Hi Bud,
not sure about the regulations here. If needed, I can delete the post in testgear.
Hi tggzzz,
Thanks for the questions!
The answer to the 1st one: Yes, different models have different configuration of registers and relays.
The 2nd one: QR10 uses a more elegant and accurate way to handle the "residual resistance" than traditional Resistance Decade Box. This is also one of the advantages of QR10.
QR10 has an MCU to control the relay coil of "Relay-Resistor Network". When user set 10 Ω, and we already know (measured) the relay contact resistance and the PCB routing resistance is, say 0.5 Ω. Then we offset this 0.5 Ω in advance and set the switch to produce 9.5 Ω.
It is an interesting take on a programmable resistor, but I do not like the serial protocol.
It may work fine for control from a terminal, but for control from a program I would prefer it more simple and SCPI like. I would probably be possible to have a extra command set for that.
Something like:
Set resistance value, will not return any answer: set xxx
Asked current resistance value, will return one number with a CR LF termination: set?
And maybe a few more command to read the other values, but no multi line return values. Multiple values can be return as "value1 value2 value3 CR LF", i.e. with spaces between and no text.
That allows a zero differential resistance under some conditions, but you claim a zero residual resistance.
Presume you have entered the offset values, and selected 0ohms. To use hypothetical numbers, if there is 0.01ohms resistance in the wires and 0.01ohms resistance in each of 9 relays, then the resistance between the terminals would be 0.1ohms, not the 0ohms you claim. Hence the residual resistance would be 0.1ohms, not 0ohms.
Hi tggzzz,
Thanks for the questions!
The answer to the 1st one: Yes, different models have different configuration of registers and relays.
The 2nd one: QR10 uses a more elegant and accurate way to handle the "residual resistance" than traditional Resistance Decade Box. This is also one of the advantages of QR10.
QR10 has an MCU to control the relay coil of "Relay-Resistor Network". When user set 10 Ω, and we already know (measured) the relay contact resistance and the PCB routing resistance is, say 0.5 Ω. Then we offset this 0.5 Ω in advance and set the switch to produce 9.5 Ω.
That allows a zero differential resistance under some conditions, but you claim a zero residual resistance.
Presume you have entered the offset values, and selected 0ohms. To use hypothetical numbers, if there is 0.01ohms resistance in the wires and 0.01ohms resistance in each of 9 relays, then the resistance between the terminals would be 0.1ohms, not the 0ohms you claim. Hence the residual resistance would be 0.1ohms, not 0ohms.
What is the specification for the relay contact changes over time, e.g. after 10000 operations, and with relay orientation?
What is the specification for the relay contact changes with changing relay orientation?
That will determine how the well calibrated your device remains.
If you are producing something aimed at hobbyists, then your device may well be sufficient. But you are comparing it with high quality standard resistors, and your comparisons appear invalid and statements incorrect. I am willing to be convinced otherwise.
Hi tggzzz,
Thanks for the questions!
The answer to the 1st one: Yes, different models have different configuration of registers and relays.
The 2nd one: QR10 uses a more elegant and accurate way to handle the "residual resistance" than traditional Resistance Decade Box. This is also one of the advantages of QR10.
QR10 has an MCU to control the relay coil of "Relay-Resistor Network". When user set 10 Ω, and we already know (measured) the relay contact resistance and the PCB routing resistance is, say 0.5 Ω. Then we offset this 0.5 Ω in advance and set the switch to produce 9.5 Ω.
That allows a zero differential resistance under some conditions, but you claim a zero residual resistance.
Presume you have entered the offset values, and selected 0ohms. To use hypothetical numbers, if there is 0.01ohms resistance in the wires and 0.01ohms resistance in each of 9 relays, then the resistance between the terminals would be 0.1ohms, not the 0ohms you claim. Hence the residual resistance would be 0.1ohms, not 0ohms.
What is the specification for the relay contact changes over time, e.g. after 10000 operations, and with relay orientation?
What is the specification for the relay contact changes with changing relay orientation?
That will determine how the well calibrated your device remains.
If you are producing something aimed at hobbyists, then your device may well be sufficient. But you are comparing it with high quality standard resistors, and your comparisons appear invalid and statements incorrect. I am willing to be convinced otherwise.
Hi tggzzz,
I'm CC, Frank's colleague. Since he is in bed right now, allow me to answer your question.
1. The concept of “residual resistance” you mentioned is actually from the old fashined resistance box for that it can do nothing about cable resistance and switch contact resistance. While for QR10, we can re-define residual resistance as “0”
for the reason it was already included in the output PV (we measured it in advance and based on it to decide “Relay-resistor” combination value).
2. For relay performance, we did a lot test in our EVT 125 units and found it's much stable than the specification given. If you want to see the original data, just send us an email to eastwood.tech@outlook.com
3. The relay we choosed is not liquid type. No such limitation in orientation.
4. QR10 is for hobbyists, but it doesn't mean low quality and shit. And it's for general purpose application rather than "resistance standard" - we will charge you 10 times more if it is.
Thanks for your question, appreciate it indeed!
Hi tggzzz,
Thanks for the questions!
The answer to the 1st one: Yes, different models have different configuration of registers and relays.
The 2nd one: QR10 uses a more elegant and accurate way to handle the "residual resistance" than traditional Resistance Decade Box. This is also one of the advantages of QR10.
QR10 has an MCU to control the relay coil of "Relay-Resistor Network". When user set 10 Ω, and we already know (measured) the relay contact resistance and the PCB routing resistance is, say 0.5 Ω. Then we offset this 0.5 Ω in advance and set the switch to produce 9.5 Ω.
That allows a zero differential resistance under some conditions, but you claim a zero residual resistance.
