Is a multimeter with 1,200,000 counts actually a 6½ digit multimeter?
$begingroup$
The Keysight 34465A Digital Multimeter is specified as a 6½ digit multimeter.
However, the meter is actually a 1,200,000 counts meter, since the meter wraps at 1.2, so if measuring a 1.19 kOhm resister, the reading is 1.190,000 kOhm, and if measuring a 1.21 kOhm resistor, the reading will be 01.210,00 kOhm.
Usually the ½ in specification of a multimeter means that it wraps as 2.0 (see EEVblog #26), for example a 3½ digit multimeter has 2000 counts, and can do reading up to 1999, so if measuring a 1.9 kOhm resister, the reading is 1.900 kOhm, and if measuring a 1.2 kOhm resistor, the reading will be 02.10 kOhm.
Based on this, I would think the Keysight 34465A Digital Multimeter should be specified as less than 6½ digits, for example log10(1200000) = 6.08 digit multimeter.
So, is a multimeter with 1,200,000 counts actually a 6½ digit multimeter?
multimeter
asked Dec 23 '18 at 17:24
EquipDevEquipDev
16518
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Keysight 34465A Digital Multimeter is specified as a 6½ digit multimeter.
However, the meter is actually a 1,200,000 counts meter, since the meter wraps at 1.2, so if measuring a 1.19 kOhm resister, the reading is 1.190,000 kOhm, and if measuring a 1.21 kOhm resistor, the reading will be 01.210,00 kOhm.
Usually the ½ in specification of a multimeter means that it wraps as 2.0 (see EEVblog #26), for example a 3½ digit multimeter has 2000 counts, and can do reading up to 1999, so if measuring a 1.9 kOhm resister, the reading is 1.900 kOhm, and if measuring a 1.2 kOhm resistor, the reading will be 02.10 kOhm.
Based on this, I would think the Keysight 34465A Digital Multimeter should be specified as less than 6½ digits, for example log10(1200000) = 6.08 digit multimeter.
So, is a multimeter with 1,200,000 counts actually a 6½ digit multimeter?
multimeter
asked Dec 23 '18 at 17:24
EquipDevEquipDev
16518
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Keysight 34465A Digital Multimeter is specified as a 6½ digit multimeter.
However, the meter is actually a 1,200,000 counts meter, since the meter wraps at 1.2, so if measuring a 1.19 kOhm resister, the reading is 1.190,000 kOhm, and if measuring a 1.21 kOhm resistor, the reading will be 01.210,00 kOhm.
Usually the ½ in specification of a multimeter means that it wraps as 2.0 (see EEVblog #26), for example a 3½ digit multimeter has 2000 counts, and can do reading up to 1999, so if measuring a 1.9 kOhm resister, the reading is 1.900 kOhm, and if measuring a 1.2 kOhm resistor, the reading will be 02.10 kOhm.
Based on this, I would think the Keysight 34465A Digital Multimeter should be specified as less than 6½ digits, for example log10(1200000) = 6.08 digit multimeter.
So, is a multimeter with 1,200,000 counts actually a 6½ digit multimeter?
multimeter
asked Dec 23 '18 at 17:24
EquipDevEquipDev
16518
$endgroup$
The Keysight 34465A Digital Multimeter is specified as a 6½ digit multimeter.
However, the meter is actually a 1,200,000 counts meter, since the meter wraps at 1.2, so if measuring a 1.19 kOhm resister, the reading is 1.190,000 kOhm, and if measuring a 1.21 kOhm resistor, the reading will be 01.210,00 kOhm.
Usually the ½ in specification of a multimeter means that it wraps as 2.0 (see EEVblog #26), for example a 3½ digit multimeter has 2000 counts, and can do reading up to 1999, so if measuring a 1.9 kOhm resister, the reading is 1.900 kOhm, and if measuring a 1.2 kOhm resistor, the reading will be 02.10 kOhm.
Based on this, I would think the Keysight 34465A Digital Multimeter should be specified as less than 6½ digits, for example log10(1200000) = 6.08 digit multimeter.
So, is a multimeter with 1,200,000 counts actually a 6½ digit multimeter?
multimeter
multimeter
asked Dec 23 '18 at 17:24
EquipDevEquipDev
16518
asked Dec 23 '18 at 17:24
EquipDevEquipDev
16518
asked Dec 23 '18 at 17:24
EquipDevEquipDev
16518
asked Dec 23 '18 at 17:24
EquipDevEquipDev
16518
asked Dec 23 '18 at 17:24
EquipDevEquipDev
16518
16518
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The 1.999999 is already a lie. A 6.5 digit meter should have $10^{6.5}$ = 3162377 "counts".
