Fraud and Ethics Violations and this is the best the Dems can come up with to run for president. I think JFK would roll over in his grave if he knew how far the lying Left has taken this country. Where Lies are praised in the Liberals Press and Truth is Demonized with hate and rage. Even demonizing our Peace Officers, the guy who is protecting citizens in our homes and on the streets of America. How can anyone respect a president like that.
you sir are part of the Dumb Americans that Gruber mentioned. Obama was not disappointed lots of dumb people iike your self.
"u cant fix stupid"
I know that, that's why you should use pad and pen and give your netbook to some other idiot with a little more brains than you have.
Ur momma was great last night..!
"Pay attention - the Soviets were already broke when they wanted to abandon all their ICBMs "
Wrong again, potty cleanser, they were maneuvering to avoid going broke. You can speculate they would have anyway, but let us deal with KNOWN facts. Reagan policy pushed them over the edge and delivered a $1-2 T peace dividend that got Clinton close to a balanced budget.
Pay attention - the Soviets were already broke when they wanted to abandon all their ICBMs that 1-2 trillion peace dividend could have been used by Reagan and would have given BushI a second term.
"You have learned not to actually try to solve the problems ..."
I have learned you are an idiot who cannot ask a question with any level of coherency. Why did you ask for quality assurance then when called say is wasn't about assurance?... because you are an uneducated science moron, that's why.
The specific correct answer to the specific question you posed is ***NO!***, idiot, quality ASSURANCE is not improved by a single after the fact calibration.
You are wrong in thinking it can be.
It is statistically LIKELY **BUT** not ASSURED, that an adjustment will render better results. If you were not a math, science and technical language dolt you would not have made the error or get "exited" about it after you have been corrected.
You are so fkucing lazy week after week you contrive a problem with a fatal flaw then whine when your basic error is pointed out. Have a fantasy your stupidity resulted in a "win" for you, fantasies of success is all you have.
You have learned not to actually try to solve the problems from repeated embarrassing failures on your part so now you take the route of embarrassing yourself by trying to nitpick the question apart with nonsense logic and thereby suffer the less embarrassment.
It still is a complete win for me as you look like an idiot.
u cant fix stupid, your the epitome of The trash that takes this country for granted! To think,our good soldiers die for rubbish like you.Please don't address me again,I don't deal on this level..Oh, have a good day..
"Aug 30, 2015 @ 8:20 AM"
"Laughing at Microsoft controversial data mining and privacy invasions within Windows 10? Well Windows 7 and Windows 8 users should laugh no longer as this most hated spying is now headed your way…
Software specialist site gHacks has discovered that Microsoft has pushed four new updates to both Windows 7 and Windows 8 which introduce new data collecting and user behaviour tracking features."
"Furthermore gHacks notes that ” these four updates ignore existing user preferences stored in Windows 7 and Windows 8 (including any edits made to the Hosts file) and immediately starts exchanging user data with vortex-win"
"Well hawcreek pizzd down his leg again but that is expected."
Look, math and science idiot YOU asked for quality ASSURANCE improvement, then when I pointed out your additional sampling did not "assure" anything you said it was not about assurance. Are you always that stupid and lying on every topic when confronted with your ignorance?
If this were isolated I could write off to your overt propensity to laziness, but "screw up" is your body of work on this board. From failing to get a fifth grade averaging problem, to confusing "exited" with magnetic engine "excite"ment. You are out of your league and apparently too stupid to realize that and move on.
In the real world people never "let" you win as you once whined for me to do for you, you EARN wins, a concept foreign to you because you are obviously poorly educated and lazy.
Well hawcreek pizzd down his leg again but that is expected.
Rational individuals with some math training would understand that the thermocouple system likely has a linear error function around the point of operation with the constant offset term being dominant.
Error = C + K*T
Obviously the constant offset term of the error is 15.
So the obvious answer would be that each temperature just needs 15 added to it for a much improved
estimate of the curing temperatures.
Any QA department would gladly accept this procedure as an improvement in the measurement process.
Extra credit. What could you do with another set of thermocouple and calibrator measurements at a different temperature in the range of usage.
"Assurance is not the goal. The best estimate is. "
Wait YOU, not I, stated your question as:
"Is David able to improve the measurements from the run so QA will have a better idea of the actual temperature conditions during the cure cycle."
Aside from the question itself being a conflict in terms, the "A" in QA is "assurance". So you are saying your stated goal was not actually the goal?
You see your problem is that you continue to try and venture into areas where you have no training and not a clue, math, physics, engineering, you're out of your league, typical of the nuts who push MMGW as fact for example, or don't know when to average for greater accuracy.
Are you trying to look stupid to pull my leg?
Assurance is not the goal. The best estimate is.
So you could do nothing with the data to provide a better ( more likely closer to true ) value for the actual temperatures.
"Actually there is a way, why don't you give it another think..
I think your lack of understanding of engineering and what you asked for has sunk your question once again. Assurance is not obtained with a single post fact calibration. QC is LIKELY improved, QA is not.
Actually there is a way, why don't you give it another think.. Or would you be incapable of proviiding improved temperature data based on the post calibration??
If so you would be more stupid than even I think you are.
Early in my career I worked in a nuclear plant. I eventually worked in three. One could not so much as use a tape measure on a critical application before it was calibrated AND DOCUMENTED against one from the bureau of standards. As a young guy I thought that a pain in the butt but it is the way to do QA.
In answer to the question QC could probably be improved but the A in QA is assurance and during the calibration with a single point, after the fact does not assure anything.