At 08:02 PM 5/10/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote... > This has nothing to do with fraudulently claiming compliance, it > just >started as a well reasoned discussion of tolerances and the >implications thereof.
There can be no other conclusion from the statements made. "Most microwave network analyzers have amplitude resolution of 0.01dB, while their accuracy is just around 1dB in most cases...I have had to argue too many times that a piece of equipment with a 2dB p-p requirement on flatness was just fine when it measured 2.01dB on the HP network analyzer. I would not have gotten in that argument if the data had been 1.99dB." "I have never had a piece of equipment rejected because a reading was 1.99 for a spec of 2 max" The statements were made with regard to instrument resolution/accuracy/precision. Clearly, measuring 2.01 (or 1.99) on an instrument with an accuracy of 1 does not allow compliance with a specification of 2 to be met. It was only later that the red herring of significant digits was brought up. A specification of "2" is ambiguous in that regard anyway. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
