I would trust it that far for flat, square pieces of metal; not for an irregular shape with a rounded tip, mounted to an irregular rounded surface. For this use I’d want a steel ruler at minimum.
wouldn’t it be even better to measure the force the nose pushes with? it’s easy to quantify and the apparatus could be a fixed mount on the head - hook it up to a raspberry pi which reads out a list of questions, records the answer and the nose output for further analysis!
Of course the information gathered is faulty, they’re measuring 3mm changes with a tape measure
My tape measure has millimeter divisions? In fact til 5cm (I think, might be 10. I’ll check tomorrow) it has 0.5 mm lines too.
I mean I would use another tool probably, but if I only had my tape measure it would do unless the changes are smaller than like 0.25 mm.
Oh mine too, but that doesn’t make it the right tool for the job.
Agreed. For those not using metric, tape measures usually have 16ths of an inch which is 1.5 mm, and you can easily measure down to 32nds.
Metric tape is good to ~1mm +/- 0.5 in my experience.
I would trust it that far for flat, square pieces of metal; not for an irregular shape with a rounded tip, mounted to an irregular rounded surface. For this use I’d want a steel ruler at minimum.
wouldn’t it be even better to measure the force the nose pushes with? it’s easy to quantify and the apparatus could be a fixed mount on the head - hook it up to a raspberry pi which reads out a list of questions, records the answer and the nose output for further analysis!
There are certainly a number of accurate measurement techniques. I simply mentioned my personal minimum.
That’s very easily very accurate.
Only for a much looser definition of “very” than I seek in regards to the scientists asking the kinds of questions they are.