Thread: A Novel Idea For Those That Can't Afford A Sensitive Level

Originally Posted by th62

You've missed my point: If the cheap Chinese level is only $35 and accurate to .02mm - why would you pay $198 for something with a nice brand name if it is only half as accurate?

I'm not sure whether your query was addressed to Ray or me, but my previous answer does address your question -

Originally Posted by Michael G

It's about the reliability of that claim and the likelihood that the claim is still valid in a a few year's time. While a randomly selected cheap level may indeed check out, if the design and production of the item is poorly executed the chance of the next level also achieving that specification is lower than if it was from a recognised quality supplier.

To put it another way, when the company I work for buys measuring equipment, they want to know that the brand that is being bought will provide repeatable results during the life of the item; that the equipment will still be serviceable after some time; that parts are available if needed and that the manufacturer's claims about the accuracy/ precision/ repeatability can be believed.

Leaving places of origin to one side, that is why a brand is worth something. I would pay $198 for a brand name level that is half as "accurate"* as a $35 one of unknown providence if I was making a long term purchase because accuracy/ precision/ repeatability/ maintainability are important to me. I feel that I can trust the claims made by a brand name manufacturer more that I can the claims of someone who may not be there tomorrow.

While getting even more OT, framing this in terms of the old argument that "Chinese equipment is just as good as the more expensive stuff" which is where I feel you are headed, yes - good things can be made in China but like just about everything you get what you pay for. I know that if I got 100 Mitutoyo levels (or Starrett or Wyler or...) and lined them up I would get results that are close to what they should be (accuracy) that would group pretty closely (repeatability) and within the limits of the resolution of the instrument (precision). If one was not reading as expected, it would be able to be adjusted so it was. If I got 100 of those $35 levels I would expect a much wider spread of results (less repeatability), which would in turn mirror their lesser precision and accuracy. Further more, adjustment to bring back to truth may not be possible (although far more likely to be an issue).

Getting back to topic, I applaud the guy in the video giving something like this a go - however, like some others I am concerned that what he has made is not as good as he thinks it is and hope that it doesn't inspire others to make something similar in the belief that they have something "as good as". I would however like them to be inspired to try and improve on it, realising the short comings.

* "Accuracy" is how close the reading is to the absolute value; "precision" is a measure of how closely one value can be discriminated from the next and "repeatability" is how well the instrument will indicate when repeated readings are taken. In this context, 0.02mm relates to the precision of the instrument.

Michael

I'm not sure why this is even referred to as a "level". By anybody. It's a glass tube containing an air bubble in some butane. The video quite clearly showed the angle of the glass tube varying, and the fulcrum point was in no particular position. As Machtool quite correctly tried to point out, but it seems was overlooked by some, it doesn't become a "level" until it's reversed and proven. Even if it may not be accurate, a level can still be proven. It's quite clear from the design that it will never prove this way, as such it will remain a glass tube containing an air bubble in some butane. End of story. Sorry, nice try. Epic fail.

As far as justifying on the basis of cost, I don't know why anyone would spend even, say $20, on some parts to produce something that is functionally useless for its intended purpose, when for little more money a simple part could be purchased off the shelf to create a level that rivals commercial alternatives costing hundreds of dollars?

Originally Posted by Big Shed

I have edited some posts and removed one other, could we please keep this debate at a non-personal level without stooping to personal insults?

We seem to have at least one member (with previous form) here, who is hell bent on upsetting the apple cart.

Please cease and desist or firmer action WILL be taken.

Thanks. Glad someone else is watching.


Dave the turning cowboy

turning wood into art