Fluke 17B accuracy? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 04:25:13 am
content: Here is an interesting picture:http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?324810-Good-cheap-multimeter&p=3780807&viewfull=1#post3780807I didn't expect that of a Fluke meter, even if it is a low end model.

author: Kiriakos-GR
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 04:55:08 am
content: Is this a trap question ?All the DMM units are just products, some can fail prematurely.This is where the Warranty plan comes handy if you have one.

author: vl400
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 05:12:37 am
content: My 17B seemed pretty close to other meters I had available (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=4068.msg54357#msg54357), but as mentioned in the link you posted his test (and mine) was just one unit.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 05:26:24 am
content: Quote from: IanB on October 28, 2011, 04:25:13 amExpect what of a fluke meter? We have three low cost devices in a dubious test situation. What is to say any of them are correct?The error is less than 1% the quoted accuracy of the 17B isDC Volt : 400mV / 4V / 40V / 400V / 1000V , +/-1.0% + 10TheTI chip accuracy is quoted at 1%. I doubt very much the millispec part is used, I can see the rest of the parts are no better than 1%. What is the accuracy repeatability of the rest of the device?Sure it's checked against a laboratory device. That is before shipping storage, operator manhandling etc. Were the temperature, humidity etc identical to those When was the calibration pot was last tweaked (knocked)?Seriously if a couple of sub $100 meters and a mail order reference board are that close in a knock about workshop test what is the problem?The Fluke could be spot on, there could be error each way or thing could be as pictured.Anything requiring better accuracy shouldn't be using this class of device.

author: RCMR
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 06:22:39 am
content: My 17B concurred almost exactly with my other two budget DMMs when I compared it. Just as (in)accurate.I'm hoping that the difference is the Fluke will *stay* accurate for longer than the other two.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 08:20:16 am
content: Quote from: Uncle Vernon on October 28, 2011, 05:26:24 amI expect the Fluke meter to be better.QuoteIMHO, that accuracy is terrible and is setting the bar absurdly low. I have meters costing $2.99 that can do better than that. Why should anyone expect so little of a meter?QuoteI have the same voltage reference device. It is designed with care and guaranteed to be accurate within 0.01% for 6 months. I have checked mine against calibrated HP bench meters to confirm this. It is stable and repeatable from day to day and week to week.QuoteMainly I don't consider an error of 40 mV in 5 V to be very acceptable, given how easy it is tonothave an error of 40 mV. It's not a matter of low cost meters or being within specs, it's a case of meter vendors being given a free pass by customers with low expectations when they could do better.

author: vtl
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 08:55:26 am
content: I've got the Fluke 17B as well. On DC volts it reads 4.96 on a 5V 0.2% TI REF02 chip.Link here:http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ref02.pdfThis is pretty crap since my $6 meter reads better than that. The Fluke 17B has a shitload of trimmers on the PCB but I haven't been able to find a service manual. Does anyone have one?

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 10:15:58 am
content: This reading is within specs, as stated. The specifications are clearly documented and anyone being surprised by them should have done better research. Sure, the specifications are quite loose, but this is their low-cost model only intended for sale in Asia (China?). It's not their fault that people have been importing them with hopes of getting a Fluke 110 series meter for cheap.

author: vtl
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 10:46:35 am
content: The Fluke 17B is actually 0.5% not 1% so these meters are out of spec

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 10:58:34 am
content: 0.5% plus 3 digits.

author: amspire
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 11:47:49 am
content: Quote from: vtl on October 28, 2011, 10:46:35 am0.5% + 3 digits means that 4.95v to 5.05v would be within specs, so 4.96v scrapes in.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 11:48:55 am
content: This model was targeted as general purpose electrician level DMM, it meets the spec it was designed for in the Asian market. Despite that, Fluke name on it would be some assurance that it would live up to its spec sheet and build quality.However, seeing the abuse DMM get by workers around me, not electrical mostly physical, I can see why pro electricians, HVAC and other techs choose US sold Fluke even if its not rated as IP54 or similarly ruggedized, as its field proven to survive daily grinds. Generally the accuracy for electrician use its in the 0.5-1% for DC and 1-3% for AC, but the US sold ones [ even if made in China] are made with better housings.Agilent's move in the DMM field has produced quality but similarly expensive DMM.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 11:55:59 am
content: 4.95 to 5.05 assuming the reference is exactly 5V. If you would do proper error propagation including the uncertainty of the reference, the confidence interval would be larger.

author: Kiriakos-GR
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 01:36:49 pm
content: Quote from: alm on October 28, 2011, 11:55:59 amI agree with alm , plus I do not believe that those big spenders they payed the full price, so to buy a reference like the LT1021-10 with with an initial tolerance as low as ± 0.05%.This move removes the uncertainty of the reference from the equation.

author: grenert
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 03:43:23 pm
content: I can't believe anyone is complaining about a multimeter that IS IN SPEC. Also, trying to claim that one meter is more accurate than another based on ONE READING on ONE SCALE for ONE FUNCTION is absolutely ridiculous.If you got lucky and your $2 throwaway is more accurate on this one measurement, then be happy. The reason the Fluke is more expensive is because most likely it will meet all of its specs, survive your abuse, and probably continue to be within spec for a very long time. If you're whining that you want more accuracy, then you need to choose a meter with better stated accuracy, not hope that the Fluke name magically guarantees better accuracy than specified. The specs on cheapo meters are usually just lies, which the meter may or may not meet.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 05:16:51 pm
content: Quote from: grenert on October 28, 2011, 03:43:23 pmBullshit.It's my belief that meters in that class have a single reference for their DC volts scales and all measurements are ratio-ed against that. Once the basic adjustment is made all the rest is about linearity and stability. I've tested various meters and once they are adjusted to hit one test voltage they hit all test voltages.Secondly the quoted accuracy of a meter is designed to allow a margin of error. When the meter is manufactured it should be adjusted to be close to the middle of the error band so that if it drifts in the future it will remain in spec. If the meter is initially adjusted right on the edge of the error band then any drift in the wrong direction will take it out of tolerance.Doing this adjustment is expensive of course. First of all they should "burn in" the meters to let them stabilize, and then the meters should be adjusted carefully, not rapidly set up by a production line worker turning a screwdriver on the clock. I think they cut corners on this and that is why readings can be out on the edge.It's my opinion that manufacturers are being given a free pass here and customers are not setting expectations high enough. The primary job of a meter is to measure and that is where the first critical evaluation of a meter lies. It's not enough to just scrape by, I expect products to exceed expectations. Others should too.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 05:42:42 pm
content: Quote from: IanB on October 28, 2011, 05:16:51 pmThere is the uncertainty/drift of the reference, which is constant for all ranges. In addition, there is the uncertainty in the divider, which is why the highest/lowest ranges tend to have the worst accuracy specs. Modern meters with closed case calibration tend to store two values (0V and near full scale) per range, to compensate for non-ideal divider resistors. Cheap meters tend to have divider networks with worse stability. This meter was described as having a bunch of trimmers, some of these might be for adjusting divider ratios.Quote from: IanB on October 28, 2011, 05:16:51 pmCalibration often involves adjustment if the value is not within 70% of the accuracy spec. Sometimes procedures only call for adjustment if a range is out of spec.Quote from: IanB on October 28, 2011, 05:16:51 pmBefore condemning a manufacturer, I would first make sure that my measurement was valid. This involves comparing this to equipment with traceable calibration. It seems likely that the meter is almost out-of-spec, but it's by no means certain. You can never rely on a piece of equipment giving you lower uncertainty than the manufacturer's specs, unless you characterize the instrument yourself. This involves measurements over a range of environmental conditions and over a time period, not a single spot check.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 05:56:14 pm
content: Quote from: alm on October 28, 2011, 05:42:42 pmI can accept this. I have measured my own voltage reference device at various times and temperatures to check for consistency and repeatability and have compared it with a calibrated HP3458A. I was very interested to verify the claims made for it. I am finding it to be very stable from day to day and week to week, and according to the HP3458A the voltage is indeed within the claimed limits.The picture of the Fluke 17B is not mine though, and I cannot say whether the owner of that meter has done the same things I have.