So, extending the lie, meters that have 3999 counts are described as 3-3/4 digit, when in fact they're barely 3.5 digit.
Lies, damn lies, and marketing. Maybe a class action suit is in order if you can claim you were hoodwinked by their fake "marketing digits".
To answer your title question, the meter in question is a 6.08 digit multimeter if it has 1,200,000 counts.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:13
Spehro PefhanySpehro Pefhany
209k5160422
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Lies, damn lies and "alternate reality" are syn's.
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
Dec 23 '18 at 19:25
1
$begingroup$
Or "half digit" isn't a precisely defined concept.
$endgroup$
– immibis
Dec 24 '18 at 3:12
2
$begingroup$
A half digit is well-defined in information theory. It is especially useful in arithmetic coding.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:12
$begingroup$
Expressed in another way, a multimeter with 1.2 million counts has 20 bits of precision (similar to a 20-bit ADC on a sound card), or 121.6 dB of dynamic range.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:13
$begingroup$
Heck, even saying it should measure to 5, i.e. 3.5 count as meaning to 5000 (0000-4999) as in a linear interpolation, would make more sense than this scheme.
$endgroup$
– The_Sympathizer
Dec 24 '18 at 14:47
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
I think designing a more than 6 digit meter is a pretty impressive feat.
If you get off on precise numbers, then you're right, sure, go rain on their (publicity department's) parade.
It's interesting that a device intended for extreme precision should fall down in the precision of how it's described.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 18:24
Neil_UKNeil_UK
77.1k283176
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Do you have a reference for definition of digit in this context, is there a requirement for the span to be specific range (i.e. can the half digit be in the decimal with lower top range)? To me it seems probable that someone took the effective bit resolution of the ADC and publish the effective decimal digits. It is disconcerting that Keysight of all folks does not have their definition in the datasheet.
$endgroup$
– crasic
Dec 23 '18 at 18:33
1
$begingroup$
The only fair definition of digits is $log_{10}(count)$ but everyone lies, 1999 count is closer to 3.3 than 3.5
$endgroup$
– Jasen
Dec 23 '18 at 18:56
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The additional overrange digit referred to as a 1/2 digit.
The overflow resulting resolution ratio with range and its name is insignificant anyways.
What really counts is accuracy.
That 1/2 digit typically shows only the values 0 or 1.
There may be some exceptions that are designed for +/-2.99 ... such as resistance overflow.
However anyone can take credit for it's definition, that's also insignificant. It is just common wisdom.
I once had a 10 1/2 digit digital counter too but resolution is insignificant usually compared to accuracy.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:06
Sunnyskyguy EE75Sunnyskyguy EE75
68k22398
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("schematics", function () {
StackExchange.schematics.init();
});
}, "cicuitlab");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "135"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f413585%2fis-a-multimeter-with-1-200-000-counts-actually-a-6%25c2%25bd-digit-multimeter%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The 1.999999 is already a lie. A 6.5 digit meter should have $10^{6.5}$ = 3162377 "counts".
So, extending the lie, meters that have 3999 counts are described as 3-3/4 digit, when in fact they're barely 3.5 digit.
Lies, damn lies, and marketing. Maybe a class action suit is in order if you can claim you were hoodwinked by their fake "marketing digits".
To answer your title question, the meter in question is a 6.08 digit multimeter if it has 1,200,000 counts.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:13
Spehro PefhanySpehro Pefhany
209k5160422
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Lies, damn lies and "alternate reality" are syn's.
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
Dec 23 '18 at 19:25
1
$begingroup$
Or "half digit" isn't a precisely defined concept.
$endgroup$
– immibis
Dec 24 '18 at 3:12
2
$begingroup$
A half digit is well-defined in information theory. It is especially useful in arithmetic coding.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:12
$begingroup$
Expressed in another way, a multimeter with 1.2 million counts has 20 bits of precision (similar to a 20-bit ADC on a sound card), or 121.6 dB of dynamic range.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:13
$begingroup$
Heck, even saying it should measure to 5, i.e. 3.5 count as meaning to 5000 (0000-4999) as in a linear interpolation, would make more sense than this scheme.
$endgroup$
– The_Sympathizer
Dec 24 '18 at 14:47
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
The 1.999999 is already a lie. A 6.5 digit meter should have $10^{6.5}$ = 3162377 "counts".
So, extending the lie, meters that have 3999 counts are described as 3-3/4 digit, when in fact they're barely 3.5 digit.