Presume you have entered the offset values, and selected 0ohms. To use hypothetical numbers, if there is 0.01ohms resistance in the wires and 0.01ohms resistance in each of 9 relays, then the resistance between the terminals would be 0.1ohms, not the 0ohms you claim. Hence the residual resistance would be 0.1ohms, not 0ohms.
What is the specification for the relay contact changes over time, e.g. after 10000 operations, and with relay orientation?
What is the specification for the relay contact changes with changing relay orientation?
That will determine how the well calibrated your device remains.
If you are producing something aimed at hobbyists, then your device may well be sufficient. But you are comparing it with high quality standard resistors, and your comparisons appear invalid and statements incorrect. I am willing to be convinced otherwise.
Hi tggzzz,
I'm CC, Frank's colleague. Since he is in bed right now, allow me to answer your question.
1. The concept of “residual resistance” you mentioned is actually from the old fashined resistance box for that it can do nothing about cable resistance and switch contact resistance. While for QR10, we can re-define residual resistance as “0”
Nonsense: you can't simply re-define a standard techincal term to suit your marketing.
Or, if you can, then the concept of "web forum" is from the old-fashioned web 1.0, and I can redefine EEVBlog Forum as a "usenet forum".
Or perhaps I can define that a car "floats" on water, because with the doors shut it takes quite a few seconds before the water is up to the windows.
Any and all of those redefinitions are crap designed to confuse and hide.
If a user can't select 0ohms, put a current through your device and measure zero volts across the terminals, then the residual resistance isn't zero ohms.
Simply state the minimum resistance between the terminals, and state the increments you can set on top of that minimum resistance. Anything else is deliberately deceptive.Quotefor the reason it was already included in the output PV (we measured it in advance and based on it to decide “Relay-resistor” combination value).
What is "PV" or "process value"?
I guess it means incremental resistance. But nobody cares what my guess is.
Please stop creating datasheets using cheese[1]
[1] my definition of cheese is a computer program that enables creation of written documents! Stupid? No more than your inventing terms!
Quote2. For relay performance, we did a lot test in our EVT 125 units and found it's much stable than the specification given. If you want to see the original data, just send us an email to eastwood.tech@outlook.com
Nobody cares about your measurements; they could be flukes or badly implemented.
The next batch of relays might be very different. The same batch might have a very different measurement next week. And nobody could complain.Quote3. The relay we choosed is not liquid type. No such limitation in orientation.
Is that guaranteed by the specification or by you not finding any issue yesterday?Quote4. QR10 is for hobbyists, but it doesn't mean low quality and shit. And it's for general purpose application rather than "resistance standard" - we will charge you 10 times more if it is.
Thanks for your question, appreciate it indeed!
Nothing wrong with it being general purpose, but don't compare it to standard resistors.
I wouldn't compare a Toyota Yaris to a Rolls Royce.
Hi tggzzz,
Thanks for the questions!
The answer to the 1st one: Yes, different models have different configuration of registers and relays.
The 2nd one: QR10 uses a more elegant and accurate way to handle the "residual resistance" than traditional Resistance Decade Box. This is also one of the advantages of QR10.
QR10 has an MCU to control the relay coil of "Relay-Resistor Network". When user set 10 Ω, and we already know (measured) the relay contact resistance and the PCB routing resistance is, say 0.5 Ω. Then we offset this 0.5 Ω in advance and set the switch to produce 9.5 Ω.
That allows a zero differential resistance under some conditions, but you claim a zero residual resistance.
Presume you have entered the offset values, and selected 0ohms. To use hypothetical numbers, if there is 0.01ohms resistance in the wires and 0.01ohms resistance in each of 9 relays, then the resistance between the terminals would be 0.1ohms, not the 0ohms you claim. Hence the residual resistance would be 0.1ohms, not 0ohms.
What is the specification for the relay contact changes over time, e.g. after 10000 operations, and with relay orientation?
What is the specification for the relay contact changes with changing relay orientation?
That will determine how the well calibrated your device remains.
If you are producing something aimed at hobbyists, then your device may well be sufficient. But you are comparing it with high quality standard resistors, and your comparisons appear invalid and statements incorrect. I am willing to be convinced otherwise.
Hi tggzzz,
I'm CC, Frank's colleague. Since he is in bed right now, allow me to answer your question.
1. The concept of “residual resistance” you mentioned is actually from the old fashined resistance box for that it can do nothing about cable resistance and switch contact resistance. While for QR10, we can re-define residual resistance as “0”
Nonsense: you can't simply re-define a standard techincal term to suit your marketing.
Or, if you can, then the concept of "web forum" is from the old-fashioned web 1.0, and I can redefine EEVBlog Forum as a "usenet forum".
Or perhaps I can define that a car "floats" on water, because with the doors shut it takes quite a few seconds before the water is up to the windows.
Any and all of those redefinitions are crap designed to confuse and hide.
If a user can't select 0ohms, put a current through your device and measure zero volts across the terminals, then the residual resistance isn't zero ohms.
Simply state the minimum resistance between the terminals, and state the increments you can set on top of that minimum resistance. Anything else is deliberately deceptive.Quotefor the reason it was already included in the output PV (we measured it in advance and based on it to decide “Relay-resistor” combination value).
What is "PV" or "process value"?
I guess it means incremental resistance. But nobody cares what my guess is.
Please stop creating datasheets using cheese[1]
[1] my definition of cheese is a computer program that enables creation of written documents! Stupid? No more than your inventing terms!
Quote2. For relay performance, we did a lot test in our EVT 125 units and found it's much stable than the specification given. If you want to see the original data, just send us an email to eastwood.tech@outlook.com
Nobody cares about your measurements; they could be flukes or badly implemented.
The next batch of relays might be very different. The same batch might have a very different measurement next week. And nobody could complain.Quote3. The relay we choosed is not liquid type. No such limitation in orientation.
