Retired test engr. (Lockheed Martin). To me all the charts serve a purpose depending on your audience.
Even the enthusiast non-engr type could understand the 1st chart with a little guidance, especially if you tone down the background graphics which tend to distract my aging eyeballs a bit.

Nice work!

 

Right on.
I worked in the Elsegundo Attitude Control Propulsion Department.
Tell Dave Newman (of Purchasing Contracts) I said hi.

I hope all is well for you guys in El Segundo.

 

If it's worth anything, the A-B plot was what sold me on your 5/16" spacer.

P.S. Damn rocket scientists!
(I'm an aerospace engineer, but my work stays below FL400)

 

Fl400?

 

40,000 feet. We airplane guys speak in acronyms!

 

Maybe i have too high of hopes for the public school systems , but abscissa-ordinate graph reading like the ones you posted - containing comparative info - should be a must for everyone. Not to dog on anyone, just saying they're important.

Having said that, the graphs look great and display solid info. I've got a list of contractors that could stand to produce this level of work instead of using excel to butcher tech data. Keep up your great work!

Haha, Flight Level 400, nice! Good to know i'm in the company of fellow enginerds (MechE gone NDI Engr for DoD - Aircraft NDI, gotta love the acronyms for absolutely everything!).

-b

 

Graphs look good to me. To bad for spacer "A", glad I've got the latter.

 

Graphs are fine to me. On the other hand, my degree is in physics, so we use graphs all the time...

 

I wish more aftermarket companies would invest in such testing. I guess they don't because it would probably prove their parts don't work as advertised.

 

Yup, and Nissan Sport supported those MD numbers with their own data.
That's what I call 'closing the deal'.