Thanks so much to our Patrons!
Thanks so much to our Patrons! [Apr 2020]
|
A Patreon of the Ahts ♥Ada Kerman ♥Alexander Botkin ♥Ali ♥Amanda Chou ♥Amelia Meyer ♥Amos Onn ♥Amy Poli ♥Andrew Swanton ♥Anna Izenman ♥Anna Walsh ♥Anthony Gilberti ♥BearPerson ♥Becky Landry ♥Billy ♥Blake Rothwell ♥Blorg³ ♥Boreas ♥Brandon Lu ♥Bria Morgan ♥Brian Kim ♥Bryce Chidester ♥Caleb Amos ♥calicosarah ♥Capucine ♥Charlie Owen ♥Chris Russell ♥Christine ♥Christopher ♥Christopher Chung ♥Christopher Ingram ♥Christopher Schurman ♥Cindy Norton ♥Damon Hart-Davis ♥Daniel Cornelius ♥Daniel DeRosia ♥Daniel Karnes ♥Dave Coleman ♥David Drum ♥Dean Bailey ♥Delta-Fox ♥Doctor Professor ♥Dylan ♥Elaine Short ♥Erik Edberg ♥Ewe Knee Knot Know ♥Faith Nelson ♥Frábás Tamás ♥Giles Sutcliffe ♥Glade ♥HardZero ♥Henrik Lindhe ♥Holly B ♥IcyMidnight ♥Ilana ♥James A. Thornton ♥Jamie Furtner ♥Jed Spradling ♥Jeff Grafton ♥Jens Banning ♥Jeph Jacques ♥Joanna ♥Joe ♥Juan Chanco ♥Justin Sorbello ♥K Fung ♥Kai ♥kaitou ♥Karl Dahlberg ♥Kathleen Ralph ♥kelly bush ♥Kevin ♥Kris Lipscombe ♥Lauren Singer ♥Lewis Allen ♥Lisa ♥llearch n'n'daCorna ♥Logan Arias ♥Maddy B ♥Matt Zweig ♥Matthew Powell ♥Mattis Jensen ♥Melissa Huston ♥Melissa Nurmi ♥Mike Purvis ♥NJGR ♥Parabet ♥Patrick Bernier ♥Patrick Hallal ♥Patrick Naish ♥Peter Kempson ♥Peter Rönnmo ♥Phil ♥Phill Peach ♥pikafoop ♥Probably Human ♥Raphael ♥Ricardo Bittencourt ♥RJAR ♥Scott ♥Sean Horn ♥Sinogen ♥Stacy Nicole ♥Stefan Schmiedl ♥Sune Ewert Astrup ♥Svend Andersen ♥Tanya ♥Thomas Pritchard ♥Tim Willmott ♥Tina Klassen ♥Tina Nichols ♥Wayne Dang ♥William Hector ♥Wolfgang Behrens ♥Yurgan Urjack ♥ |
Join them on Patreon!
Comic Info:
September 15, 2014 - 11:48pm
My company does a fair bit of R and D and it's really fun. It's amazing how much work can go into answering a simple question... and sometimes the best answer you can come up with is "maybe...?"
Topic:
Tags:
Comments
Sorry, was the "definitely less than eight" intentional?
Unless we're talking fractional tubes (whoah!), "seven" would do. Unless, unless he meant "definitely no more than eight"?
(What, you thought I was going to complain about "less" vs "fewer"?)
But it might be six!
Worst case might be six? Why bring in eight, then?
Adds a 1.3 Factor of Safety. Depends on how critical the function of the device is. If it's very critical, I'd go with 9 or 10 tubes (3x3 array or 2x5), since that bumps things up a bit more. Less critical, 7 (packs nicely in a hex-pack) since you're not risking as much by pushing down the FS.
If it breaking means people die, more like 20 or so. Or you can go with the Brooklyn Bridge's factor of safety and use 36 tubes, if you're designing it for use by the public for a hundred plus years.
The answer was apparently so interesting, or took so long, that literally half the people changed shirt colors.
Funny; reminded me of this story, where Richard Feynman, working on the Connection Machine, determined the optimal number of buffers to use in routing would be 5, but using differential equations. His analysis was distrusted and they attempted to go with 7 as suggested by a more conventional (for computer architecture), discrete analysis, but the chips with 7 buffers turned out to be too big to manufacture efficiently (for reasons presumably unrelated to either analysis), so they thought they'd rely on Feynman's work and reduced the number of buffers to 5, and the computer working with the chips such manufactured turned out to work OK.
In honor of this event, the US government even created a new agency, the ATF - Always Trust Feynman.
The organization you normally think of as the ATF is actually the BATFE. They just shorten the acronym because the US believes in the Rule of Three, as noted by its obsession with 3 letter acronyms for agencies. (CIA, NSA, FBI, ATF,...)
(In case text strips the humor from this, the only true statement here is that the proper acronym for the ATF should be the BATFE - Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives....or for something more pronouncable, the Boat-fae)
Given time, engineers can do quantified qualification really well. If you don't have time to do it right, give the favorite SWAG of a friend of mine, "X, plus or minus 2 dB." (Caveat emptor, only attempt this with quantities that don't normally scale exponentially.)