home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   sci.electronics.design      Electronic circuit design      143,102 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 141,611 of 143,102   
   John R Walliker to Don Y   
   Re: Carbon monoxide sensor   
   11 Dec 25 20:19:55   
   
   From: jrwalliker@gmail.com   
      
   On 11/12/2025 20:03, Don Y wrote:   
   > On 12/11/2025 6:37 AM, John R Walliker wrote:   
   >>> What's it do at 1 cm?  Or, do we just pretend there is an   
   >>> absence of effect at distances closer than 30 cm?  Why   
   >>> 30 and not 10?  Or, 500?   
   >>   
   >> In the case of the horn system you mentioned there is a   
   >> public address mode.  For that to work without gross   
   >> distortion there is a fundamental limit of about 191dBspl   
   >> when the negative peaks of a sine wave go to zero pressure.   
   >> This applies even inside the horn.   
   >> The system however has 18 horns, so at short distances   
   >> it becomes impossible to come up with a meaningful   
   >> measurement.  Where do you measure from?   
   >   
   > Do you think THEORY just stops working without measurements?   
   >   
   >>> My point is, that is a "respectible" manufacturer targeting   
   >>> a "knowledgeable" community.  If they had chosen to   
   >>> extend their data to shorter distances, they aren't   
   >>> "making stuff up".   
   >>>   
   >>> Consumer markets operate under entirely different assumptions.   
   >>>   
   >>> What makes one "aspirin" more expensive than another?   
   >>>   
   >>> If I tell you that this screwdriver is hardened to Rc 65,   
   >>> would you purchase it over another hardened to Rc 64?  66?   
   >>>   
   >>> Why do you purchase one brand of "batteries" over another?   
   >>> Is there any reliable data on their capacities?  Have you   
   >>> done any specific research?   
   >>   
   >> I avoid Duracell because I have found that they leak more often   
   >> than other brands that I have tried.  I do sometimes test the   
   >> capacities of batteries, especially if I am about to buy a large   
   >> number.   
   >   
   > Do you think people keep track of that *quantitatively*?   
   >   
   > Do you think they keep track of how often the blade on a particular   
   > brand of screwdriver deforms?  Or, the tip sheared off?  Or, the   
   > application in which said deformations take place (to make "fair"   
   > comparisons)?   
   >   
   > Or, if the aspirins they purchased "last time" came with any   
   > digestive problems?  If the weight of the "actives" inside each   
   > tablet was consistent?  Their dissolution times?  Yet, the price   
   > varies by about a FACTOR of *4*!   
   >   
   > You get a "feel" for a product and make recommendations to others   
   > based on that "feel".  And, use advertised information to decide   
   > when to move up or down that relative scale based on whether   
   > you want something "more" or "less".   
   >   
   >>> Ivory soap claims to be "99.44% pure" -- why aren't other   
   >>> soap manufacturers marketing "99.45% pure" products?   
   >>   
   >> Sometimes there are regulatory limits to the claims that can   
   >> be made.   
   >   
   > In most cases, there aren't.  There isn't a 99.45% product because   
   > Ivory already cornered that "purity" appeal.  What does "purity"   
   > in a bar of soap mean?  Does it make you cleaner?  Less dermatological   
   > reactions?  What does the scent of Irish Spring have to do with   
   > cleanliness?  Does the abrasiveness of Lava make a real difference?   
   >   
   > I buy LED light bulbs.  They all CLAIM to have lifespans of 50,000+   
   > hours.  Yet, I've replaced most of them, already, even under the   
   > "recommended operating conditions".  Should I look for another   
   > product that claims 100,000+ hours?   
   >   
   > Engineers get used to absolutes.  It's psychologically comforting   
   > to be able to lean on some "hard numbers" to bolster your claims.   
   > Consumers put little faith in those.  *Designing* for that market   
   > is entirely different than for a regulated market or one where   
   > the customer expects metrics to apply.  There, you don't want the   
   > customer to remember any negative aspects of your product that   
   > will discourage him from a repeat purchase.   
   >   
   > A "300 dB horn" just has to SOUND loud.  REALLY loud.   
   >   
      
   How can companies compete fairly when their claims are so   
   obviously made up?   
   Why should I believe one impossible claim is better or worse than   
   another impossible claim?   
   John   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca