Sharp EL501X2BWH Engineering/Scientific Calculator

(SHARP, you should be able to come up with something better! I had a SHARP scientific calculator (EL-1) with me at the time. 514), from 1984 to this spring, a period of 37 years(!). Unfortunately, it developed problems with the batteries and the battery cover, and it eventually stopped working. I have a STEM background (undergraduate degree in math, physics, and biophysics, PhD in biochemistry/biophysics, and university professor in biochemistry/biophysics). My old EL- was a favorite of mine. 514 was ideal for my needs and included some amusing extra features (such as decimal to hexadecimal conversion). As a result, when it died, I went on the hunt for a new SHARP scientific calculator. The EL- I ordered the EL501X2 because the 514 was no longer in stock. br>br>As soon as it arrived, I put it to use. I often use exponential functions and logarithms (these operations are common in chemical equilibria and kinetics) and noticed that some of the results were incorrect. When the argument was obtained by some operation, it appears that the EL501X2 is unable to handle exponential functions with negative arguments. (br>br>For example, each keystroke is enclosed in square brackets [] and comments are enclosed in parentheses (): [/-] [/-] [/-] [/-] [/-] [/-] [/-] [/-] [/-] ] (as shown on the display: 1) [ex] [2nd F] (display: 3678 , which is correct)br>br>Now try [0] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [- (display shows: ] [1] [=] ] [1] [=] ] [1] [=] ] [1 1) [ex] [2nd F] (display: 718 This is incorrect! Rather than e-, it's e 1. 1)br>br>In other words, if you enter a negative number, e. g. , if you enter a negative number, e. g. , if you enter a negative number, e. g. , It's fine if you take 1 and use it as an argument for an exponential function. However, if the result of an operation is a negative number, e. g. The negative sign will be ignored if you take 1 and use it as an argument for the exponential function. (br>br>One more thing: [0] [- (display shows: ] [1] [=] ] [1] [=] ] [1] [=] ] [1 1) [+/- ] (as shown on the display: 1) [ex] [2nd F] (display: 3678 As a result, the calculator now believes that we had - 1 was substituted for 1 in the equation, and e- was calculated. 1 (rather than e 1): (br>br>10x does exactly what it says: [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] (display shows: ] [1] [=] ] [1] [=] ] [1] [=] ] [1 1) [10x] [2nd F] (display: Other functions I've used so far have seemed to work fine, but I haven't tried them all. br>br>Another minor point: br>The FE button, which switches between standard and scientific notation, only works after you've done something with the number, not on the number itself: br>[30000] [FE] (continues to show: 30000)br>[30000] [*] [1] [=] (shows: 30000, 30000, 30000, 30000, 30000, 30000, 30000, 30000, 30000, 30000, 30000 30000) [FE] (shows 3 exp 04)br>On other calculators, you can switch between the notations for the number entered without first doing anything with the numbers. br>br>One last thing: When you press the buttons, they make a clicking sound. It's a lot louder than it was on the old EL-C. 514! This isn't a big deal for me, but it can be very distracting when students use calculators during quizzes or exams in a quiet classroom. br>br>I contacted Sharp calculators' customer service in the United States (sharpcalculators. com). com) about the sign drop in the exponential function, but I never received a response. br>I exchanged the calculator on Amazon, but the second one functions identically to the first. So it's not just one faulty unit; it's either a bad batch or the model as a whole. I'll keep the second unit so I can demonstrate to my students what a calculator should not be used for. br>br>Bottom line: If all you need to do is add, subtract, and multiply, this calculator will most likely suffice. But I need a calculator that can do more than just add and subtract, and the sign drop in the exponential function is a major issue. Furthermore, following the problems with the sign in the exponential, I'm not sure I trust the calculator's other operations. br>It's extremely disappointing to see that SHARP is no longer capable of producing a reliable calculator. I've made the switch to Texas Instruments TI-84 Plus. 30Xa.

Forrest WHITTAKER

| Oct 11, 2021

As far as scientific calculators go, it's quite functional. It's LR44 powered, which means it can work in low light, which a solar calculator might struggle with, but it also means it can run out of batteries and require replacement. I'm not sure how significant that is; it's not like it's a back-up plan. It can't be used in the dark because it's not lit or anything. The base conversion is useful if you need it, and the statistics are adequate, but who does statistics on a calculator these days? The lack of a reciprocal key, which is very useful for fraction inputs in longer calculations, and easy flipping of the current result before multiplying or dividing by the next term, is the biggest thing I don't like. Yes, the "yx" key can be used to enter - 1 However, this is more work, and hand calculators are designed for quick calculations rather than complex calculations that would be better handled by a computer. br>br>I also like calculators that have a key for formatting engineering/scientific notation. There's an "F" on this one. > E" key that converts to scientific format but not engineering that groups to powers in 1E3 steps which is very convenient for 3 significant figures or 1% engineering tasks It's not difficult to mentally move the point and change the exponent, but it's more difficult if you're tired or in a hurry. br>br>My personal favorite is the CASIO FX- Sharp EL501X2BWH is a nice package with a protective cover, similar to the FX-260 solar, but this one works fine. 260 It's a little less expensive, but it's missing a few of the FX-series' features. 260 you'll almost certainly never use. However, they are all fairly similar, as are all modern scientific calculators, so the extra couple of dollars buys you a slightly more convenient button selection and battery-free operation, which is worth it in my opinion.

Milan Graves

| Jul 01, 2021

I frequently convert between decimal and hexadecimal base systems as part of my systems programming work. I didn't want to waste any more screen real estate with a calculator program, and I didn't want to have to juggle that window among the many others that needed to be open, so I just wanted a simple calculator that could do the job. Converting between base systems isn't as common on low-cost calculators as it is on symbolic or graphing calculators, which surprised me. However, I already own a TI-83 Plus calculator. For my simple needs, the 8x series calculator is simply too big and consumes too many batteries. I'm very pleased with this calculator because it meets my needs. br>br>It's easy enough to use that I can recall all but the more complicated functions. Although the manual could have used some more descriptive text, I was able to figure out everything without too much difficulty. Although I doubt I'll ever use some of the more advanced features, I was pleasantly surprised by a few of them, such as the ability to convert decimal degrees to degrees, minutes, and seconds. Work with complex numbers, or convert from Cartesian to polar coordinates. br>br>The only gripe is that the front panel is made of a gleaming plastic that attracts fingerprints like a magnet. When you first get it, it appears to be cool, but as soon as you press any buttons, it becomes filthy. Someone in the product design department made a bad decision there, but it doesn't detract from what is otherwise a fantastic little calculator.

Cayden Gentry

| Feb 22, 2021