On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:37:53 -0500, Keith R. Williams Gave us:
Ahh... the truth rears it's ugly head. Your retard proofs have been qualified by this one. You can now enter the retard hall of shame.
In use 24/7! Imagine that.
He uses the word "Folks" here....that would be BongWaters subtle attempt at rationalizing his plagarism!
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:43:44 -0500, Keith R. Williams Gave us:
They are 0.15 micron, dipshit. Or less even. You couldn't be more clueless.
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:43:44 -0500, Keith R. Williams Gave us:
Sure you do, KeithTard. Sure...
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:47:45 -0500, Keith R. Williams Gave us:
Using HID activity as a cue against "activity" is very poor process management.
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:14:09 -0500, Keith R. Williams Gave us:
Yes, you are...
Yes, you are...
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 04:31:00 GMT, "Ross Mac" Gave us:
More proof of how retarded you really are.
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:04:59 GMT, "Anthony Fremont" Gave us:
And they happen all too often.
Tell me oh DimBulb....how do you choose the wattage on a resistor for a circuit you don't know the power rating?? I suppose you could just grab the biggest one off the shelf.....why bother you fool....Can you comprehend the word AMP CLAMP.....or the word APPROXIMATION??? As for the leads on the DMM.....You really have swallowed the bong water this morning....The leads would not make an appreciable difference measuring current at .11 ohms....your resistor alone was .1 ohms....And no you idiot....the lead resistance would not be an issue measuring voltage....I can't even believe you bought that up.... Go back to your bong, have a couple more puffs and post some more crap there DarkManure.....
Ah...some more of BongMatters' expanded vocabulary...
About 10 times larger than GreyMatters' brain!
It sounds as if you're talking about using an external shunt and a DMM on a 'high' current scale in parallel. Then the current would divide between the external shunt and resistance of the meter with leads. So in this setup, the lead resistance would be critical to the division of the current between the external shunt and the meter (with leads). This is *not* the recommended way to use a DMM for measuring current. Either use a it on a current scale in series with the load without an external shunt, or use it on a voltage measurment scale with an external shunt (such as the 0.1 ohm precision resistor you've mentioned). On most voltage scales, the internal impedance of DMM's exceeds 1Mohm so the lead resistance is *not* going to affect the 3 or 4 digit accuracy.
I got the impression from Ross that he was talking about putting the DMM in series with the load and no external shunt (obviously, the DMM has an
*internal* one). This is one way to measure the current in the circuit. In this setup, the meter lead resistance would only be significant if it affects the load current of the original circuit.Although a 10 amp load measured this way would mean the meter leads and internal shunt would dissipate ~21 watts, the error in the 120VAC circuit would not be 47%. If this were originally a 120VAC resistive load, to draw
10 amps would imply a resistance of 12 ohms. Putting the meter with its *internal* shunt in series would raise the circuit resistance to 12.21 ohms. The load with meter would draw 9.83 amps, an error of only 1.7% in the current measurement. Original power of the load 1200 Watts, calculated power using meter reading of 9.83 amps would be 1179.6 Watts (1.7% error) if you use the voltage measured 'upstream' of the meter.With lower current loads, the error is even smaller. (for a 120ohm load the measured current would be 0.998 amps versus 1.0)
FWIW, many DMM's that have a 'high current' range simply have a 0.1ohm resistor switched into the circuit between the two meter leads. Others have a special jack for this range, with just a 0.1 ohm or 0.01 ohm resistor between it and the common jack. The electronic meter is connected to the resistor to measure the voltage across it. Just as you had suggested doing with separate parts, Ross is doing with parts supplied and installed inside the meter by Fluke.
daestrom
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:04:59 GMT, "Anthony Fremont" Gave us:
My idle process is ALWAYS at zero as I ALWAYS have active processes, and two of them are 50% each ... One on each cpu. Nothing ever goes to sleep on this machine.... ever.
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:42:55 GMT, "Ross Mac" Gave us:
You need a two pound sledge in the head.
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:51:32 GMT, "Ross Mac" Gave us:
I cannot believe that you have no grasp of this concept. Line resistance has been discussed in this group several times over.
You are totally clueless if you think it doesn't matter for a DMMs current mode. It does. It places two more resistors in series with the load *outside* the shunt.
You are too goddamned retarded to get the concept of the error that gets introduced.
With the resistor shunt, there are NO leads to place in series with the load. Get it?
The DMM reading voltage will be as accurate as possible.
In the current mode, the DMM is not able to achieve that accuracy.
It was YOU that brought it up, dipshit. read your own posts. It was me that responded to you, outlining the differences, and you STILL haven't gotten it yet! You are 100% uneducable.
You keep projecting your flaws onto others. It is you that posts crap. Utter crap.
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:46:36 GMT, "daestrom" Gave us:
Wrong!
Place a resistor in series with the load, read VOLTAGE directly across the resistor, and do ohm's law. Nothing could be more simple or more accurate.
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:46:36 GMT, "daestrom" Gave us:
That is ALSO the method I mentioned. Doh!
For the shunted method. That is WHY I said that it is the most accurate.
It certainly *WILL* affect the reading if the meter's standard current mode is used.
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:46:36 GMT, "daestrom" Gave us:
Well duh. That is what the entire discussion is about.
DMM are not good for current measurements through 4 feet of additional leads if what one is characterizing is what a circuit uses, then one needs to look at only the circuit, not additional elements that introduce error.
You should really read back through the thread again, as you appear to have what I said twisted a bit.
message
Take another chug of the bong water doper boy! You'll fell like YOU got hit with the sledge!
Simple Ohms law Dimbulb..Line resistance would never be an issue here for this type of measurement....or does the word Approximation escape you .....And of course...more out of context snippets from TrollBoy...OH....it is me that posts that crap...well it seems to me you admitted, just last week, to being a drug abuser. And your posts over at alt.drugs.pot are well known. So nobody is projecting their flaws on you....you project them upon yourself. I'll check in later when you have a good buz on and try to read your posts.....I am sure there will be some entertainment value there....but certainly not educational value! The SnakeSkin boots are on .... RoachMatter is in the corner ... and Caaarrrrunch......the pest is eliminated!
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.