Quote:
Originally posted by pHaestus
...
What I see in these threads for the most part is the following thought process:
Hmm I wanna test some waterblocks and not get flamed by Jaydee and/or BillA on the internet when I'm done. How do I test them? Hey let's look at Bill's bench testing article; I bet it explains it! Ok this seems reasonable; how much will it cost? Holy mother of god HOW MUCH? Ok I better e-mail Bill and find out if there's a cheaper way. Shit there's NOT? I better make an alliance and a bunch of posts on a forum then. Maybe with enough people involved we can talk this whole cost thing out of existance. Or at least get rid of the error bars.
...
|
I definitely understand that you may be used to doing things a certain way, but it doesn't exclude the possibility of doing it another way now does it?
As I stated earlier, even if we got 20 members, there is no way in h*ll that we could reasonably expect each member to fork out $1'000, so that one member can have a test bench of Bill's caliber.
As I also stated, the idea of going with multiple test benches is one of many possible directions, and the one that I envisioned for the WBTA. If you believe that you could start gathering $20'000 in contributions/donations, etc, then go right ahead, but we both know the odds of that happening.
I certainly never made any claims that we would reach Bill's level of testing, but all of us will certainly give it our best shot. It's one of those "ideal goals", a target to shoot for, sort of speak.
As for the cost issue, that's very simply an every day thing. Accuracy still remains the top priority, but cost is definitely close behind. If there is any way that I can trade "putting some time and effort", instead of buying a ready made solution, you can bet that I'm going to consider it: that's just common sense.
[edit]As I also stated (in another thread here), there may be a need for some higher accuracy, strictly for building. From a cost perspective, that leaves me with a possible option of borrowing or renting a tool.[/edit]
Satanicoo: what your real question is, is "Is the resolution related to the accuracy?" and the answer is "no". A meter could have a resolution of +/- 0.1 (i.e. display), but an accuracy of +/- 0.5. That's where it gets interesting, because you have to go over the specifications of the device. Then it extends into "repeatability" and then into "calibration".