Referring to Table 4, it is quite clear that the difference uu in ppm is appreciable. The result of the present approach is positive which means an increase in uncertainty. Increasing the uncertainty value is more authentic due to adding another source of error to the system which is more realistic and comprehensible. On the other hand, the negative results of E(s) of [19] (−0.013 ppm) means improvements of the uncertainty by considering the effect of quantization, which is misleading and unpredictable beside the complexity of its application [18], [19]. rj r Conclusion In this paper, the effects of the quantization process errors on the resolution uncertainty of the digital indicators were analyzed. From this novel analysis, it is concluded that the measured analog stimulus is usually relocated at the indicated value. A simple proposed mathematical model was developed to identify and evaluate the quantization effect on resolution uncertainty error ( rj uu). The proposed approach is straightr forward and simple to apply to all types of ADC indicators. From this developed model, it is concluded that the quantization effects presented by the modified resolution uncertainty u are slightly affected by the upper bounds (b) of the visible zone of the digital indicator, while the index of the indication N-bit wordlengths is significantly affecting the quantization error and hence the resolution uncertainty. This mathematicalhttps://microchipdeveloper.com/adc:ade-gain-error https://microchipdeveloper.com/adc:adc-gain-error