Is that guaranteed by the specification or by you not finding any issue yesterday?Quote4. QR10 is for hobbyists, but it doesn't mean low quality and shit. And it's for general purpose application rather than "resistance standard" - we will charge you 10 times more if it is.
Thanks for your question, appreciate it indeed!
Nothing wrong with it being general purpose, but don't compare it to standard resistors.
I wouldn't compare a Toyota Yaris to a Rolls Royce.
Hi tggzz,
I'm afraid you wend too, FAR. Return and talk in peace, please.
1. Timing and tide is changing and you must accept it. Science and technique is not Bible that can not be modified (for Bibile, who knows:-).
If you don't agree with me, I guess IET Labs can answer your same question about “residual resistance” (here is the link: https://www.ietlabs.com/os-260-resistance-decade-box-rtd-simulator.html). Great minds think alike - I mean, us - Eastwood Instruments and IET labs.
2. If you want to know the relay model, the best way is to order one (or you can apply for a free sample on our official website), tear it down and see. What I can tell you is, the relay brand we selected is from JP. I seldom question our friendly neighbor's quality control. But sure, you can.
3. We all born equal (@admin, this is not talking about politics, please), and the remarkable thing of instruments field is, there is an objective "standard" and even the tiny one can be a gaint.
Why not order one and see? I'll give you a big bargain since we almost be friends already.
Best,
CC
[Humpty Dumpty:] 'And only ONE for birthday presents, you know. There's glory for you!'
'I don't know what you mean by "glory,"' Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't--till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'
'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument,"' Alice objected.
'When _I_ use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you CAN make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master--that's all.'
Your comments and professional opinions are highly appreciated!
Hi tggzzz,
Thanks for the questions!
The answer to the 1st one: Yes, different models have different configuration of registers and relays.
The 2nd one: QR10 uses a more elegant and accurate way to handle the "residual resistance" than traditional Resistance Decade Box. This is also one of the advantages of QR10.
QR10 has an MCU to control the relay coil of "Relay-Resistor Network". When user set 10 Ω, and we already know (measured) the relay contact resistance and the PCB routing resistance is, say 0.5 Ω. Then we offset this 0.5 Ω in advance and set the switch to produce 9.5 Ω.
That allows a zero differential resistance under some conditions, but you claim a zero residual resistance.
Presume you have entered the offset values, and selected 0ohms. To use hypothetical numbers, if there is 0.01ohms resistance in the wires and 0.01ohms resistance in each of 9 relays, then the resistance between the terminals would be 0.1ohms, not the 0ohms you claim. Hence the residual resistance would be 0.1ohms, not 0ohms.
What is the specification for the relay contact changes over time, e.g. after 10000 operations, and with relay orientation?
What is the specification for the relay contact changes with changing relay orientation?
That will determine how the well calibrated your device remains.
If you are producing something aimed at hobbyists, then your device may well be sufficient. But you are comparing it with high quality standard resistors, and your comparisons appear invalid and statements incorrect. I am willing to be convinced otherwise.
Hi tggzzz,
I'm CC, Frank's colleague. Since he is in bed right now, allow me to answer your question.
1. The concept of “residual resistance” you mentioned is actually from the old fashined resistance box for that it can do nothing about cable resistance and switch contact resistance. While for QR10, we can re-define residual resistance as “0”
Nonsense: you can't simply re-define a standard techincal term to suit your marketing.
Or, if you can, then the concept of "web forum" is from the old-fashioned web 1.0, and I can redefine EEVBlog Forum as a "usenet forum".
Or perhaps I can define that a car "floats" on water, because with the doors shut it takes quite a few seconds before the water is up to the windows.
Any and all of those redefinitions are crap designed to confuse and hide.
If a user can't select 0ohms, put a current through your device and measure zero volts across the terminals, then the residual resistance isn't zero ohms.
Simply state the minimum resistance between the terminals, and state the increments you can set on top of that minimum resistance. Anything else is deliberately deceptive.Quotefor the reason it was already included in the output PV (we measured it in advance and based on it to decide “Relay-resistor” combination value).
What is "PV" or "process value"?
I guess it means incremental resistance. But nobody cares what my guess is.
Please stop creating datasheets using cheese[1]
[1] my definition of cheese is a computer program that enables creation of written documents! Stupid? No more than your inventing terms!
Quote2. For relay performance, we did a lot test in our EVT 125 units and found it's much stable than the specification given. If you want to see the original data, just send us an email to eastwood.tech@outlook.com
Nobody cares about your measurements; they could be flukes or badly implemented.
The next batch of relays might be very different. The same batch might have a very different measurement next week. And nobody could complain.Quote3. The relay we choosed is not liquid type. No such limitation in orientation.
Is that guaranteed by the specification or by you not finding any issue yesterday?Quote4. QR10 is for hobbyists, but it doesn't mean low quality and shit. And it's for general purpose application rather than "resistance standard" - we will charge you 10 times more if it is.
Thanks for your question, appreciate it indeed!
Nothing wrong with it being general purpose, but don't compare it to standard resistors.
I wouldn't compare a Toyota Yaris to a Rolls Royce.
Hi tggzz,
I'm afraid you wend too, FAR. Return and talk in peace, please.
1. Timing and tide is changing and you must accept it. Science and technique is not Bible that can not be modified (for Bibile, who knows:-).
If you don't agree with me, I guess IET Labs can answer your same question about “residual resistance” (here is the link: https://www.ietlabs.com/os-260-resistance-decade-box-rtd-simulator.html). Great minds think alike - I mean, us - Eastwood Instruments and IET labs.
2. If you want to know the relay model, the best way is to order one (or you can apply for a free sample on our official website), tear it down and see. What I can tell you is, the relay brand we selected is from JP. I seldom question our friendly neighbor's quality control. But sure, you can.