author: Achilles
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2011, 10:51:35 pm
content: Well, I don't know, but I think the meter is just fine. It's not as accurate as other Fluke meters, but it's a lot cheaper. You may get a good one (low error) or a bad one (high error) within the specs. None of them equals another. If you need more precision you have to pay for it. At least they don't state it's 0.1% and ship it, because they won't offer any warranty or so anyway. There may better cheapos for the price, but you may remeber:-It's for Asian market. Maybe they want to sell "High Quality". Here we have Fluke (179 for example) and if you are on a Budet you take an Extech, Voltcraft or whatever. There you have a Fluke and take a Vichy when you need some spare money left.-Next Point, it's a Fluke. So you may pay a lot just to have the name on it and show you got it. Same with cars....buy a Ferrari, but some parts are from Fiat...buy a Porsche and enjoy VW Technology.....pay more, have a status symbol.....-Warranty, I don't know if they offer a warranty but I could Imagine that. A lot of cheap chinese suppliers don't care about that.So for a 100USD Meter it's Ok if you want a Fluke. Otherwise, there are plenty of other meters around to pick from.

author: kek
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2011, 12:15:00 am
content: My 17B was out a bit too. I downloaded the calibration manual and tweeked R18 a bit to get dc volts closer.I have a couple of fluke 8050a's that I have adjusted to agree with the fluke 289 that I convinced my employer that we needed at work.All my meters still agree with the 289.Google 15b17b__cmeng0000.pdf to find a copy of the cal manual for the 17B.Ken

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2011, 01:46:33 am
content: Quote from: kek on October 29, 2011, 12:15:00 amThat's really the fascinating point. Even the cheapest meters seem to have good stability down to the 0.1% level or better. I have found meters I own to remain rock solid and consistent in their readings over one year, two years, as long as I have owned them. It's the original factory adjustment where they seemingly don't try very hard. Maybe they don't actually adjust them at the factory? Maybe they just check them and if they are reasonably within tolerance they let them go. Which is interesting. Maybe the quoted accuracy is not so much a technical limitation as a process limitation?

author: vtl
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2011, 02:13:14 am
content: Quote from: kek on October 29, 2011, 12:15:00 amThanks mate, was trying to look for that for ages.All right sure enough its within spec (albeit 10mV within spec). But I don't think its unreasonable to expect better. People keep saying its because its made in China for the China market. Surely thats irrelavent? If you saw dave's $50 and $100 shootout none of them was that bad. This meter still costs around $100 and is not a $5 cheapo and if you look at the build quality is actually excellent.

author: kek
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2011, 04:25:50 am
content: I've aquired quite a few meters at home and work since I've been watching Dave's blogs, high quality meters such as agilent 1242b, fluke 289, fluke 17B, fluke 8050a, fluke 79 II and some low cost ones such as the sparkfun VC830L and mastercraft 052-0060-2 (crappy tire), and also had a couple of meters from years ago: brunelle instruments 4060, tenma 72-2055. The meter that was most out was the 17B.Now I just have to convince my wife to buy me a HP34410a for Christmas.Ken

author: Achilles
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2011, 08:02:03 am
content: Quote from: vtl on October 29, 2011, 02:13:14 amwell, not that irrelevant. It is common to export higher grades and keep lower grades for inland consumption to keep a good reputation on international markets. Switzerland with cheese, Panama with banana, costa rica with coffee....... not so unusual.There may be sure better catches for the money,sure, but maybe the Fluke is more secure...don't know. I wouldn't thing because it is a special brand it has to be great....I think the 17B and it's chinese brothers were released there to get an low level entry in the asian market. With all the meters around there on the market it might be tough to keep a foot on ground. Well, and I don't think a Chinese worker/Factory would buy a triple price meter made in USA because everyone wants one. So get them a cheap entry with good build quality and make them want more (higher accuracy for example).

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2011, 08:22:14 am
content: Quote from: Achilles on October 29, 2011, 08:02:03 amAnd the other way is also common. This area produces a special alcoholic beverage. The good stuff is all sold locally, and the horse piss version that no one here would touch is exported.

author: vtl
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2011, 08:28:35 am
content: I've just tweaked my 17B to provide better accuracy. The Basic DC volts reading is adjusted with just 1 pot for all ranges. I'm not familiar with how calibration procedures work but the manual seems to tell the user to only adjust the pot until its on the cusp of 0.5% accuracy and no better? Or maybe thats just my literal intepretation

author: Achilles
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2011, 09:23:05 am
content: Quote from: BoredAtWork on October 29, 2011, 08:22:14 amYeah, but you can get B+**di there, too. Export stuff at least seems to have higher %vol. And well, I just take nice stuff......no big marketing brand.....rhum agricole de Martinique@VTL: Maybe they want no so high accuracy to keep the customer open fir higher spec stuff which is usually more expensive. Great that it works. So if you have some good referencing source, take it as accurate as you can get. It would be interesting for a long tim insight how good they keep that calibration.

author: samgab
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2011, 11:46:29 am
content: Quote from: Uncle Vernon on October 28, 2011, 05:26:24 amI see some people just invent figures and quote them to sound like they know what they are talking about:The actual quoted accuracy spec of the 17B in the DC 4.000/40.00/400.0/1000 volts range is +/-(0.5% +3 counts LSD).Only the DC 400.0 Millivolts range is quoted at +/-(1.0% +10 counts LSD).Even so, the meter (it's my meter, by the way) was within spec.5.0000 Volts with +/-(0.5% +3 counts LSD) means any reading between 4.95 and 5.05 Volts is within spec on that (40.00V) range.So it made it ...just.But I think it shows somewhat of a lack of care and attention to detail to sell a meter that far off accuracy.Yes, if one has a "within spec is good enough" attitude, then it's okay. But with that sort of attitude, one doesn't maintain a company reputation for accuracy and care for detail.But, it is a relatively low cost meter. So whatever. I've adjusted it now and it reads correctly.If I was a Digital multimeter manufacturer, I would not be satisfied selling someone a meter that read 4.96V from a 5.0000 V source, even if it was "within spec".If I was a Fluke employee sitting on the manufacturing line responsible for calibrating the meters as they go out, with a high precision calibrator in front of me, and a device came through reading just a tad within spec, but that far off accuracy, I would not be content to let it go through without correcting it. 5 Volts is 5 Volts, regardless of how many zeros you put after the decimal point.Quote from: Uncle Vernon on October 28, 2011, 05:26:24 amMore off the top of your head spouting...The TI 5050 standard grade chip is quoted at 0.1% inaccuracy MAX. But that isn't really the main concern in this instance.The device is aged for >250 hours then it is carefully trimmed using a precision 10 turn trim pot to exactly 5.0000 using a calibrated 8.5 digit HP 3458A DMM that has an accuracy of 0.0008%. (Tektronix Certificate of Calibration # 4787923 valid through January 19, 2012).The temperature was recorded at 21 degrees C at the time of calibration of the voltage reference.So more important than the accuracy of the TI chip, is the stability, or level of drift, which is stated at 8ppm/degree C MAX temperature drift, and 5ppm/1000 hours long term stability. But much of this possible time related drift happens in the first 250 hours (as proven under testing and shown in the data sheet), which is why Doug - who makes the voltage reference device - ages the chip for 250+ hours prior to trimming.The rest of the components are high quality parts but don't affect the voltage reference, if you know how the chip works.Also, I don't know how you "can see the rest of the parts are no better than 1%", when if you actually looked at the device, and knew what you were talking about, there are several resistors that are clearly marked to be of 0.01% accuracy (either in writing on the brown resistors, or with a violet coloured 5th band).The date of calibration of the voltage reference I was using was exactly one week prior to the date the photos were taken.The temperature at the time the photos were taken was also 21 degrees C (+/-1 degree), the same as that at the time of calibration.As for transit, the device has had a touch of enamel put on the trim pot adjuster after calibration to prevent change, and it is still in place un-altered.It was carefully packaged and shipped.There was no "operator manhandling" thank you.Yes the temperature was within a degree of when it was calibrated 1 week prior, and no, it hasn't been "knocked".The DMMCHECK device is guaranteed to be accurate to within 0.01% (plus or minus 500uV) for a minimum of 6 months, but as it has just been fine tuned, it is much more accurate than even that at present.Quote from: Uncle Vernon on October 28, 2011, 05:26:24 amThe Fluke was not spot on, but it is now that I've adjusted it. Now it matches the readings of my 87 V.The reason a difference of .04 V can be of concern to me, is when charging li-ion cells.The difference between charging a li-ion cell to 4.20 V and 4.24 V can have a big impact on the long term life of the cell. They really are that sensitive.Safety of the charge is also impacted if a reading is out by even such a small amount.The same is true with a .04 V difference with lead acid batteries, The difference in voltage between nearly 0% SOC and nearly 100% SOC is only about 0.6 V in some cases, so a .04 V difference can be important, especially if working with individual cells.Quote from: Uncle Vernon on October 28, 2011, 05:26:24 amQuite right, and that is why I bought a Fluke 87 V as well.A hobbyist can perceivably have need for good accuracy, but not have the funds to spend on something like a Fluke 87 V or something else in that class.There is