Lies, damn lies, and marketing. Maybe a class action suit is in order if you can claim you were hoodwinked by their fake "marketing digits".
To answer your title question, the meter in question is a 6.08 digit multimeter if it has 1,200,000 counts.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:13
Spehro PefhanySpehro Pefhany
209k5160422
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Lies, damn lies and "alternate reality" are syn's.
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
Dec 23 '18 at 19:25
1
$begingroup$
Or "half digit" isn't a precisely defined concept.
$endgroup$
– immibis
Dec 24 '18 at 3:12
2
$begingroup$
A half digit is well-defined in information theory. It is especially useful in arithmetic coding.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:12
$begingroup$
Expressed in another way, a multimeter with 1.2 million counts has 20 bits of precision (similar to a 20-bit ADC on a sound card), or 121.6 dB of dynamic range.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:13
$begingroup$
Heck, even saying it should measure to 5, i.e. 3.5 count as meaning to 5000 (0000-4999) as in a linear interpolation, would make more sense than this scheme.
$endgroup$
– The_Sympathizer
Dec 24 '18 at 14:47
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
The 1.999999 is already a lie. A 6.5 digit meter should have $10^{6.5}$ = 3162377 "counts".
So, extending the lie, meters that have 3999 counts are described as 3-3/4 digit, when in fact they're barely 3.5 digit.
Lies, damn lies, and marketing. Maybe a class action suit is in order if you can claim you were hoodwinked by their fake "marketing digits".
To answer your title question, the meter in question is a 6.08 digit multimeter if it has 1,200,000 counts.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:13
Spehro PefhanySpehro Pefhany
209k5160422
$endgroup$
The 1.999999 is already a lie. A 6.5 digit meter should have $10^{6.5}$ = 3162377 "counts".
So, extending the lie, meters that have 3999 counts are described as 3-3/4 digit, when in fact they're barely 3.5 digit.
Lies, damn lies, and marketing. Maybe a class action suit is in order if you can claim you were hoodwinked by their fake "marketing digits".
To answer your title question, the meter in question is a 6.08 digit multimeter if it has 1,200,000 counts.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:13
Spehro PefhanySpehro Pefhany
209k5160422
edited Dec 23 '18 at 19:54
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:13
Spehro PefhanySpehro Pefhany
209k5160422
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:13
Spehro PefhanySpehro Pefhany
209k5160422
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:13
Spehro PefhanySpehro Pefhany
209k5160422
209k5160422
1
$begingroup$
Lies, damn lies and "alternate reality" are syn's.
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
Dec 23 '18 at 19:25
1
$begingroup$
Or "half digit" isn't a precisely defined concept.
$endgroup$
– immibis
Dec 24 '18 at 3:12
2
$begingroup$
A half digit is well-defined in information theory. It is especially useful in arithmetic coding.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:12
$begingroup$
Expressed in another way, a multimeter with 1.2 million counts has 20 bits of precision (similar to a 20-bit ADC on a sound card), or 121.6 dB of dynamic range.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:13
$begingroup$
Heck, even saying it should measure to 5, i.e. 3.5 count as meaning to 5000 (0000-4999) as in a linear interpolation, would make more sense than this scheme.
$endgroup$
– The_Sympathizer
Dec 24 '18 at 14:47
|
show 2 more comments
1
$begingroup$
Lies, damn lies and "alternate reality" are syn's.
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
Dec 23 '18 at 19:25
1
$begingroup$
Or "half digit" isn't a precisely defined concept.
$endgroup$
– immibis
Dec 24 '18 at 3:12
2
$begingroup$
A half digit is well-defined in information theory. It is especially useful in arithmetic coding.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:12
$begingroup$
Expressed in another way, a multimeter with 1.2 million counts has 20 bits of precision (similar to a 20-bit ADC on a sound card), or 121.6 dB of dynamic range.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:13
$begingroup$
Heck, even saying it should measure to 5, i.e. 3.5 count as meaning to 5000 (0000-4999) as in a linear interpolation, would make more sense than this scheme.
$endgroup$
– The_Sympathizer
Dec 24 '18 at 14:47
1
1
$begingroup$
Lies, damn lies and "alternate reality" are syn's.
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
Dec 23 '18 at 19:25
$begingroup$
Lies, damn lies and "alternate reality" are syn's.
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
Dec 23 '18 at 19:25
1
1
$begingroup$
Or "half digit" isn't a precisely defined concept.
$endgroup$
– immibis
Dec 24 '18 at 3:12
$begingroup$
Or "half digit" isn't a precisely defined concept.