3. We all born equal (@admin, this is not talking about politics, please), and the remarkable thing of instruments field is, there is an objective "standard" and even the tiny one can be a gaint.
Why not order one and see? I'll give you a big bargain since we almost be friends already.
Best,
CC
Firstly and obviously, when you make claims about your device, it is up to you to justify them - not other people to dispove them.
Secondly and more importantly, I and most other engineers, strongly dislike Wittgenstein-style "language games".
Basically your (rather weird) response about un-birthday presents is a glory...Quote from: Through the Looking-Glass by Lewis Carroll, Ch7
[Humpty Dumpty:] 'And only ONE for birthday presents, you know. There's glory for you!'
'I don't know what you mean by "glory,"' Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't--till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'
'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument,"' Alice objected.
'When _I_ use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you CAN make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master--that's all.'
Sorry, I didn't "other engineers" except you.
I'm not native speaker and I learned my Engilish from my former German boss. But you must got what I mean, that's the key point.
I'm not weird but tired.
Your comments and professional opinions are highly appreciated!
It looks interesting but I'm not sure why you felt it necessary to make it so small?
I see your colleague has stepped on a land mine by getting into a debate between compensating for and eliminating residual resistance. It seems obvious what you've done there and it is a good idea, but being precise in the description is important. I understand what you've done but would need to be convinced that the compensation is valid over time and varying operating conditions. For example, I think you will struggle to meet your TC specs at minimum resistance because the residual that you are compensating for will likely have a larger TC than the resistors themselves. Or perhaps I haven't read the specs closely enough and that's accounted for.
You are welcome to send me an example if you want it tested. I'm not a Youtuber but I'd post the results, photos, etc here. I'm able to measure it to the specs you've given and I'd be comparing it to other old-style resistance substitution boxes like the ESI Dekabox and Ohmite Decade-Ranger. PM if you like.
Hi tggzzz,
I saw your conversations with one of my colleagues. Please allow me to clarify a few things to avoid further confusion and misunderstanding.
- “Residual Resistance” is not an appropriate term to describe our product, mainly because we consider “Residual Resistance” as part of our output circuit. Unlike traditional resistance boxes, we measure and record this residual value in advance and compensate for this value accordingly when outputting the resistance.
- If you would like to know this value, it is about 0.5 Ω. And FYI, since we also include an extra 0.5 Ω resistance in our output, this makes the minimum output range of our resistor 1 Ω. We have clearly specified this number in our spec. Say, if a client needs a 10-Ω output, our resistance will first produce a 9-Ω. With the 1-Ω extra "residual resistance"", the end output will be exactly 10-Ω
- We have no intention to hide any information or mislead others, but we just don’t think the term “Residual Resistance” applies to our product. Moreover, the end user does not have to pay attention to this value. However, we can explain this when needed.
- Moreover, we are not the first one adopting this idea. In fact, IET implements the same idea in their resistance boxes: https://www.ietlabs.com/os-260-resistance-decade-box-rtd-simulator.html. On their website, they clearly state: "Automatic Eliminates Residual Resistance - the OS-260 residual resistance is automatically factored out in output resistance value."
Hi tggzzz,
I saw your conversations with one of my colleagues. Please allow me to clarify a few things to avoid further confusion and misunderstanding.
- “Residual Resistance” is not an appropriate term to describe our product, mainly because we consider “Residual Resistance” as part of our output circuit. Unlike traditional resistance boxes, we measure and record this residual value in advance and compensate for this value accordingly when outputting the resistance.
Sorry, but that is a false statement. You do consider "residual resistance" appropriate, and you claim it is a defining advantage over your competitors' well-establised products. See your kickstarter page here...Quote
- If you would like to know this value, it is about 0.5 Ω. And FYI, since we also include an extra 0.5 Ω resistance in our output, this makes the minimum output range of our resistor 1 Ω. We have clearly specified this number in our spec. Say, if a client needs a 10-Ω output, our resistance will first produce a 9-Ω. With the 1-Ω extra "residual resistance"", the end output will be exactly 10-Ω
That's fine. But it doesn't match the terms used in your publicity.Quote
- We have no intention to hide any information or mislead others, but we just don’t think the term “Residual Resistance” applies to our product. Moreover, the end user does not have to pay attention to this value. However, we can explain this when needed.
- Moreover, we are not the first one adopting this idea. In fact, IET implements the same idea in their resistance boxes: https://www.ietlabs.com/os-260-resistance-decade-box-rtd-simulator.html. On their website, they clearly state: "Automatic Eliminates Residual Resistance - the OS-260 residual resistance is automatically factored out in output resistance value."
Now look at the information in your publicity (above). The IET-201 claims 0-10Mohm, residual 0.39ohm. The Yokagawa 278610 claims 0.1-111.111kohm, residual 0.023ohm.
Do you claim that just because some people/companies use a term, that use of the term becomes correct?
If you do claim that, then presumably you think it is correct to measure time in Siemens (i.e. conductance). Look at how many companies/people incorrectly specify times in "nS" or "mS"! That mistake can be made through ignorance or carelessness. I hope you aspire to avoid looking ignorant or careless!
Hi tggzzz,
I saw your conversations with one of my colleagues. Please allow me to clarify a few things to avoid further confusion and misunderstanding.
- “Residual Resistance” is not an appropriate term to describe our product, mainly because we consider “Residual Resistance” as part of our output circuit. Unlike traditional resistance boxes, we measure and record this residual value in advance and compensate for this value accordingly when outputting the resistance.
