — the meter can trigger on positive or negative pulse edges, and this edge polarity is independently selectable for the start and stop events, which is what enables both same-polarity timing (A-A mode) and pulse-width measurement (A tied to B, opposite polarities).

What signal types can feed the start and stop channels?

The FR dual-channel signal conditioner accepts NPN or PNP proximity switch outputs, TTL or CMOS logic, magnetic pickups, contact closures, and other signals from 12 mV up to 250 Vac — with jumper selections optimizing operation for the specific sensor type and noise environment in use.

Can the meter hold a "Rate Based on 1/Time" reading until it's manually reviewed, rather than immediately updating to the next measurement?

Yes — in the documented photodetector speed-measurement application, the display is held until reset by an external control input, which prevents the reading from being overwritten by the next event before an operator or downstream system has a chance to capture it.

Precision Timing & Photoelectric Trigger Questions From Engineering Sources

Does a photoelectric sensor's own response time affect the accuracy of a time-interval or speed measurement it's triggering?

Yes, and this is specifically documented as a real design consideration — a sensor's internal processing delay (the time for its electronics to detect the beam break and output a valid signal) adds directly to any downstream timing measurement, and even fast through-beam photoelectric sensors have a documented response time in the range of roughly 0.1 to 0.3 ms. For applications needing the highest position or timing accuracy, pairing a fast-response through-beam sensor with a high-speed timestamp input is the documented recommendation to minimize this added delay.

Is the response time the only delay to account for, or does the receiving instrument add its own delay too?

No, it's not the only delay — documented guidance on timestamp-based position and timing systems specifically identifies two separate delay sources: the sensor's own internal processing delay, and the receiving device's input scan time (how quickly it recognizes and registers the state change once the signal arrives). Both delays need to be accounted for together when correlating a captured timestamp to a real physical position or interval, not just the sensor's spec alone.

Are photoelectric sensors generally faster or slower than inductive proximity sensors for this kind of timing trigger application?

Photoelectric sensors are documented as generally exhibiting faster response times than inductive sensors, which is attributed to the fundamental difference between optical detection and the magnetic field sensing an inductive sensor relies on. This is a relevant consideration when choosing which sensor type to use as a timing trigger where minimizing added delay matters.

If I'm using a photoelectric sensor with a built-in on-delay or off-delay timer as my start or stop trigger, does that delay get included in my measured interval?

Yes, and this is an important distinction documented in photoelectric sensor timer functionality — an on-delay sensor deliberately waits a set period after actually detecting the target before changing its output state, and an off-delay sensor similarly delays after the target leaves. If such a sensor is used as a start or stop trigger for precision timing, that internal delay setting becomes part of the measured interval unless it's specifically accounted for or the delay function is disabled for the timing application.

How much delay tolerance should I expect from a sensor's built-in timer function, and does it stay consistent?

Documented sensor timer specifications typically express tolerance as a combination of a percentage of the set delay plus a fixed offset — for example, a documented tolerance format of roughly ±5% of the setting plus 20 ms — and guidance specifically flags checking this tolerance, especially its stability over temperature variation and long periods, before relying on that delay setting for precision timing applications.

In very high-precision timing setups (well beyond typical industrial needs), how do engineers characterize and calibrate sensor-to-instrument trigger delay?

In precision timing research contexts, trigger delay and detector timing jitter are specifically measured and characterized as their own quantities — for example, comparing the delay between an internal trigger pulse and the actual detected signal arrival, and separately verifying the timing instrument's own resolution against a known reference pulse generator at a fixed, precisely known delay. While this level of characterization exceeds typical industrial timing needs, the same underlying principle — that trigger/detector delay is a real, measurable, and potentially significant quantity separate from the timing instrument's own resolution spec — applies at any precision level.

Should I calibrate or verify my two triggering sensors' delays independently, or is it enough to know the instrument's own timing resolution?

Documented precision timing practice specifically separates these concerns — instrument resolution (how finely the timer itself can measure) is a distinct quantity from trigger delay (how much lag exists between the real physical event and when a valid trigger signal actually reaches the instrument). A timer with excellent resolution can still produce a systematically offset reading if the delays of its two triggering sensors aren't matched or accounted for, so verifying both factors separately is the documented best practice.

Does an on-delay or off-delay photoelectric sensor's timing accuracy stay the same regardless of how long the delay is set?

Not necessarily — documented sensor specifications generally note a fixed offset component (such as 20 ms) in addition to a percentage-of-setting error, meaning the fixed component becomes proportionally more significant as a fraction of very short delay settings, while a percentage component becomes more significant in absolute terms at very long delay settings. Reviewing the actual tolerance specification against the specific delay value being used, rather than assuming uniform accuracy across all settings, is the documented recommendation.