Error

 5 Pages«<345
 Previous Topic Next Topic
 Razonar #81 Posted : 04 May 2022 07:20:04(UTC) Rank: Advanced MemberGroups: Registered Joined: 28/08/2014(UTC)Posts: 998Was thanked: 548 time(s) in 357 post(s) Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud Originally Posted by: Razonar a PT100 (which should have a resistance of 100 ohms at 0 Celsius)Pt100 is simply a designation from EIT90 with Ω as given 1 @ 0.01 °C.The instrument maintenance crew calibrates the XTR's reading fromexpensive secondary standard lab equipment accordingly to BIPM.Platinum wire is not infinitely ductible ... 100 times smaller cross area ?Of same cross area now 100 times longer ?Don't worry, those things work fine for so long.Cheers ... Jean.From your SMath file ( https://en.smath.com/for...rce.ashx?a=43693&b=2 ):andFrom the NIST ( https://nvlpubs.nist.gov...tions/NIST.SP.250-91.pdf at page 77)There you can see that Wr is dimensionless, and can read how to define it as a quotient between resistance's. What you get, 0.59493791 and 1.77363368 are not fake ohms, as you type. Are the relation between the Platinum electric resistance and the reference value for the water at 0.01 Celsius. It is very practical because it is very easy to obtain temperatures of 0 C and 100 C with enough accuracy in the work area inside the plant, without having to disassemble the instrument and take it to the workshop workbench. It is PT100 because 100 ohms, otherwise it would be called PT1. You can google it. Actually there are also PT1000, whose nominal resistance is 1000 ohms at 0 CBest regards.Alvaro.
 fedeghi #82 Posted : 04 May 2022 09:45:28(UTC) Rank: Advanced MemberGroups: Registered Joined: 14/09/2013(UTC)Posts: 87Was thanked: 22 time(s) in 15 post(s) Every single topic gets spammed and hijacked by Jean's out of topic posts.What a spammer! You would expect such an immature use of a forum from a teenager.This forum has become a mess under his many unrelated replies, and "search" function is polluted with crap, crusades against SI or other useless/unrelated stuff.But maybe as forum users, we should just "stop feeding the troll" and ignore him, since it appears that the recent two weeks ban was useless, and we can't expect he changes his mind today.So my suggestion is to stop interacting.Personally speaking I have stopped reading his stuff and downloading his documents. And I will return silent again after this reply.I would like to add one more thing: for "non english" mother tongue users, his colloquial english is often confusing, to say the least.It is confusing to me, at least (and I remember more than one user being puzzled, and asking to rephrase...). Colloquial and unclear statements, that's not the approach I would expect on a forum like this one.I remember when I joined the forum some years ago, I always read his replies ten times while thinking "Damn I need to improve my english, here there is someone who is trying to teach me something and, stupid me, I'm missing the point due to my english skill".After some months, I finally understood that my english was 10% of the problem :^PIMHO, in his replies there is no true intention to "help" (as some may think), but only the intention to "show" (...wrongs... as we have all read recently, and as resumed by other users in this same thread).See you.Edited by user 04 May 2022 09:48:29(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified 1 user thanked fedeghi for this useful post. on 04/05/2022(UTC)
 uni #83 Posted : 04 May 2022 11:05:09(UTC) Rank: Advanced MemberGroups: Registered, Advanced MemberJoined: 10/11/2010(UTC)Posts: 1,324Was thanked: 1157 time(s) in 668 post(s) To be clear, I don't have permission to ban users. Until now this has not been necessary, except for the usual spammers. Yes, I can ask Andrey about it personally, but only in extreme cases. The current case is borderline. I don't have time to follow everything that happens on the forum. I could delete all posts that are not related to the topic of the forum, but this is inefficient. Thus, if you want to change something, then you will have to jointly develop proposals, coordinate them with Jean and report the result to Andrey. I think this is a more civilized way. Russia ☭ forever Viacheslav N. Mezentsev
 fedeghi #84 Posted : 04 May 2022 11:11:43(UTC) Rank: Advanced MemberGroups: Registered Joined: 14/09/2013(UTC)Posts: 87Was thanked: 22 time(s) in 15 post(s) Yes Uni, I understand and agree with your statement, I also think it is a waste of time to "regulate" this at an admin level.On the other hand, since it is unlikely that we can change Jean's mind and way of thinking, I will personally stop interacting and simply ignore what happens.Nevertheless, it should be noted that the forum will keep getting polluted and the "search" feature (which would be a very important feature of any technical forum...) is impacted.