Sorry, but that is a false statement. You do consider "residual resistance" appropriate, and you claim it is a defining advantage over your competitors' well-establised products. See your kickstarter page here...Quote
- If you would like to know this value, it is about 0.5 Ω. And FYI, since we also include an extra 0.5 Ω resistance in our output, this makes the minimum output range of our resistor 1 Ω. We have clearly specified this number in our spec. Say, if a client needs a 10-Ω output, our resistance will first produce a 9-Ω. With the 1-Ω extra "residual resistance"", the end output will be exactly 10-Ω
That's fine. But it doesn't match the terms used in your publicity.Quote
- We have no intention to hide any information or mislead others, but we just don’t think the term “Residual Resistance” applies to our product. Moreover, the end user does not have to pay attention to this value. However, we can explain this when needed.
- Moreover, we are not the first one adopting this idea. In fact, IET implements the same idea in their resistance boxes: https://www.ietlabs.com/os-260-resistance-decade-box-rtd-simulator.html. On their website, they clearly state: "Automatic Eliminates Residual Resistance - the OS-260 residual resistance is automatically factored out in output resistance value."
Now look at the information in your publicity (above). The IET-201 claims 0-10Mohm, residual 0.39ohm. The Yokagawa 278610 claims 0.1-111.111kohm, residual 0.023ohm.
Do you claim that just because some people/companies use a term, that use of the term becomes correct?
If you do claim that, then presumably you think it is correct to measure time in Siemens (i.e. conductance). Look at how many companies/people incorrectly specify times in "nS" or "mS"! That mistake can be made through ignorance or carelessness. I hope you aspire to avoid looking ignorant or careless!
Hi tggzzzzzz,
Good day!
Just one question, to be simplified, if for a resistance box claimed to be ±0.01% of RD:
1. You set 1.0 Ohm, then it can "tell you" the output is 1.0 Ohm , and you measured it is 1.0 ±0.01% of RD.
2. Moreover, not only for the point 1.0 Ohm, but it can be applied in the whole range "1.0 Ohm - 1.2M Ohm". i.e.
You set n Ohm, then it can "tell you" the output is n Ohm , and you measured it is n ±0.01% of RD.
Then would you mind to tell us what's the "residual resistance" of such a resistance box in your understanding?
Best,
CC
Hi tggzzz,
I saw your conversations with one of my colleagues. Please allow me to clarify a few things to avoid further confusion and misunderstanding.
- “Residual Resistance” is not an appropriate term to describe our product, mainly because we consider “Residual Resistance” as part of our output circuit. Unlike traditional resistance boxes, we measure and record this residual value in advance and compensate for this value accordingly when outputting the resistance.
Sorry, but that is a false statement. You do consider "residual resistance" appropriate, and you claim it is a defining advantage over your competitors' well-establised products. See your kickstarter page here...Quote
- If you would like to know this value, it is about 0.5 Ω. And FYI, since we also include an extra 0.5 Ω resistance in our output, this makes the minimum output range of our resistor 1 Ω. We have clearly specified this number in our spec. Say, if a client needs a 10-Ω output, our resistance will first produce a 9-Ω. With the 1-Ω extra "residual resistance"", the end output will be exactly 10-Ω
That's fine. But it doesn't match the terms used in your publicity.Quote
- We have no intention to hide any information or mislead others, but we just don’t think the term “Residual Resistance” applies to our product. Moreover, the end user does not have to pay attention to this value. However, we can explain this when needed.
- Moreover, we are not the first one adopting this idea. In fact, IET implements the same idea in their resistance boxes: https://www.ietlabs.com/os-260-resistance-decade-box-rtd-simulator.html. On their website, they clearly state: "Automatic Eliminates Residual Resistance - the OS-260 residual resistance is automatically factored out in output resistance value."
Now look at the information in your publicity (above). The IET-201 claims 0-10Mohm, residual 0.39ohm. The Yokagawa 278610 claims 0.1-111.111kohm, residual 0.023ohm.
Do you claim that just because some people/companies use a term, that use of the term becomes correct?
If you do claim that, then presumably you think it is correct to measure time in Siemens (i.e. conductance). Look at how many companies/people incorrectly specify times in "nS" or "mS"! That mistake can be made through ignorance or carelessness. I hope you aspire to avoid looking ignorant or careless!
Hi tggzzzzzz,
Good day!
Just one question, to be simplified, if for a resistance box claimed to be ±0.01% of RD:
1. You set 1.0 Ohm, then it can "tell you" the output is 1.0 Ohm , and you measured it is 1.0 ±0.01% of RD.
2. Moreover, not only for the point 1.0 Ohm, but it can be applied in the whole range "1.0 Ohm - 1.2M Ohm". i.e.
You set n Ohm, then it can "tell you" the output is n Ohm , and you measured it is n ±0.01% of RD.
Then would you mind to tell us what's the "residual resistance" of such a resistance box in your understanding?
Best,
CC
1) What is "RD"?[1]
2) I'm not making claims about a device's performance, so I don't have anything to justify.
3) Stop trying to avoid the points I've made about your claims[2] .
[1] Abbreviations and acronyms should be avoided or introduced, e.g. "Relative Density (RD)". That also applies to another acronym you have used: Photovoltaic (PV)
[2] Your customers will notice. People that might think of investing in your kickstarter will notice. Various TV programmes (e.g. Dragon's Den in the UK) illustrate that potential investors rapidly say "I'm out" (i.e. won't invest) when they feel people trying to get investment are avoiding answering their questions.
For the avoidance of doubt, I can believe that your device might sell. But if you oversell its performance, you might have devices returned.
Hi tggzzz,
I saw your conversations with one of my colleagues. Please allow me to clarify a few things to avoid further confusion and misunderstanding.
- “Residual Resistance” is not an appropriate term to describe our product, mainly because we consider “Residual Resistance” as part of our output circuit. Unlike traditional resistance boxes, we measure and record this residual value in advance and compensate for this value accordingly when outputting the resistance.
