Error of % + digits?...

[Ralph Mowery]

In article <rdnant$2sm$3@gonzo.revmaps.no-ip.org>, jasen@xnet.co.nz
says...

I have not ran any tests for AC . The things I work with don\'t care
about very much about being accurate to more than around 5 %. Usually
it is more of do I have a voltage/current or not.

Just for the fun of it, I did test the 3 \'free\' Harbor Freight meters on
AC and DC yeaterday. From 0 to 25 VDC the HF meters were within about
..5 % of the Fluke meter. On AC up to 130 VAC they were around 3 %. One
was always low and the other 2 were always high.

So they are accurate for most anything around the house for most people.

 

[Ralph Mowery]

In article <rdnant$2sm$3@gonzo.revmaps.no-ip.org>, jasen@xnet.co.nz
says...

I have not ran any tests for AC . The things I work with don\'t care
about very much about being accurate to more than around 5 %. Usually
it is more of do I have a voltage/current or not.

Just for the fun of it, I did test the 3 \'free\' Harbor Freight meters on
AC and DC yeaterday. From 0 to 25 VDC the HF meters were within about
..5 % of the Fluke meter. On AC up to 130 VAC they were around 3 %. One
was always low and the other 2 were always high.

So they are accurate for most anything around the house for most people.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:54:19 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com> wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Commander Kinsey <CFKinsey@military.org.jp> wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 16:24:41 +0100, Ralph Mowery <rmowery28146@earthlink.net> wrote:

In article <op.0miefkhkwdg98l@glass>, CFKinsey@military.org.jp says...

I\'d need to contract OCD to understand that. There\'s only one thing in question here, how close is the reading to the correct value. You can\'t split that into two. 3.1416 is better than 3.14, and that\'s it. All you can state with a reading is it\'s correct to within a certain percentage.

Try this.

A doctor does a very complicated operation on your left arm like a joint
replacement. It all goes very well. Very precise.

However he should have done the operation on the right arm that was
causing trouble. Not accurate.

Nope, because the first one is 100% useless. I wouldn\'t call that precise at all, as he was out by half a metre.

That is why a voltmeter can show 3 digits and be accurate to only the
last digit being in question by one number either way, but a 5 digit
volt meter can show many numbers, but if it is not calibrated corrctly
the 2nd digit to the 5 th digit could be way off and the meter not
accurate at all.

Showing those extra two numbers is pointless if they\'re wrong. All that matters is how many volts difference between the actual voltage and what is shown.

agreed. The problem with the bullets and the target story is that when
explained, we somehow perfectly know where the bullets are- be in on
target or a small grouping somewhere else. Cheapo meters won\'t give
CONSISTENT or REPEATABLE results, not matter how \"precise\" they pretended
to be, or how accurate the spec sheet claims, especially considering the
last digit(s) may be totaly wrong, and random. It\'s like having crappy or
dirty test leads or a component. You\'ll get all the digits in the world,
but they keep changing. You won\'t even be able to pick a reading.

Keep in mind that \"calibrated\" equipment doesn\'t even have to be precise
or accurate. An example would be an adjustable power supply with digital
readout. Say it\'s always reads high by 0.7 volts. It\'s not precise or
accurate, but by knowing the offset it can used with success and may even
have great regulation.

I\'ve got thermostats like that, I\'ve calibrated them to 0.1C. Trouble is, they have remote sensors which work perfectly, but if the actual unit gets very warm (as in direct sunlight), the reading goes up by as much as 2C. Nevermind, they happen to be in my conservatory (the main source of heat in the summer), along with the air conditioner, so on a hot day they switch it on slightly too soon, then correct themselves when the AC cools them off.

On the other hand say you have an alibaba special power supply that\'s
\"accurate\" to +/- 0.35 volts, with terrible regulation that oscillates.

What power supply is better?

So the point is cheapo equipment can have lots of bogus digits and
readings that flop up and down, while better equipment can be more
consistently wrong, which can be compensated for. Precision and accuracy
mean little by themselves if you need multiple readings.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:23:31 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com> wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 6/20/2020 4:29 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 23:55:42 +0100, Ralph Mowery <rmowery28146@earthlink.net> wrote:

In article <op.0mg7zmz6wdg98l@glass>, CFKinsey@military.org.jp says...

But what I\'m surprised at is a ?5 multimeter (not clamp) not giving a digits error. Maybe precision on a simple voltmeter is cheap as chips nowadays?



