Hypothesis

0

1

Procedures and Data Collection

Analysis

Discussion/Conclusion

SCIENCE, *****es

Gentlemen, I present to you keyboard science, the like of which the world has never seen the like of which.Ok, so VesperSAINT and I were talking about the dome weighting on the FC660C in this thread . I have owned 3 different Leo FC660Cs, and based on my experience with them, I believe that the later models have substantially heavier weighted domes than the earlier ones, even approaching RF 55g territory. I have seen other users make similar comments on GH, so I wanted to resolve this.So, I did some real keyboard science.: There is no difference in dome weighting between my older model and my newer model: The dome weighting on the newer model is heavier than that of the old model.I currently have 2 FC660Cs in my possession. A blank one I purchased new from EK in Feb 2014 and have used as a daily driver since then. Serial #944. The second one, printed, I purchased from another user who got it as part of an early batch last year, and used it for 2-3 months. Serial #419. So, to the best of my knowledge, they have been used an approximately equal amount, canceling out any potential difference due to "break in."I popped off a bunch of keycaps on both keyboards, like this:Perfect for using nickels (5 grams each). The home row is nice and flat, and with surrounding keys popped off, there is no interference with the distribution of weight.I gently added nickels on top of each of these five keys until the domes collapsed, and recorded the weight in grams that finally triggered the collapse. When I was reaching the peak # of nickels, I gently slid them on from the side so as to not cause extra force due to downward acceleration. I did 10 trials for each of these five keys, and as my final data point, used the mode (hell yeah).Then, I did the same for the other four easily accessible keys on the home row (D, G, J, L) , for a total of nine data points per keyboard. Could have done more, obviously, but I was getting bored.From this summary data, I could see that there was an approx. 5g difference in means in the direction I expected.Tested equality of variances with f testAccepted the null hypothesis, variances are equal, did t-test for meansI rejected the null hypothesis with a two-tailed test at p=0.05, there was a statistically significant difference in dome weighting between the two models, the later one being heavier.The data supported and confirmed my hypothesis, however my sample size was super small and there are tons of potential confounding variables here. However, the best analysis I can do with what I have suggests the new Leo's are really different. I would like to compare these results to a similar nickel test on an RF 55g. Even though the newer model had a mean depression force of 57.2g, I think my RF 55g (which is not handy right now) nevertheless feels heavier.Good news: if any of you guys want to repeat the nickel test using the procedure I outlined above, I can collect your data and add it to my analysis and we can try to corroborate the hypothesis, and/or get a sense for what serial numbers have the new, heavier domes