Sorry, but that is a false statement. You do consider "residual resistance" appropriate, and you claim it is a defining advantage over your competitors' well-establised products. See your kickstarter page here...Quote
- If you would like to know this value, it is about 0.5 Ω. And FYI, since we also include an extra 0.5 Ω resistance in our output, this makes the minimum output range of our resistor 1 Ω. We have clearly specified this number in our spec. Say, if a client needs a 10-Ω output, our resistance will first produce a 9-Ω. With the 1-Ω extra "residual resistance"", the end output will be exactly 10-Ω
That's fine. But it doesn't match the terms used in your publicity.Quote
- We have no intention to hide any information or mislead others, but we just don’t think the term “Residual Resistance” applies to our product. Moreover, the end user does not have to pay attention to this value. However, we can explain this when needed.
- Moreover, we are not the first one adopting this idea. In fact, IET implements the same idea in their resistance boxes: https://www.ietlabs.com/os-260-resistance-decade-box-rtd-simulator.html. On their website, they clearly state: "Automatic Eliminates Residual Resistance - the OS-260 residual resistance is automatically factored out in output resistance value."
Now look at the information in your publicity (above). The IET-201 claims 0-10Mohm, residual 0.39ohm. The Yokagawa 278610 claims 0.1-111.111kohm, residual 0.023ohm.
Do you claim that just because some people/companies use a term, that use of the term becomes correct?
If you do claim that, then presumably you think it is correct to measure time in Siemens (i.e. conductance). Look at how many companies/people incorrectly specify times in "nS" or "mS"! That mistake can be made through ignorance or carelessness. I hope you aspire to avoid looking ignorant or careless!
Hi tggzzzzzz,
Good day!
Just one question, to be simplified, if for a resistance box claimed to be ±0.01% of RD:
1. You set 1.0 Ohm, then it can "tell you" the output is 1.0 Ohm , and you measured it is 1.0 ±0.01% of RD.
2. Moreover, not only for the point 1.0 Ohm, but it can be applied in the whole range "1.0 Ohm - 1.2M Ohm". i.e.
You set n Ohm, then it can "tell you" the output is n Ohm , and you measured it is n ±0.01% of RD.
Then would you mind to tell us what's the "residual resistance" of such a resistance box in your understanding?
Best,
CC
1) What is "RD"?[1]
2) I'm not making claims about a device's performance, so I don't have anything to justify.
3) Stop trying to avoid the points I've made about your claims[2] .
[1] Abbreviations and acronyms should be avoided or introduced, e.g. "Relative Density (RD)". That also applies to another acronym you have used: Photovoltaic (PV)
[2] Your customers will notice. People that might think of investing in your kickstarter will notice. Various TV programmes (e.g. Dragon's Den in the UK) illustrate that potential investors rapidly say "I'm out" (i.e. won't invest) when they feel people trying to get investment are avoiding answering their questions.
For the avoidance of doubt, I can believe that your device might sell. But if you oversell its performance, you might have devices returned.Hi tggzzz,
Sorry for my straight forward, I though you must be an expert who has rich experience. O.K. Let me explain:
1) RD is short for Reading, like FS (Full Scale), they 're frequently used Abbreviations to describe the accuracy of an instrument in different angle of view. (FS makes the tolerance value looks "better" in general)
2) (I really don't now how to make a comment of your words)
3) We have tried and tried and tried our best to explain our understanding and the mechanism of why we can say our resistance box have ZERO residual resistance. However, in return you just saying we are "trying to avoid your point"?! ARE YOU SERIOUS?
BTW, Abbreviations for PV is not what you have guessed. If you have read our datasheet or user manual, you probably already know. PV is short for "Process Value" and it's a concept borrowed from automatic control field.
And thanks for your kindly reminding (seriously), yes anyone can return the product if it's oversold. Trust me, we also hate such products.
“The IET-201 claims 0-10Mohm, residual 0.39ohm. The Yokagawa 278610 claims 0.1-111.111kohm, residual 0.023ohm.”
— Is there any problem if we claim 1-1.2 MOhm, and residual is 0? And how can you explain IET says "the OS-260 residual resistance is automatically factored out in output resistance value". Since according to your theory, how can "residual resistance" be factored out? It's always there, correct? And, if something be factored out, can we just say it's ZERO?
We just see things in different angle of view, it's nothing about right or wrong and even “honest” or "dishonest". If residual resistance is transparent to user, why we have to mention it and say it's 0.5 Ω to let people do meaningless calculation (-0.5 then +0.5, what for???)?
I'd like to address it again: For conventional resistance box they have to mark residual resistance is because they cannot find a way to make compensation for it; while for QR10, it's not a problem at all.
BR(@tggzzz BR is short for "Best Regards"),
CC
Hi tggzzz,
I saw your conversations with one of my colleagues. Please allow me to clarify a few things to avoid further confusion and misunderstanding.
- “Residual Resistance” is not an appropriate term to describe our product, mainly because we consider “Residual Resistance” as part of our output circuit. Unlike traditional resistance boxes, we measure and record this residual value in advance and compensate for this value accordingly when outputting the resistance.
Sorry, but that is a false statement. You do consider "residual resistance" appropriate, and you claim it is a defining advantage over your competitors' well-establised products. See your kickstarter page here...Quote
- If you would like to know this value, it is about 0.5 Ω. And FYI, since we also include an extra 0.5 Ω resistance in our output, this makes the minimum output range of our resistor 1 Ω. We have clearly specified this number in our spec. Say, if a client needs a 10-Ω output, our resistance will first produce a 9-Ω. With the 1-Ω extra "residual resistance"", the end output will be exactly 10-Ω
That's fine. But it doesn't match the terms used in your publicity.Quote
- We have no intention to hide any information or mislead others, but we just don’t think the term “Residual Resistance” applies to our product. Moreover, the end user does not have to pay attention to this value. However, we can explain this when needed.
