1,900/1,700,000 = 0.0011%
No! 1,900 / 1,700,000 =0.0011
To convert 0.0011 to a percent multiply by 100 getting 0.11%.
Check: 1,900 / 1,700,000, drop is about 1 /100 1000 which is 1 / 10 of a percent.
I'm not going to argue with you anymore. We are both right, just looking at it in a different form. In my world, 0.11 is eleven percent, with 1.0 being 100 percent.
In any event, it is a non issue failure rate.
No offense, but I think I *might* see what’s going on here:
You *may* be forgetting the “rule” of converting the decimal number to a percent because, in “your world” you’re used to seeing only decimals out to two places (eg: .11, .25, .33, etc).
In all these cases, the “percent representation” just ends up being the same number (eg: 11 percent, 25 percent, 33 percent).
But then this is causing you to do the same thing with decimal numbers with *more than* two decimals places:
.0011 becomes .0011% ... which is incorrect.
I know it’s confusing, but you gotta remember the rule, or come up with a memory aid like ... “to put the percent sign on the right you must move the decimal point two places to the right”
A problem for me: While I never had a problem with a previous platform, I couldn’t remember PID algorithm “control action” on the Rockwell platform the way they presented it ... SP-PV vs PV-SP (which is the “calculated error”, and makes perfect sense - except I could never remember which Controller Action each represented).
Finally came up with my own little memory aid: “Look at the first term (SP or PV). If the letters are in alphabetical order (eg: PV), that’s a “direct-acting” PID. If they’re in reverse order (SP), that’s reverse-acting. Drove me crazy there for a while.
So much of what we do everyday relies on memory. And as we age, portions of our memory capability start to wither away. Using memory aids like I’ve described above are one way to get around this, and at least give the *appearance* that we’ve still got our fastball (LOL!)