 Jean Giraud #85 Posted : 04 May 2022 15:39:22(UTC) Rank: GuestGroups: Registered Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)Posts: 6,133Was thanked: 895 time(s) in 723 post(s) You are both right, Smath Community is on the decline of Poisson Distribution.@ fedeghi 0.25% statistics, little chance of productive whatever collaboration.Take care ...
 Jean Giraud #86 Posted : 04 May 2022 16:32:21(UTC) Rank: GuestGroups: Registered Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)Posts: 6,133Was thanked: 895 time(s) in 723 post(s) Originally Posted by: Razonar Actually there are also PT1000, whose nominal resistance is 1000 ohms at 0 CThere are even more SPRT [25.5 Ω] ... others fit in mother board.TP water 0.01 °CPlease, make the attached as you think it should be.Publish for the benefit of the Smath Community.Take care Alvaro ... Jean. Inst_Type Pt100 BIPM Copy.sm (397kb) downloaded 3 time(s).
 Razonar #87 Posted : 04 May 2022 19:24:12(UTC) Rank: Advanced MemberGroups: Registered Joined: 28/08/2014(UTC)Posts: 998Was thanked: 548 time(s) in 357 post(s) Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud Originally Posted by: Razonar Actually there are also PT1000, whose nominal resistance is 1000 ohms at 0 CThere are even more SPRT [25.5 Ω] ... others fit in mother board.TP water 0.01 °CPlease, make the attached as you think it should be.Publish for the benefit of the Smath Community.Take care Alvaro ... Jean. Inst_Type Pt100 BIPM Copy.sm (397kb) downloaded 3 time(s).Fedeghi is right, answering you does not make any difference: "Sostenedlla y no enmendadlla". I'm just doing it to warn the community of what I consider to be correctable mistakes but unacceptable bugs if you insist on them.W is dimensionless, but you insist on putting it in ohms. If you don't want to read the NIST document, at least take a look at the table header: It has no units. Just modify your calculations or stop spamming these kinds of errors:And don't try to confuse the reader with the 0.01 W value, which is dimensionless and not in ohms like in your table: PT100 temperature sensors have a resistance of 100 ohms at 0 C, not 1 ohm like in your calculations.Best regards.Alvaro.
 Jean Giraud #88 Posted : 04 May 2022 23:56:53(UTC) Rank: GuestGroups: Registered Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)Posts: 6,133Was thanked: 895 time(s) in 723 post(s) Originally Posted by: Razonar PT100 temperature sensors have a resistance of 100 ohms at 0 C, not 1 ohm like in your calculations.Again 0.01°Ceit90 and BIPM are compatible as given conjointly.Produce your own for the benefit of Smath Community.
 Jean Giraud #89 Posted : 05 May 2022 00:35:09(UTC) Rank: GuestGroups: Registered Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)Posts: 6,133Was thanked: 895 time(s) in 723 post(s) Originally Posted by: fedeghi Personally speaking I have stopped reading his stuff and downloading his documentsSuppose you have not downloaded "Most used_3" because you denigrate.You have rejected this exceptional collection of 5 Collaborators.1. Carlos ∫Adaptive(f,a,b,iter,ε) 2. Viacheslav ODE exposed ... good/freak3. Martin discrete successive derivative.4. Mostly Jean back Mathcad adapted Smath5. Paul W. convolution Laser as I have first exposed.
 Razonar #90 Posted : 05 May 2022 01:13:51(UTC) Rank: Advanced MemberGroups: Registered Joined: 28/08/2014(UTC)Posts: 998Was thanked: 548 time(s) in 357 post(s) Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud Originally Posted by: Razonar PT100 temperature sensors have a resistance of 100 ohms at 0 C, not 1 ohm like in your calculations.Again 0.01°Ceit90 and BIPM are compatible as given conjointly.Produce your own for the benefit of Smath Community.Neither, as usual. Sostenedlla y no enmendadlla.Water TP is the water Triple Point, which is 0.01 C according to ITS-90. You can check that even on wikipedia. The water is for the thermal bath where the sensor is immersed, just like mercury or nitrogen.PT100 is for Platinum, which has according to EN 60 751 a nominal value of 100.000 Ω at 0°C.Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud ...Produce your own for the benefit of Smath Community.For what? The calculations you show are for the sensor manufacturer, not for use by the instrument engineer to calibrate the sensor. Or do you suggest that I do a liquid Hydrogen or Helium bath every time I'm going to calibrate a temperature sensor?Best regards.Alvaro.Edited by user 05 May 2022 01:20:53(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified
 Users browsing this topic
 5 Pages«<345
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.