Mike M:
Chris Pearson‍ 


That's very presumptuous of you considering you don't know what meters I have used. 


Once again taking into account all that we know about tolerances and circuit variations, if something is defined as the maximum then surely it should it should never be acceptable to have a value higher than the maximum as far as the regs are concerned. 

Please don't make the mistake of thinking that just because a meter displays 2 dp, it is accurate to 2 dp.


If maximum really must be a maximum, it follows that a meter must never under-read. This is rather like car speedos. In reality the meter might, within 99% confidence, measure on a 0 - 1 Ω scale +/- 0.05 Ω, so if it gives a reading of 1.00 Ω, 95% of the time, the true value will be between 0.95 Ω and 1.05 Ω.


If the true value must never be under-estimated, what we now do is oblige the meter to be accurate to within +0.1 Ω/-0.0 Ω. That is achieved by making the meter over-read, on average, by 0.05 Ω.


So in pursuit of making maximum = maximum, you have made the meter less accurate.


And you still have a 0.5% chance of under-reading.

Mike M:
Chris Pearson‍ 


That's very presumptuous of you considering you don't know what meters I have used. 


Once again taking into account all that we know about tolerances and circuit variations, if something is defined as the maximum then surely it should it should never be acceptable to have a value higher than the maximum as far as the regs are concerned. 

Please don't make the mistake of thinking that just because a meter displays 2 dp, it is accurate to 2 dp.


If maximum really must be a maximum, it follows that a meter must never under-read. This is rather like car speedos. In reality the meter might, within 99% confidence, measure on a 0 - 1 Ω scale +/- 0.05 Ω, so if it gives a reading of 1.00 Ω, 95% of the time, the true value will be between 0.95 Ω and 1.05 Ω.


If the true value must never be under-estimated, what we now do is oblige the meter to be accurate to within +0.1 Ω/-0.0 Ω. That is achieved by making the meter over-read, on average, by 0.05 Ω.


So in pursuit of making maximum = maximum, you have made the meter less accurate.


And you still have a 0.5% chance of under-reading.