Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 29 May 2012 22:00:36 -0700, John Robertson
wrote:

So is that how some researchers get accuracy to .001 using
hundreds/thousands of devices calibrated to 0.1?

They probably bribed the peer reviewers or made some manner of quid
pro quo deal. The lab assistant that ran the numbers probably didn't
care about signifigant figures or the difference between resolution
and accuracy. If it fits in the speadsheet box, it must be correct.

Incidentally, at 0.001C resolution, the heat emitted by the observer
becomes signifigant.

I'll confess to having done the ice and boiling water calibration
ceremony to various thermometers while in college, but not to a
wireless sensor.
http://www.in.gov/isdh/files/ThermometerCalibration__3_.pdf
Put the sensor in a baggie and suck the air out then see how it measures
up...

If you let everything equalize to ambient temperature, you'll
eventually get an accurate reading. Incidentally, many black plastic
shipping bags are somewhat transparent to IR.


I meant to seal the device in a bag and then put in boiling (@ sea
level) or ice water for calibration. Sorry that I wasn't clear enough,
my bad!

John :-#)#

--
(Please post followups or tech enquiries to the newsgroup)
John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9
Call (604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games)
www.flippers.com
"Old pinballers never die, they just flip out."