- Moreover, we are not the first one adopting this idea. In fact, IET implements the same idea in their resistance boxes: https://www.ietlabs.com/os-260-resistance-decade-box-rtd-simulator.html. On their website, they clearly state: "Automatic Eliminates Residual Resistance - the OS-260 residual resistance is automatically factored out in output resistance value."
Now look at the information in your publicity (above). The IET-201 claims 0-10Mohm, residual 0.39ohm. The Yokagawa 278610 claims 0.1-111.111kohm, residual 0.023ohm.
Do you claim that just because some people/companies use a term, that use of the term becomes correct?
If you do claim that, then presumably you think it is correct to measure time in Siemens (i.e. conductance). Look at how many companies/people incorrectly specify times in "nS" or "mS"! That mistake can be made through ignorance or carelessness. I hope you aspire to avoid looking ignorant or careless!
Hi tggzzzzzz,
Good day!
Just one question, to be simplified, if for a resistance box claimed to be ±0.01% of RD:
1. You set 1.0 Ohm, then it can "tell you" the output is 1.0 Ohm , and you measured it is 1.0 ±0.01% of RD.
2. Moreover, not only for the point 1.0 Ohm, but it can be applied in the whole range "1.0 Ohm - 1.2M Ohm". i.e.
You set n Ohm, then it can "tell you" the output is n Ohm , and you measured it is n ±0.01% of RD.
Then would you mind to tell us what's the "residual resistance" of such a resistance box in your understanding?
Best,
CC
1) What is "RD"?[1]
2) I'm not making claims about a device's performance, so I don't have anything to justify.
3) Stop trying to avoid the points I've made about your claims[2] .
[1] Abbreviations and acronyms should be avoided or introduced, e.g. "Relative Density (RD)". That also applies to another acronym you have used: Photovoltaic (PV)
[2] Your customers will notice. People that might think of investing in your kickstarter will notice. Various TV programmes (e.g. Dragon's Den in the UK) illustrate that potential investors rapidly say "I'm out" (i.e. won't invest) when they feel people trying to get investment are avoiding answering their questions.
For the avoidance of doubt, I can believe that your device might sell. But if you oversell its performance, you might have devices returned.Hi tggzzz,
Sorry for my straight forward, I though you must be an expert who has rich experience. O.K. Let me explain:
I built my first novel measuring instrument in 1979/80. I spent 13 years in HPLabs. Therefore I know how little I know - the opposite of the Dunning-Kruger syndrome.Quote1) RD is short for Reading, like FS (Full Scale), they 're frequently used Abbreviations to describe the accuracy of an instrument in different angle of view. (FS makes the tolerance value looks "better" in general)
Despite my experience, I have never seen "RD" as an abbreviation for "reading". For measuring instruments specifications are usually of the form "% of reading + counts"Quote2) (I really don't now how to make a comment of your words)
3) We have tried and tried and tried our best to explain our understanding and the mechanism of why we can say our resistance box have ZERO residual resistance. However, in return you just saying we are "trying to avoid your point"?! ARE YOU SERIOUS?
Unfortunately yes; your response did not address the points I had made. Your response was about different points.QuoteBTW, Abbreviations for PV is not what you have guessed. If you have read our datasheet or user manual, you probably already know. PV is short for "Process Value" and it's a concept borrowed from automatic control field.
I knew PV couldn't have meant photovoltaic in this context! I just borrowed the expansion from a different field
Your "borrowing" an abbreviation from a completely different field and not explaining it is a mistake.QuoteAnd thanks for your kindly reminding (seriously), yes anyone can return the product if it's oversold. Trust me, we also hate such products.
Would you return a kickstarter investment?Quote“The IET-201 claims 0-10Mohm, residual 0.39ohm. The Yokagawa 278610 claims 0.1-111.111kohm, residual 0.023ohm.”
— Is there any problem if we claim 1-1.2 MOhm, and residual is 0? And how can you explain IET says "the OS-260 residual resistance is automatically factored out in output resistance value". Since according to your theory, how can "residual resistance" be factored out? It's always there, correct? And, if something be factored out, can we just say it's ZERO?
We just see things in different angle of view, it's nothing about right or wrong and even “honest” or "dishonest". If residual resistance is transparent to user, why we have to mention it and say it's 0.5 Ω to let people do meaningless calculation (-0.5 then +0.5, what for???)?
I'd like to address it again: For conventional resistance box they have to mark residual resistance is because they cannot find a way to make compensation for it; while for QR10, it's not a problem at all.
BR(@tggzzz BR is short for "Best Regards"),
CC
I've spent too much time on this topic.
TTFN.
BCC.
Then I can estimate your are almost the same age like my father - or maybe older. Just according to my own experience, you guys are in the golden age that can hardly be convinced (for this topic, probably no difference between the East and the West). And I should have shown you more respect if I had known your age and told you that "Yes, you're always right, old dad".
Since you're asking "Would I return a kickstarter investment?", my answer is "Absolutly, if it's oversell".
You know what, I just got an idea, I want to challege you - unlike in the old days Knights fight to each other - we engineers talk it with test results:
1. I'd like to send you one unit free sample, probably QR101B-2M-RX. To be fair, you have to handle the shipping cost (go to our Kickstarter page and pledge $5, I'll ask you for the shipping fee when I got the exact number)
2. If your test shows any point within the range 1 - 1.2 MΩ are over spec. I'll post that test result on our website www.eastwood.tech homepage, and highlighting it.
3. If your test shows QR10 is good, please withdraw your word that intended to imply we are "dishonest" under this topic.
