By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more
Forum sponsored by:
Forum sponsored by Allendale

Issue 269 Temperature Controller Article

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
Zebethyal10/08/2018 09:19:29
171 forum posts

I believe there have been a large number of typographical issues regarding the temperature values as presented in this article.

For example the K type thermocouple is described as having a range of 200-23000F or 96-12600C, where this should actually read 200-1300F or 96 - 1260C, the 'degree' symbols have been somehow become transcribed as an additional 0 throughout much of the article.

There is also an inconsistency with reporting the numbers, sometimes 400C and sometimes with a gap between the number and the C, such as 400 C, again adding to the confusion regarding the actual temperature being discussed, which in reality was only 40C.

I also appreciate that such items are not easy to pick up on any proof reading, as these are all still valid temperature values, however, in a technical article such as this one where most of the article is about precise temperature control, the values as shown are wildly misleading .

XD 35110/08/2018 09:31:24
avatar
1006 forum posts
38 photos

Could also be a printing issue and once it has gone to print the Editor has no control.

Unlike some magazines they don't have a team of proof readers so occasionally errors slip through and it is the same with many , many other publications !

Zebethyal10/08/2018 09:37:58
171 forum posts

I am sure it is a printing issue, which is a shame for such a well written article, since it adds an unnecessary level of confusion.

Zebethyal10/08/2018 09:48:08
171 forum posts

Unfortunately, I am not even sure that the thermocouple values are correct, as on reading the manual for the JLD612, it shows a K type thermocouple as -328 to 2372F or -200 to 1300C, so it looks like the preceding '-' sign has been dropped from the lower values shown for the thermocouples as well as the F and C values being transposed.

Neil Wyatt10/08/2018 09:51:41
avatar
Moderator
14407 forum posts
611 photos
70 articles

We've discussed this issue and this article before

The author used superscript zeros as degree symbols, and I missed them when preparing the article (I have to change them all to the word degrees or a proper degree symbol).

In the setting process all formatting is stripped out and they become ordinary zeroes, that said I should have spotted them when proofing, but didn't.

Neil

Zebethyal10/08/2018 10:11:35
171 forum posts

Thanks Neil,

I have only just read the article, and did look to see if there was a previous posting regarding this issue, but did not see one - maybe I should have looked harder.

As I mentioned above, even if it had been proof read, the issues may not have been picked up as they were still valid temperatures, if a little high.

not done it yet10/08/2018 10:25:37
2138 forum posts
11 photos

The sooner we all use the Kelvin temperature scale in all technical articles, the better.smiley

No problem with zeros, noughts, ‘O’ s, sub- or super-scripts, degrees, Celsius, Centigrade, Fahrenheit, Reamur, Rankine, Absolute, any abbreviations of the preceding temperature scales, or anything else. Just plain K after the number.

XD 35110/08/2018 10:51:05
avatar
1006 forum posts
38 photos

We forgive you Neil !

Nidy ,

You forgot the most important temperature scale of all time - PTBC - Pyrometerus temperus Beerus Correctus !

Michael Gilligan10/08/2018 10:53:45
avatar
11738 forum posts
517 photos
Posted by not done it yet on 10/08/2018 10:25:37:

The sooner we all use the Kelvin temperature scale in all technical articles, the better.smiley

.

I agree ... but perhaps that is inevitable angel

**LINK**

https://www.model-engineer.co.uk/forums/postings.asp?th=136275&p=1

MichaelG.

Roderick Jenkins10/08/2018 11:02:32
avatar
1624 forum posts
409 photos

I've given up using the degree symbol. In the context of model engineering or, indeed, everyday life 200C or 300F are unlikely to be confused with 200 Coulombs or 300 Farads.

Rod

Neil Wyatt10/08/2018 19:30:34
avatar
Moderator
14407 forum posts
611 photos
70 articles
Posted by Roderick Jenkins on 10/08/2018 11:02:32:

I've given up using the degree symbol. In the context of model engineering or, indeed, everyday life 200C or 300F are unlikely to be confused with 200 Coulombs or 300 Farads.

The average pedant doesn't need to be confused, merely piqued

Neil

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of Model Engineer or Model Engineers' Workshop? Use our magazine locator links to find your nearest stockist!

Find Model Engineer & Model Engineers' Workshop

Support Our Partners
Eccentric July 5 2018
Expo Tools July 14
Eccentric Engineering
Meridienne Sept 5
Ausee.com.au
Warco
Shapiro
TRANSWAVE Converters
emcomachinetools
ChesterUK
SPG Tools October Seventeen
Allendale Electronics
Sarik
Subscription Offer

Latest "For Sale" Ads
Latest "Wanted" Ads
Get In Touch!

Do you want to contact the Model Engineer and Model Engineers' Workshop team?

You can contact us by phone, mail or email about the magazines including becoming a contributor, submitting reader's letters or making queries about articles. You can also get in touch about this website, advertising or other general issues.

Click THIS LINK for full contact details.

For subscription issues please see THIS LINK.

Digital Back Issues

Social Media online

'Like' us on Facebook
Follow us on Facebook

Follow us on Twitter
 Twitter Logo

Pin us on Pinterest