no need for elitist snobbery, it simply makes sense when on a very truncated budget to attempt to get the best item one can afford.If all one can afford is a <$100 meter, and one wants to get the best possible DMM one can within those constraints,in the past, one could be forgiven for thinking that by getting a Fluke there was a certain promise of care and accuracy in manufacturing and setting them in the factory before shipping.Clearly, with these cheaper, Chinese manufactured Flukes, that isn't the case.Having said that, the build quality of the 17B seems really good, it has good components, and is nicely soldered and well put together and designed.It was just let down by the lack of a tiny turn of a couple of trim pots. A lack of care and attention to detail.Yes it was within spec, but surely they should make an attempt to have the units leave the factory "ACCURATE" not just "WITHIN SPEC" It's the matter of a slight turn of the trim pot. and makes a huge difference to the end user, who may not have access to the high accuracy calibration devices that they have at the manufacturing location.If then, after a few years it's reading slightly out, well one might expect that, but this device was only a couple of Months old, and should have been accurate, in my opinion./rant.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 08, 2011, 01:20:47 pm
content: Quote from: samgab on November 08, 2011, 11:46:29 amI see a 2 post jackass spouting shit. The figures quoted were directly of the sales page. Want to argue about you half a percent on a cheapo meter take it up with them or someone who cares.QuoteThen may you be eternally happy with your $100 gem.QuoteBut you purchased it anyway and were blissfully happy till some one else point out that it may not be the sharpest tool after all.QuoteBut you bought one, didn't you, could be they had the product and it's target market sussed.QuoteMeter doesn't say what you want then mess with it till it does.QuoteOh I don't know if you were making dollars, selling meters to people like you it may soften the blow some what.QuoteYou think sub hundred dollar meters are actually hand calibrated in the factory. Muhahaha that's funny.QuoteWell come on Einstein where is your supporting evidence to say I'm wrong and your POS meter is actually hand crafted by blonde virgins using only the finest of hand selected and individually tested top spec parks.QuoteAnd this by your logic proves the entire instrument must manage similar accuracy. Did you work this out in your clue free zone?QuoteThen it's banged about in a (hopefully) padded post pack exposed to all manner of climatic aberrations during transit before arriving in the post box of everyday chronic fiddlers, allowing them to perform bizarre calibration procedures at varying room temperatures with the aid of serious looks and kitchen scissors.QuoteYeah 250 hours sitting about at Doug's place ensures the device is totally impervious to all the rigours of transport and misuse by smarmy upstarts. You could probably even use one underwater and it's still be spot on eh?Quoteespecially since they were all installed by nude virgins, under soft lighting, right?QuoteAm I supposed to swoon now?And of course the manufacturer of those parts will guarantee this some time after assembly at Doug's place, uncertain transit and storage and operation in your NATA certifiedbedroomlab?QuoteAnd everyone knows calibrations must be accurate at times while a certificate is current, right? Underwater, swamped with RF, in any heat or humidy. Right?QuoteMagic stiff that enamel if the'y only pour it into pots during manufacture then everything could be in calibration forever. And I do trust you checked that temperature against a universal must be correct temp cal board.QuoteYep Blonde virgins accompanied the entire transit to your door. And you used all your skills as a practicing know-it-all to ensure things were just dandy in all weathers at your house.QuoteOH I have no doubt and it will accurately indicate the temperature six inches from your thumb plus or minus theodd draft through yourbedroomlab.QuoteSo you potentially have two out of cal meters now accurate to plus or minus half to one on the doug scale?QuoteThis is nice for you! Zero error everywhere when it's you and batteries, right. NASA would be impressed.QuoteAnd the extra life on the first 50 batteries will go part way to recouping the cost of your Doug board.QuoteAnd there was me thinking you bought it because people laughed at you for having a 17B.QuoteJust like amateur race car drivers can need a Ferrari yet live out their dreams in nan's old Honda Civic.QuoteWhich still does not explain how shelling out around a hundred bucks on a badge engineered promise brought you any closer to being able to eventually purchase of a meter you could rely on.QuoteCurious you had such a constraint and yet found funds for Doug's wonder board. Purchase price of the 17B plus the board would have got you straight to the buy price of a better entry level meter.QuoteDid the meter perform within it's quoted specifications? And yet despite this and the kid zone price you expect it to somehow be better. How very realistic of your.QuoteDetail you chose not to pay for. You do realise what individual hand calibration would do to the price of that 17B? No you wanted the impossible and refuse to include the eventual cost of the wonder board into your equation.QuoteWhine, whinge, whine, but never admit you aren't prepared to pay the cost of such factory calibration. Besides whats to say it wasn't spot on until your third 1m drop of the thing.QuoteAnd as a prospective Multimeter production coordinator you'd know right?In fairness to Doug I haven't too much reason to doubt his device. What I do doubt is the ability of pedant and whiners to use it accurately especially when they choose to ignore so many aspects of measurement environment, accuracy and repeatability.The fact remains the dodgy Chinese Flukes mentioned have all been within their quoted specification. Yet somehow post purchase this is not good enough.Did you read the specification prior to purchase? If you didn't and your whining you're a moron! If you did and you're still whining then you're an unrealistic tool!

