Ewan
this is doubtless the worst forum in the world to promote 'consumer testing' to,
but such is the crux of your question
as the principal proponent of 'highly accurate' testing of WCing components, I will repeat the conclusion of an old article:
"Why bother with all this ?
While the equipment and methods described in this article may seem hopelessly complex and even impractical, one needs to consider the intended purpose and use for the data so developed. The results are engineering data, of use to systems and product designers. The independent control of the heating and cooling functions - while being able to measure the effect - is in fact the only way that a design prototype may be validated. And also the only way that a wb's performance attributes can be quantified."
etc. etc.
most on this site are quite into product design, not at all true in most other places
but since an informed decision is, to me, better than a random one; I conclude that more information is better
and the question you asked of me about rad test results earlier is illustrative
- the sole piece of equipment that I still have from when that testing was done is a Little Giant pump; everything else has been replaced, several times over
-> this is the process of improvement; in terms of the equipment capability, the knowledge of how to use it, and increased knowledge also in understanding and intrepreting the results
aka progress
and I suspect you understand this after comparing the 2 articles
no, the errors of an individual do not invalidate technically driven testing methods
|