$endgroup$
– immibis
Dec 24 '18 at 3:12
2
2
$begingroup$
A half digit is well-defined in information theory. It is especially useful in arithmetic coding.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:12
$begingroup$
A half digit is well-defined in information theory. It is especially useful in arithmetic coding.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:12
$begingroup$
Expressed in another way, a multimeter with 1.2 million counts has 20 bits of precision (similar to a 20-bit ADC on a sound card), or 121.6 dB of dynamic range.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:13
$begingroup$
Expressed in another way, a multimeter with 1.2 million counts has 20 bits of precision (similar to a 20-bit ADC on a sound card), or 121.6 dB of dynamic range.
$endgroup$
– Nayuki
Dec 24 '18 at 7:13
$begingroup$
Heck, even saying it should measure to 5, i.e. 3.5 count as meaning to 5000 (0000-4999) as in a linear interpolation, would make more sense than this scheme.
$endgroup$
– The_Sympathizer
Dec 24 '18 at 14:47
$begingroup$
Heck, even saying it should measure to 5, i.e. 3.5 count as meaning to 5000 (0000-4999) as in a linear interpolation, would make more sense than this scheme.
$endgroup$
– The_Sympathizer
Dec 24 '18 at 14:47
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
I think designing a more than 6 digit meter is a pretty impressive feat.
If you get off on precise numbers, then you're right, sure, go rain on their (publicity department's) parade.
It's interesting that a device intended for extreme precision should fall down in the precision of how it's described.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 18:24
Neil_UKNeil_UK
77.1k283176
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Do you have a reference for definition of digit in this context, is there a requirement for the span to be specific range (i.e. can the half digit be in the decimal with lower top range)? To me it seems probable that someone took the effective bit resolution of the ADC and publish the effective decimal digits. It is disconcerting that Keysight of all folks does not have their definition in the datasheet.
$endgroup$
– crasic
Dec 23 '18 at 18:33
1
$begingroup$
The only fair definition of digits is $log_{10}(count)$ but everyone lies, 1999 count is closer to 3.3 than 3.5
$endgroup$
– Jasen
Dec 23 '18 at 18:56
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think designing a more than 6 digit meter is a pretty impressive feat.
If you get off on precise numbers, then you're right, sure, go rain on their (publicity department's) parade.
It's interesting that a device intended for extreme precision should fall down in the precision of how it's described.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 18:24
Neil_UKNeil_UK
77.1k283176
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Do you have a reference for definition of digit in this context, is there a requirement for the span to be specific range (i.e. can the half digit be in the decimal with lower top range)? To me it seems probable that someone took the effective bit resolution of the ADC and publish the effective decimal digits. It is disconcerting that Keysight of all folks does not have their definition in the datasheet.
$endgroup$
– crasic
Dec 23 '18 at 18:33
1
$begingroup$
The only fair definition of digits is $log_{10}(count)$ but everyone lies, 1999 count is closer to 3.3 than 3.5
$endgroup$
– Jasen
Dec 23 '18 at 18:56
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think designing a more than 6 digit meter is a pretty impressive feat.
If you get off on precise numbers, then you're right, sure, go rain on their (publicity department's) parade.
It's interesting that a device intended for extreme precision should fall down in the precision of how it's described.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 18:24
Neil_UKNeil_UK
77.1k283176
$endgroup$
I think designing a more than 6 digit meter is a pretty impressive feat.
If you get off on precise numbers, then you're right, sure, go rain on their (publicity department's) parade.
It's interesting that a device intended for extreme precision should fall down in the precision of how it's described.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 18:24
Neil_UKNeil_UK
77.1k283176
answered Dec 23 '18 at 18:24
Neil_UKNeil_UK
77.1k283176
answered Dec 23 '18 at 18:24
Neil_UKNeil_UK
77.1k283176
answered Dec 23 '18 at 18:24
Neil_UKNeil_UK
77.1k283176
77.1k283176
$begingroup$
Do you have a reference for definition of digit in this context, is there a requirement for the span to be specific range (i.e. can the half digit be in the decimal with lower top range)? To me it seems probable that someone took the effective bit resolution of the ADC and publish the effective decimal digits. It is disconcerting that Keysight of all folks does not have their definition in the datasheet.