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2011, 05:56:49 am
content: Geez! you're a grumpy old sod,Unc!Sometimes it seems like you & "Bored at Work" are competing for "Grump of the Year!"That said,I find myself bemused by this "accuracy fetish" so many people seem to have.In most cases,if you are trying to fix something,& you check the 5 volt rail,if it reads 4.96 volts you are quite happy & head off elsewhere,looking for the problem.After all,a logic level of 4.96 means the same thing as one of 5 volts,or 5.4volts for that matter!In fact,--SHOCK!!,HORROR!!,I usually use an old analog Oscilloscope set to DC coupling to check such voltages.Obviously,there must be situations where extreme accuracy is necessary,but out in the big,bitey,nasty world inhabited by Technicians,rather than Development Engineers,these are very much fewer than imagined.VK6ZGO

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 09, 2011, 06:51:46 am
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on November 09, 2011, 05:56:49 amWhy thank you! I'll take that as a compliment!It's taken years of practice and time spent setting know-it-all sprogs right again.QuoteNot a problem till the world champs we each represent different geographical regions.QuoteBemused is one word for it, I can think of a few others.QuoteAnyone with any brains would be, some will still choose to argue that point with you, despite their being ill equipped to comprehend simple realities.QuoteNone of which involve amateur geniuses armed with hand-helds and only some of the necessary clues.QuoteToo true! The world is far from exact or constant. What annoys me is the routine accuracy fetish while at the same time ignoring half the factors of influence. It's not just clueless sprogs either, in the corporateworld I see Flukes that are in reality used as little more than continuity testers and mains indicators routinely sent of for NATA lab calibration. Of course the test leads are never included or checked despite the rigours of their user environment.I see temperature meters lab calibrated to plus or minus 0.25°C to measure the temperature of rooms plus or minus the influence of a selection of user thumbs.Then for the next six months those instruments survive, within the limits of the environmental and G-Force extremes of a plastic toolbox within a company van. But hey theyhave a sticker so must be accurate to within a gazilionth of a degree for exactly six months. The term wankers doesn't come close enough to describing those who perpetuate this pointless stupidity.I'm convinced that many companies issue their staff with meters so that employees will have both their hands out of their trousers, when viewed by passers by.