Big Tea wrote: ↑24 Nov 2025, 17:57
Farnborough wrote: ↑23 Nov 2025, 20:53
Reasonably, any metal measured when hot will be larger than when cold.
It's advantageous to the competitors to measure as soon as possible that component, as it'll never be as big as that after cooling.
They don't say how much smaller it was when measured in front of McL team personnel, unlikely to be much.
The first measurement it seems is recorded for scrutineering purposes.
The micrometer is going to be a 0~25mm range in its gateway. This is effectively "self" calibrating in that at closed position (zero) it can be confirmed It's reading correctly, either digital or vernier scale. This is normal and no obvious suspicious circumstances are apparent from the reported words.
If there were other "device" used at last GP it doesn't look like its within this particular measurement and record.
There are exceptions where uneven wear on the anvil or a drop slightly misaligning the shaft from 90 deg can have an effect, but in high accuracy checks a test plate would probably show it up and I have little doubt everyone who verified it used their own instrument, so I believe you would be correct.
That would be a fault, and obvious too though. Any method of measurement would carry the onus of working correctly.
The device is intrinsically accurate and without specific routine to calibrate that would rely on outside reference.
My point is, that its highly unlikely to false report or be logically questioned as to accuracy successfully in this use scenario.
The data recorded can ge relied upon, and was agreed with by the team personnel. There's no questionable part of the scrutineering.