You have to be careful how you throw precision and accurecy around.

A meter that shows 4 digits is more precice than one that shows only 3
digits, however the 4 digit one may only be 1% accurate and the 3 digit
one may be .5% accurate.

It is easy to get precision, but difficule to be accurate. Think of it
as shooting a gun. Precision may be how close the bullets land to each
other where ever they land on the target, but to be accurate the bullets
have to land on the center of the target. Such as all the bullets could
land very close to each other, but not even hit the target.

As I mentioned, a good meter will not have a digits error outside the +-
one digit due to rounding.

That didn\'t help. I interchange the two. I just want to know how close to the correct reading the readout is. Adding another digit doesn\'t improve anything if it\'s incorrect. And shooting all the bullets in one place doesn\'t help if they all miss.


Take pi as an example. It can be said that 3.14 is accurate as a
three-digit value, but 3.1416 is more precise because it has a
higher resolution.

OTOH, deriving it from 22/7 or 3.1429 has the same 5-digit
resolution and is just as precise as far as the number it
represents is concerned but is less accurate.

In this particular case, 3.1416 is both more precise and more
accurate than 3.14 but that\'s not always the case with measurements.

My mechanical slide caliper has a resolution of 0.001 inch. This
means that it can display measurements with a precision of 1 mil,

What if your caliper had a resolution of 1 mil +/- 3 counts on the last
digit? That\'s the issue with multimeters that have completely bogus digits
at the end. Those number are just noise and serve no purpose at all. They
don\'t even compare to all bullets missing the target but landing in the
same wrong spot.

In America, what is a \"mill\"? In the UK, it used to mean a thousandth of an inch, but people use it to mean a millimetre nowadays.

but that doesn\'t guarantee that a measurement taken with it will
be accurate to 1 mil. I may not always press the jaws snugly
enough and the scale may not be perfectly accurate.

 

[Pimpom]

On 7/12/2020 11:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:

On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:23:31 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com> wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

My mechanical slide caliper has a resolution of 0.001 inch. This
means that it can display measurements with a precision of 1 mil,

What if your caliper had a resolution of 1 mil +/- 3 counts on the last
digit?
......<snip>........

In America, what is a \"mill\"? In the UK, it used to mean a thousandth of an inch, but people use it to mean a millimetre nowadays.

It\'s not a mill. It\'s mil - single l. It means, and has always
meant, a thousandth of an inch. It\'s not an Americanism.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 12/07/20 19:01, Pimpom wrote:

On 7/12/2020 11:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:23:31 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com
wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

My mechanical slide caliper has a resolution of 0.001 inch. This
means that it can display measurements with a precision of 1 mil,

What if your caliper had a resolution of 1 mil +/- 3 counts on the last
digit?
.....<snip>........

In America, what is a \"mill\"?  In the UK, it used to mean a thousandth of an
inch, but people use it to mean a millimetre nowadays.


It\'s not a mill. It\'s mil - single l. It means, and has always meant, a
thousandth of an inch. It\'s not an Americanism.

In the UK \"mill\" means millilitre.

If you want to refer to fractions of an inch, then
it is /always/ \"thou\", i.e. thousandths of an inch.

In the UK \"mil/mill\" /never/ means 0.001\".

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:54:19 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com> wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Commander Kinsey <CFKinsey@military.org.jp> wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 16:24:41 +0100, Ralph Mowery <rmowery28146@earthlink.net> wrote:

In article <op.0miefkhkwdg98l@glass>, CFKinsey@military.org.jp says...

I\'d need to contract OCD to understand that. There\'s only one thing in question here, how close is the reading to the correct value. You can\'t split that into two. 3.1416 is better than 3.14, and that\'s it. All you can state with a reading is it\'s correct to within a certain percentage.

Try this.

A doctor does a very complicated operation on your left arm like a joint
replacement. It all goes very well. Very precise.

However he should have done the operation on the right arm that was
causing trouble. Not accurate.

Nope, because the first one is 100% useless. I wouldn\'t call that precise at all, as he was out by half a metre.

That is why a voltmeter can show 3 digits and be accurate to only the
last digit being in question by one number either way, but a 5 digit
volt meter can show many numbers, but if it is not calibrated corrctly
the 2nd digit to the 5 th digit could be way off and the meter not
accurate at all.

