JS220 Validation spreadsheet question & notes

Issues
1

I was using the verification spreadsheet (JS220 Version 1.0) to cross check an SMU (which is now past it’s calibration due) and was getting some red cells in the 15V range due to entering negative voltages in the “Applied” column. It looks like the formula for the “Expected Accuracy” calculations for voltages -12 through 14.5 (in E17:E26) differ from the -14.5 (in E16) calculation by not using the ABS operator. It looks like the other ranges all have the ABS operator for the column C value.
If I copy E16 and paste to the cells below it the “As Measured” cells are green.Can you confirm if that change is appropriate/correct?

I noticed a few other extremely minor issues:

  1. The 2 V range has a couple of empty unit cells (but it’s obvious they’re “V”).
  2. The voltage ranges don’t have a space between the number and the unit as the SI convention indicates.
  3. It looks like most of the number formatting is set up to show the least significant digit plus another, but the 10 A range does not show any and the 2 V range only shows one.
  4. It might be nice to have fields for the equipment used to test the Joulescope - I usually add this to the right of the Joulescope info. Having it in a fixed place could allow it to be used with scripts.

Having a modifiable spreadsheet is very helpful for assessing both the Joulescope as well as other equipment. I’ve added other measurement points for some ranges to allow minimizing the uncertainty for the specific supply, and the modifications are easy to make by copying adjacent rows - it’s really nice and straightforward.

1 Like
2

Thanks @Jeremy for taking the time to provide this feedback!

I agree with all the issues you found, and they are now fixed in js220_validate_1_1.xlsx. The spreadsheet now has a “Changelog” tab, too, which shows what we changed.

The link above is directly for the 1.1 version. Future visitors should download the most recent version.

If you notice anything else, please post again!