To see is to believe. I hope you can accept it and then let's end our endless argument.
BR,
CC
Despite my experience, I have never seen "RD" as an abbreviation for "reading". For measuring instruments specifications are usually of the form "% of reading + counts"
Oh, yes. What you have termed "Process Value", I would call "Set Value".
Despite my experience, I have never seen "RD" as an abbreviation for "reading". For measuring instruments specifications are usually of the form "% of reading + counts"
FWIW, I've seen RD or %RD as short for "reading"/"percent of reading" in various manuals and datasheets over the years. Keithley tend to use "rdg" or "%rdg" (and have done so since the 80's at least) but I am sure have dropped the g in some cases (possibly as typos).
Mind you %RD can also mean "percent relative distance", "percent relative density", "percent reflectance" (with a lowercase d), and many more according to a quick Google search. Which does show that in most cases defining an abbreviation is critical to avoid misunderstanding even when it may seem obvious to you based on context.
Oh, yes. What you have termed "Process Value", I would call "Set Value".
No, PV and SV are quite different things. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process_variable
Normally Process Value (PV) would be a measured value as something like a PID controller attempts to reach a Set Point (SP), aka Set Value (SV)
In the case of this programmable resistor device it is more like the nearest calculated value to the SV that can be obtained using the various resistor combinations available and related calibration adjustments.
I have a question...
Is it possible to re-calibrate the device? And how accurate of a multimeter would you need to perform the recalibration yourself?
For the prototype, I just send you one, ok? There is no deadline for this test. Just suit yourself.
For the prototype, I just send you one, ok? There is no deadline for this test. Just suit yourself.
As mentioned previously and for the reasons mentioned previously, that would not be appropriate.
Such definition based on PV is reasonable since in most applications, what user need is not exactly 100 (if he does need exactly 100, then it must be something wrong about his design), instead, they only need to know the "actual" output value - PV.
For the prototype, I just send you one, ok? There is no deadline for this test. Just suit yourself.
As mentioned previously and for the reasons mentioned previously, that would not be appropriate.
No bugs inside, trust me :-)
But, anyway I cannot force you (although I really want to see the test results from you).
For the prototype, I just send you one, ok? There is no deadline for this test. Just suit yourself.
As mentioned previously and for the reasons mentioned previously, that would not be appropriate.
No bugs inside, trust me :-)
What on earth are you talking about?QuoteBut, anyway I cannot force you (although I really want to see the test results from you).
Why do you want to see results from out-of-calibration equipment?
What value would it add to your claims and/or your device?
For the prototype, I just send you one, ok? There is no deadline for this test. Just suit yourself.
As mentioned previously and for the reasons mentioned previously, that would not be appropriate.
No bugs inside, trust me :-)
What on earth are you talking about?QuoteBut, anyway I cannot force you (although I really want to see the test results from you).
Why do you want to see results from out-of-calibration equipment?
What value would it add to your claims and/or your device?
I mean, my FW code is clean and has no bugs :-)
I got an idea, maybe, why not use QR10 to calibrate your out-of-calibration equipment? Although it's not “resistance standard ”, might help.
What about free charging of shipping, my friend?
I repeat...
Why do you want to see results from out-of-calibration equipment?
What value would it add to your claims and/or your device?
QuoteI repeat...
Why do you want to see results from out-of-calibration equipment?
Such equipment might have rich experience, that's why I want to learn from it.
QuoteWhat value would it add to your claims and/or your device?
NOTHING for my claims & device. Instead, I might adding one gentleman‘s name to my friends' list.
How's that for a solution ?
- your are not hiding anything
- what i request is what i get at the terminals
- if the residual drifts it can be calibrated away.
- no user calculations needed.
I set a value on the device, it tries to set the output as close as possible and tells me the actual (calibrated) output value. I don't have to care about residual resistance. IMHO everything is fine.
The only thing that matters for me is the TC, aging of the resistors and if the relays degrade over time. TC is stated, I don't know if resistors normally change their values over time. Maybe humidity might be a problem?
If I understand it correctly, to get the lowest resistance all relays need to be closed. Is it possible to close all relays manually and just measure the resistance? That would be an easy way to see if the contact resistance of the relays changes as an indication for recalibration / relay maintenance.
Hi,QuoteI set a value on the device, it tries to set the output as close as possible and tells me the actual (calibrated) output value. I don't have to care about residual resistance. IMHO everything is fine.Great.QuoteThe only thing that matters for me is the TC, aging of the resistors and if the relays degrade over time. TC is stated, I don't know if resistors normally change their values over time. Maybe humidity might be a problem?1) TC is ok, in general it's much lower for most points (since different base resistors that with opposite slope can cancel each other on TC).
2) Aging is depending on your actual application. If only for light load application, Vishay 0204 MELF resistor is not that ”fragile“, especially for <=25 ppm grade.
For resistor, in general, the longer you use, the more stable it will be.
Anyway, NEVER overestimate such "general purpose" tool as "resistance standard", since they major in different fields.
3) As for humidity influence, to my experience it can be ignored since QR10 is almost sealed
(Just remember don't let water/dews in).
I will give it a try. So I can check it out and don't have to speculate how it performs.
Now I just have to wait until December...
I will give it a try. So I can check it out and don't have to speculate how it performs.
Now I just have to wait until December...
During the video the device seems to be making bursts of clicking sounds - probably from relays.
I received my unit today and doing a quick manual test all seems to work well. I also got a nice calibration/test report via email.
One thing that confused me was is you can switch between different display modes which seem to work differently with value entry and it wasn't accepting my input. It is hard to read the tiny display even with my reading glasses, so using PC control might be the way to go - that is really my intended use.
At least lots of button pressing eventually got me back to an entry mode that worked. Maybe I will real the manual properly now I have it in front of me.