Showing those extra two numbers is pointless if they\'re wrong. All that matters is how many volts difference between the actual voltage and what is shown.

agreed. The problem with the bullets and the target story is that when
explained, we somehow perfectly know where the bullets are- be in on
target or a small grouping somewhere else. Cheapo meters won\'t give
CONSISTENT or REPEATABLE results, not matter how \"precise\" they pretended
to be, or how accurate the spec sheet claims, especially considering the
last digit(s) may be totaly wrong, and random. It\'s like having crappy or
dirty test leads or a component. You\'ll get all the digits in the world,
but they keep changing. You won\'t even be able to pick a reading.

Keep in mind that \"calibrated\" equipment doesn\'t even have to be precise
or accurate. An example would be an adjustable power supply with digital
readout. Say it\'s always reads high by 0.7 volts. It\'s not precise or
accurate, but by knowing the offset it can used with success and may even
have great regulation.

I\'ve got thermostats like that, I\'ve calibrated them to 0.1C. Trouble is, they have remote sensors which work perfectly, but if the actual unit gets very warm (as in direct sunlight), the reading goes up by as much as 2C. Nevermind, they happen to be in my conservatory (the main source of heat in the summer), along with the air conditioner, so on a hot day they switch it on slightly too soon, then correct themselves when the AC cools them off.

On the other hand say you have an alibaba special power supply that\'s
\"accurate\" to +/- 0.35 volts, with terrible regulation that oscillates.

What power supply is better?

So the point is cheapo equipment can have lots of bogus digits and
readings that flop up and down, while better equipment can be more
consistently wrong, which can be compensated for. Precision and accuracy
mean little by themselves if you need multiple readings.

 

[Cydrome Leader]

In sci.electronics.basics Commander Kinsey <CFKinsey@military.org.jp> wrote:

On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:54:19 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com> wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Commander Kinsey <CFKinsey@military.org.jp> wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 16:24:41 +0100, Ralph Mowery <rmowery28146@earthlink.net> wrote:

In article <op.0miefkhkwdg98l@glass>, CFKinsey@military.org.jp says...

I\'d need to contract OCD to understand that. There\'s only one thing in question here, how close is the reading to the correct value. You can\'t split that into two. 3.1416 is better than 3.14, and that\'s it. All you can state with a reading is it\'s correct to within a certain percentage.

Try this.

A doctor does a very complicated operation on your left arm like a joint
replacement. It all goes very well. Very precise.

However he should have done the operation on the right arm that was
causing trouble. Not accurate.

Nope, because the first one is 100% useless. I wouldn\'t call that precise at all, as he was out by half a metre.

That is why a voltmeter can show 3 digits and be accurate to only the
last digit being in question by one number either way, but a 5 digit
volt meter can show many numbers, but if it is not calibrated corrctly
the 2nd digit to the 5 th digit could be way off and the meter not
accurate at all.

Showing those extra two numbers is pointless if they\'re wrong. All that matters is how many volts difference between the actual voltage and what is shown.

agreed. The problem with the bullets and the target story is that when
explained, we somehow perfectly know where the bullets are- be in on
target or a small grouping somewhere else. Cheapo meters won\'t give
CONSISTENT or REPEATABLE results, not matter how \"precise\" they pretended
to be, or how accurate the spec sheet claims, especially considering the
last digit(s) may be totaly wrong, and random. It\'s like having crappy or
dirty test leads or a component. You\'ll get all the digits in the world,
but they keep changing. You won\'t even be able to pick a reading.

Keep in mind that \"calibrated\" equipment doesn\'t even have to be precise
or accurate. An example would be an adjustable power supply with digital
readout. Say it\'s always reads high by 0.7 volts. It\'s not precise or
accurate, but by knowing the offset it can used with success and may even
have great regulation.

I\'ve got thermostats like that, I\'ve calibrated them to 0.1C. Trouble
is, they have remote sensors which work perfectly, but if the actual
unit gets very warm (as in direct sunlight), the reading goes up by as
much as 2C. Nevermind, they happen to be in my conservatory (the main
source of heat in the summer), along with the air conditioner, so on a
hot day they switch it on slightly too soon, then correct themselves
when the AC cools them off.

Is it the controller that\'s off by 2C when it warms up?

 

[Cydrome Leader]

In sci.electronics.basics Commander Kinsey <CFKinsey@military.org.jp> wrote:

On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:54:19 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com> wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Commander Kinsey <CFKinsey@military.org.jp> wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 16:24:41 +0100, Ralph Mowery <rmowery28146@earthlink.net> wrote:

In article <op.0miefkhkwdg98l@glass>, CFKinsey@military.org.jp says...