$endgroup$
– crasic
Dec 23 '18 at 18:33
1
$begingroup$
The only fair definition of digits is $log_{10}(count)$ but everyone lies, 1999 count is closer to 3.3 than 3.5
$endgroup$
– Jasen
Dec 23 '18 at 18:56
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Do you have a reference for definition of digit in this context, is there a requirement for the span to be specific range (i.e. can the half digit be in the decimal with lower top range)? To me it seems probable that someone took the effective bit resolution of the ADC and publish the effective decimal digits. It is disconcerting that Keysight of all folks does not have their definition in the datasheet.
$endgroup$
– crasic
Dec 23 '18 at 18:33
1
$begingroup$
The only fair definition of digits is $log_{10}(count)$ but everyone lies, 1999 count is closer to 3.3 than 3.5
$endgroup$
– Jasen
Dec 23 '18 at 18:56
$begingroup$
Do you have a reference for definition of digit in this context, is there a requirement for the span to be specific range (i.e. can the half digit be in the decimal with lower top range)? To me it seems probable that someone took the effective bit resolution of the ADC and publish the effective decimal digits. It is disconcerting that Keysight of all folks does not have their definition in the datasheet.
$endgroup$
– crasic
Dec 23 '18 at 18:33
$begingroup$
Do you have a reference for definition of digit in this context, is there a requirement for the span to be specific range (i.e. can the half digit be in the decimal with lower top range)? To me it seems probable that someone took the effective bit resolution of the ADC and publish the effective decimal digits. It is disconcerting that Keysight of all folks does not have their definition in the datasheet.
$endgroup$
– crasic
Dec 23 '18 at 18:33
1
1
$begingroup$
The only fair definition of digits is $log_{10}(count)$ but everyone lies, 1999 count is closer to 3.3 than 3.5
$endgroup$
– Jasen
Dec 23 '18 at 18:56
$begingroup$
The only fair definition of digits is $log_{10}(count)$ but everyone lies, 1999 count is closer to 3.3 than 3.5
$endgroup$
– Jasen
Dec 23 '18 at 18:56
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The additional overrange digit referred to as a 1/2 digit.
The overflow resulting resolution ratio with range and its name is insignificant anyways.
What really counts is accuracy.
That 1/2 digit typically shows only the values 0 or 1.
There may be some exceptions that are designed for +/-2.99 ... such as resistance overflow.
However anyone can take credit for it's definition, that's also insignificant. It is just common wisdom.
I once had a 10 1/2 digit digital counter too but resolution is insignificant usually compared to accuracy.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:06
Sunnyskyguy EE75Sunnyskyguy EE75
68k22398
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The additional overrange digit referred to as a 1/2 digit.
The overflow resulting resolution ratio with range and its name is insignificant anyways.
What really counts is accuracy.
That 1/2 digit typically shows only the values 0 or 1.
There may be some exceptions that are designed for +/-2.99 ... such as resistance overflow.
However anyone can take credit for it's definition, that's also insignificant. It is just common wisdom.
I once had a 10 1/2 digit digital counter too but resolution is insignificant usually compared to accuracy.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:06
Sunnyskyguy EE75Sunnyskyguy EE75
68k22398
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The additional overrange digit referred to as a 1/2 digit.
The overflow resulting resolution ratio with range and its name is insignificant anyways.
What really counts is accuracy.
That 1/2 digit typically shows only the values 0 or 1.
There may be some exceptions that are designed for +/-2.99 ... such as resistance overflow.
However anyone can take credit for it's definition, that's also insignificant. It is just common wisdom.
I once had a 10 1/2 digit digital counter too but resolution is insignificant usually compared to accuracy.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:06
Sunnyskyguy EE75Sunnyskyguy EE75
68k22398
$endgroup$
The additional overrange digit referred to as a 1/2 digit.
The overflow resulting resolution ratio with range and its name is insignificant anyways.
What really counts is accuracy.
That 1/2 digit typically shows only the values 0 or 1.
There may be some exceptions that are designed for +/-2.99 ... such as resistance overflow.
However anyone can take credit for it's definition, that's also insignificant. It is just common wisdom.
I once had a 10 1/2 digit digital counter too but resolution is insignificant usually compared to accuracy.
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:06
Sunnyskyguy EE75Sunnyskyguy EE75
68k22398
edited Dec 23 '18 at 19:20
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:06
Sunnyskyguy EE75Sunnyskyguy EE75
68k22398
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:06
Sunnyskyguy EE75Sunnyskyguy EE75
68k22398
answered Dec 23 '18 at 19:06
Sunnyskyguy EE75Sunnyskyguy EE75
68k22398
68k22398
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Electrical Engineering Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f413585%2fis-a-multimeter-with-1-200-000-counts-actually-a-6%25c2%25bd-digit-multimeter%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