I\'d need to contract OCD to understand that. There\'s only one thing in question here, how close is the reading to the correct value. You can\'t split that into two. 3.1416 is better than 3.14, and that\'s it. All you can state with a reading is it\'s correct to within a certain percentage.

Try this.

A doctor does a very complicated operation on your left arm like a joint
replacement. It all goes very well. Very precise.

However he should have done the operation on the right arm that was
causing trouble. Not accurate.

Nope, because the first one is 100% useless. I wouldn\'t call that precise at all, as he was out by half a metre.

That is why a voltmeter can show 3 digits and be accurate to only the
last digit being in question by one number either way, but a 5 digit
volt meter can show many numbers, but if it is not calibrated corrctly
the 2nd digit to the 5 th digit could be way off and the meter not
accurate at all.

Showing those extra two numbers is pointless if they\'re wrong. All that matters is how many volts difference between the actual voltage and what is shown.

agreed. The problem with the bullets and the target story is that when
explained, we somehow perfectly know where the bullets are- be in on
target or a small grouping somewhere else. Cheapo meters won\'t give
CONSISTENT or REPEATABLE results, not matter how \"precise\" they pretended
to be, or how accurate the spec sheet claims, especially considering the
last digit(s) may be totaly wrong, and random. It\'s like having crappy or
dirty test leads or a component. You\'ll get all the digits in the world,
but they keep changing. You won\'t even be able to pick a reading.

Keep in mind that \"calibrated\" equipment doesn\'t even have to be precise
or accurate. An example would be an adjustable power supply with digital
readout. Say it\'s always reads high by 0.7 volts. It\'s not precise or
accurate, but by knowing the offset it can used with success and may even
have great regulation.

I\'ve got thermostats like that, I\'ve calibrated them to 0.1C. Trouble
is, they have remote sensors which work perfectly, but if the actual
unit gets very warm (as in direct sunlight), the reading goes up by as
much as 2C. Nevermind, they happen to be in my conservatory (the main
source of heat in the summer), along with the air conditioner, so on a
hot day they switch it on slightly too soon, then correct themselves
when the AC cools them off.

Is it the controller that\'s off by 2C when it warms up?

 

[Pimpom]

On 7/13/2020 12:51 AM, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 12/07/20 19:01, Pimpom wrote:
On 7/12/2020 11:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:23:31 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com
wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

My mechanical slide caliper has a resolution of 0.001 inch. This
means that it can display measurements with a precision of 1 mil,

What if your caliper had a resolution of 1 mil +/- 3 counts on the last
digit?
.....<snip>........

In America, what is a \"mill\"?  In the UK, it used to mean a thousandth of an
inch, but people use it to mean a millimetre nowadays.


It\'s not a mill. It\'s mil - single l. It means, and has always meant, a
thousandth of an inch. It\'s not an Americanism.

In the UK \"mill\" means millilitre.

If you want to refer to fractions of an inch, then
it is /always/ \"thou\", i.e. thousandths of an inch.

In the UK \"mil/mill\" /never/ means 0.001\".

My bad. This is the first time I heard that the mil is not used
as the unit for .001\" in the UK. (I\'m *not* an American).

 

[Pimpom]

On 7/13/2020 12:51 AM, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 12/07/20 19:01, Pimpom wrote:
On 7/12/2020 11:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:23:31 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com
wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

My mechanical slide caliper has a resolution of 0.001 inch. This
means that it can display measurements with a precision of 1 mil,

What if your caliper had a resolution of 1 mil +/- 3 counts on the last
digit?
.....<snip>........

In America, what is a \"mill\"?  In the UK, it used to mean a thousandth of an
inch, but people use it to mean a millimetre nowadays.


It\'s not a mill. It\'s mil - single l. It means, and has always meant, a
thousandth of an inch. It\'s not an Americanism.

In the UK \"mill\" means millilitre.

If you want to refer to fractions of an inch, then
it is /always/ \"thou\", i.e. thousandths of an inch.

In the UK \"mil/mill\" /never/ means 0.001\".

My bad. This is the first time I heard that the mil is not used
as the unit for .001\" in the UK. (I\'m *not* an American).

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 04:21:41 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com> wrote:

In sci.electronics.basics Commander Kinsey <CFKinsey@military.org.jp> wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:54:19 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com> wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Commander Kinsey <CFKinsey@military.org.jp> wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 16:24:41 +0100, Ralph Mowery <rmowery28146@earthlink.net> wrote:

In article <op.0miefkhkwdg98l@glass>, CFKinsey@military.org.jp says...

I\'d need to contract OCD to understand that. There\'s only one thing in question here, how close is the reading to the correct value. You can\'t split that into two. 3.1416 is better than 3.14, and that\'s it. All you can state with a reading is it\'s correct to within a certain percentage.

Try this.

A doctor does a very complicated operation on your left arm like a joint
replacement. It all goes very well. Very precise.

However he should have done the operation on the right arm that was
causing trouble. Not accurate.

Nope, because the first one is 100% useless. I wouldn\'t call that precise at all, as he was out by half a metre.

That is why a voltmeter can show 3 digits and be accurate to only the
last digit being in question by one number either way, but a 5 digit
volt meter can show many numbers, but if it is not calibrated corrctly
the 2nd digit to the 5 th digit could be way off and the meter not
accurate at all.

Showing those extra two numbers is pointless if they\'re wrong. All that matters is how many volts difference between the actual voltage and what is shown.

agreed. The problem with the bullets and the target story is that when
explained, we somehow perfectly know where the bullets are- be in on
target or a small grouping somewhere else. Cheapo meters won\'t give
CONSISTENT or REPEATABLE results, not matter how \"precise\" they pretended
to be, or how accurate the spec sheet claims, especially considering the
last digit(s) may be totaly wrong, and random. It\'s like having crappy or
dirty test leads or a component. You\'ll get all the digits in the world,
but they keep changing. You won\'t even be able to pick a reading.

Keep in mind that \"calibrated\" equipment doesn\'t even have to be precise
or accurate. An example would be an adjustable power supply with digital
readout. Say it\'s always reads high by 0.7 volts. It\'s not precise or
accurate, but by knowing the offset it can used with success and may even
have great regulation.

I\'ve got thermostats like that, I\'ve calibrated them to 0.1C. Trouble
is, they have remote sensors which work perfectly, but if the actual
unit gets very warm (as in direct sunlight), the reading goes up by as
much as 2C. Nevermind, they happen to be in my conservatory (the main
source of heat in the summer), along with the air conditioner, so on a
hot day they switch it on slightly too soon, then correct themselves
when the AC cools them off.

Is it the controller that\'s off by 2C when it warms up?

Yes. The controller is in the conservatory in direct sunlight. The sensor is on a long wire in a cooler room (the living room) which is what I want to control the temperature of. The controller\'s reading goes up by 2C if it gets really hot, but the AC blows across it, so it doesn\'t do it wrong for long.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 04:21:41 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com> wrote:

In sci.electronics.basics Commander Kinsey <CFKinsey@military.org.jp> wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:54:19 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com> wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Commander Kinsey <CFKinsey@military.org.jp> wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 16:24:41 +0100, Ralph Mowery <rmowery28146@earthlink.net> wrote:

In article <op.0miefkhkwdg98l@glass>, CFKinsey@military.org.jp says...

I\'d need to contract OCD to understand that. There\'s only one thing in question here, how close is the reading to the correct value. You can\'t split that into two. 3.1416 is better than 3.14, and that\'s it. All you can state with a reading is it\'s correct to within a certain percentage.

Try this.

A doctor does a very complicated operation on your left arm like a joint
replacement. It all goes very well. Very precise.

However he should have done the operation on the right arm that was
causing trouble. Not accurate.

Nope, because the first one is 100% useless. I wouldn\'t call that precise at all, as he was out by half a metre.

That is why a voltmeter can show 3 digits and be accurate to only the
last digit being in question by one number either way, but a 5 digit
volt meter can show many numbers, but if it is not calibrated corrctly
the 2nd digit to the 5 th digit could be way off and the meter not
accurate at all.

Showing those extra two numbers is pointless if they\'re wrong. All that matters is how many volts difference between the actual voltage and what is shown.

agreed. The problem with the bullets and the target story is that when
explained, we somehow perfectly know where the bullets are- be in on
target or a small grouping somewhere else. Cheapo meters won\'t give
CONSISTENT or REPEATABLE results, not matter how \"precise\" they pretended
to be, or how accurate the spec sheet claims, especially considering the
last digit(s) may be totaly wrong, and random. It\'s like having crappy or
dirty test leads or a component. You\'ll get all the digits in the world,
but they keep changing. You won\'t even be able to pick a reading.

Keep in mind that \"calibrated\" equipment doesn\'t even have to be precise
or accurate. An example would be an adjustable power supply with digital
readout. Say it\'s always reads high by 0.7 volts. It\'s not precise or
accurate, but by knowing the offset it can used with success and may even
have great regulation.

I\'ve got thermostats like that, I\'ve calibrated them to 0.1C. Trouble
is, they have remote sensors which work perfectly, but if the actual
unit gets very warm (as in direct sunlight), the reading goes up by as
much as 2C. Nevermind, they happen to be in my conservatory (the main
source of heat in the summer), along with the air conditioner, so on a
hot day they switch it on slightly too soon, then correct themselves
when the AC cools them off.

Is it the controller that\'s off by 2C when it warms up?

Yes. The controller is in the conservatory in direct sunlight. The sensor is on a long wire in a cooler room (the living room) which is what I want to control the temperature of. The controller\'s reading goes up by 2C if it gets really hot, but the AC blows across it, so it doesn\'t do it wrong for long.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 20:21:10 +0100, Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 12/07/20 19:01, Pimpom wrote:
On 7/12/2020 11:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:23:31 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com
wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

My mechanical slide caliper has a resolution of 0.001 inch. This
means that it can display measurements with a precision of 1 mil,

What if your caliper had a resolution of 1 mil +/- 3 counts on the last
digit?
.....<snip>........

In America, what is a \"mill\"? In the UK, it used to mean a thousandth of an
inch, but people use it to mean a millimetre nowadays.


It\'s not a mill. It\'s mil - single l. It means, and has always meant, a
thousandth of an inch. It\'s not an Americanism.

In the UK \"mill\" means millilitre.

If you want to refer to fractions of an inch, then
it is /always/ \"thou\", i.e. thousandths of an inch.

In the UK \"mil/mill\" /never/ means 0.001\".

Yes it does. My neighbour\'s a tradesman (in Scotland) and says \"mill/mil\" (I don\'t know which as they sound the same in speech) as shorthand for millimetre. As in \"that kitchen unit is 600 mill wide\". Since we don\'t use inches for such things in the UK, there\'s no confusion.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 20:21:10 +0100, Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 12/07/20 19:01, Pimpom wrote:
On 7/12/2020 11:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:23:31 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com
wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

My mechanical slide caliper has a resolution of 0.001 inch. This
means that it can display measurements with a precision of 1 mil,

What if your caliper had a resolution of 1 mil +/- 3 counts on the last
digit?
.....<snip>........

In America, what is a \"mill\"? In the UK, it used to mean a thousandth of an
inch, but people use it to mean a millimetre nowadays.


It\'s not a mill. It\'s mil - single l. It means, and has always meant, a
thousandth of an inch. It\'s not an Americanism.

In the UK \"mill\" means millilitre.

If you want to refer to fractions of an inch, then
it is /always/ \"thou\", i.e. thousandths of an inch.

In the UK \"mil/mill\" /never/ means 0.001\".

Yes it does. My neighbour\'s a tradesman (in Scotland) and says \"mill/mil\" (I don\'t know which as they sound the same in speech) as shorthand for millimetre. As in \"that kitchen unit is 600 mill wide\". Since we don\'t use inches for such things in the UK, there\'s no confusion.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 05:53:29 +0100, Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

On 7/13/2020 12:51 AM, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 12/07/20 19:01, Pimpom wrote:
On 7/12/2020 11:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:23:31 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com
wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

My mechanical slide caliper has a resolution of 0.001 inch. This
means that it can display measurements with a precision of 1 mil,

What if your caliper had a resolution of 1 mil +/- 3 counts on the last
digit?
.....<snip>........

In America, what is a \"mill\"? In the UK, it used to mean a thousandth of an
inch, but people use it to mean a millimetre nowadays.


It\'s not a mill. It\'s mil - single l. It means, and has always meant, a
thousandth of an inch. It\'s not an Americanism.

In the UK \"mill\" means millilitre.

If you want to refer to fractions of an inch, then
it is /always/ \"thou\", i.e. thousandths of an inch.

In the UK \"mil/mill\" /never/ means 0.001\".


My bad. This is the first time I heard that the mil is not used
as the unit for .001\" in the UK. (I\'m *not* an American).

If you\'re not American why did you say \"my bad\"? Your bad what? Finish the sentence!

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 05:53:29 +0100, Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

On 7/13/2020 12:51 AM, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 12/07/20 19:01, Pimpom wrote:
On 7/12/2020 11:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:23:31 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com
wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

My mechanical slide caliper has a resolution of 0.001 inch. This
means that it can display measurements with a precision of 1 mil,

What if your caliper had a resolution of 1 mil +/- 3 counts on the last
digit?
.....<snip>........

In America, what is a \"mill\"? In the UK, it used to mean a thousandth of an
inch, but people use it to mean a millimetre nowadays.


It\'s not a mill. It\'s mil - single l. It means, and has always meant, a
thousandth of an inch. It\'s not an Americanism.

In the UK \"mill\" means millilitre.

If you want to refer to fractions of an inch, then
it is /always/ \"thou\", i.e. thousandths of an inch.

In the UK \"mil/mill\" /never/ means 0.001\".


My bad. This is the first time I heard that the mil is not used
as the unit for .001\" in the UK. (I\'m *not* an American).

If you\'re not American why did you say \"my bad\"? Your bad what? Finish the sentence!

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 19:01:01 +0100, Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

On 7/12/2020 11:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:23:31 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com> wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

My mechanical slide caliper has a resolution of 0.001 inch. This
means that it can display measurements with a precision of 1 mil,

What if your caliper had a resolution of 1 mil +/- 3 counts on the last
digit?
.....<snip>........

In America, what is a \"mill\"? In the UK, it used to mean a thousandth of an inch, but people use it to mean a millimetre nowadays.


It\'s not a mill. It\'s mil - single l. It means, and has always
meant, a thousandth of an inch. It\'s not an Americanism.

I only expect such ambiguity from Australians. They say \"6 Ks\" to mean 6 km. I say the complete words. Kilometre, millimetre, millilitre, etc.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 19:01:01 +0100, Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

On 7/12/2020 11:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:23:31 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com> wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

My mechanical slide caliper has a resolution of 0.001 inch. This
means that it can display measurements with a precision of 1 mil,

What if your caliper had a resolution of 1 mil +/- 3 counts on the last
digit?
.....<snip>........

In America, what is a \"mill\"? In the UK, it used to mean a thousandth of an inch, but people use it to mean a millimetre nowadays.


It\'s not a mill. It\'s mil - single l. It means, and has always
meant, a thousandth of an inch. It\'s not an Americanism.

I only expect such ambiguity from Australians. They say \"6 Ks\" to mean 6 km. I say the complete words. Kilometre, millimetre, millilitre, etc.

 

[Cydrome Leader]

In sci.electronics.equipment Commander Kinsey <CFKinsey@military.org.jp> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 20:21:10 +0100, Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 12/07/20 19:01, Pimpom wrote:
On 7/12/2020 11:15 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 05:23:31 +0100, Cydrome Leader <presence@mungepanix.com
wrote:

In sci.electronics.equipment Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

My mechanical slide caliper has a resolution of 0.001 inch. This
means that it can display measurements with a precision of 1 mil,

What if your caliper had a resolution of 1 mil +/- 3 counts on the last
digit?
.....<snip>........

In America, what is a \"mill\"? In the UK, it used to mean a thousandth of an
inch, but people use it to mean a millimetre nowadays.


It\'s not a mill. It\'s mil - single l. It means, and has always meant, a
thousandth of an inch. It\'s not an Americanism.

In the UK \"mill\" means millilitre.

If you want to refer to fractions of an inch, then
it is /always/ \"thou\", i.e. thousandths of an inch.

In the UK \"mil/mill\" /never/ means 0.001\".

Yes it does. My neighbour\'s a tradesman (in Scotland) and says
\"mill/mil\" (I don\'t know which as they sound the same in speech) as
shorthand for millimetre. As in \"that kitchen unit is 600 mill wide\".
Since we don\'t use inches for such things in the UK, there\'s no
confusion.

The context there is key too. While I\'d not measure a countertop or
whatever in millimeters, it would make no sense that anything in a kitchen
would be measured thicknesses of paper.

We (in the US) use \"guage\" for wire and sheet metal. We also use \"guage\"
for measuring really thin stuff like plastic films. In the last case, it\'s
a completly different unit, but with proper context won\'t confuse anybody.

Question for the metric woodworkers. Does anybody cut a piece of wood to
317mm or 429mm or other off numbers when building a house or handing a
door or installing a countertop?