Comparison of air temperature calibrations

M. Heinonen (Corresponding Author), M. Anagnostou, J. Bartolo, S. Bell, R. Benyon, R.A. Bergerud, J. Bojkovski, N. Böse, C. Dinu, D. Smorgon, K. Flakiewicz, M.J. Martin, S. Nedialkov, M.B. Nielsen, S. Oğuz Aytekin, J. Otych, M. Pedersen, M. Rujan, N. Testa, E. Turzó-AndrásM. Vilbaste, M. White

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

European national metrology institutes use calibration systems of various types for calibrating thermometers in air. These were compared to each other for the first time in a project organized by the European Association of National Metrology Institutes (EURAMET). This EURAMET P1061 comparison project had two main objectives: (1) to study the equivalence of calibrations performed by different laboratories and (2) to investigate correlations between calibration methods and achievable uncertainties. The comparison was realized using a pair of 100 {\omega} platinum resistance thermometer probes connected to a digital thermometer bridge as the transfer standard. The probes had different dimensions and surface properties. The measurements covered the temperature range between -40°C and +50°C , but each laboratory chose a subrange most relevant to its scope and performed measurements at five nominal temperature points covering the subrange. To enable comparison between the laboratories, comparison reference functions were determined using weighted least-squares fitting. Various effects related to variations in heat transfer conditions were demonstrated but clear correlations to specific characteristics of calibration system were not identified. Calibrations in air and liquid agreed typically within ±0.05°C at +10°C and +80°C . Expanded uncertainties determined by the participants ranged from 0.02°C to 0.4°C and they were shown to be realistic in most cases.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1251-1272
JournalInternational Journal of Thermophysics
Volume35
Issue number6-7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014
MoE publication typeA1 Journal article-refereed

Fingerprint

air
thermometers
metrology
resistance thermometers
temperature
probes
calibrating
surface properties
equivalence
platinum
coverings
heat transfer
liquids

Keywords

  • air temperature
  • calibration
  • EURAMET
  • heat transfer
  • intercomparison

Cite this

Heinonen, M., Anagnostou, M., Bartolo, J., Bell, S., Benyon, R., Bergerud, R. A., ... White, M. (2014). Comparison of air temperature calibrations. International Journal of Thermophysics, 35(6-7), 1251-1272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10765-014-1654-9
Heinonen, M. ; Anagnostou, M. ; Bartolo, J. ; Bell, S. ; Benyon, R. ; Bergerud, R.A. ; Bojkovski, J. ; Böse, N. ; Dinu, C. ; Smorgon, D. ; Flakiewicz, K. ; Martin, M.J. ; Nedialkov, S. ; Nielsen, M.B. ; Oğuz Aytekin, S. ; Otych, J. ; Pedersen, M. ; Rujan, M. ; Testa, N. ; Turzó-András, E. ; Vilbaste, M. ; White, M. / Comparison of air temperature calibrations. In: International Journal of Thermophysics. 2014 ; Vol. 35, No. 6-7. pp. 1251-1272.
@article{8cd430c418264f85b2fdc0ad6ca7d61a,
title = "Comparison of air temperature calibrations",
abstract = "European national metrology institutes use calibration systems of various types for calibrating thermometers in air. These were compared to each other for the first time in a project organized by the European Association of National Metrology Institutes (EURAMET). This EURAMET P1061 comparison project had two main objectives: (1) to study the equivalence of calibrations performed by different laboratories and (2) to investigate correlations between calibration methods and achievable uncertainties. The comparison was realized using a pair of 100 {\omega} platinum resistance thermometer probes connected to a digital thermometer bridge as the transfer standard. The probes had different dimensions and surface properties. The measurements covered the temperature range between -40°C and +50°C , but each laboratory chose a subrange most relevant to its scope and performed measurements at five nominal temperature points covering the subrange. To enable comparison between the laboratories, comparison reference functions were determined using weighted least-squares fitting. Various effects related to variations in heat transfer conditions were demonstrated but clear correlations to specific characteristics of calibration system were not identified. Calibrations in air and liquid agreed typically within ±0.05°C at +10°C and +80°C . Expanded uncertainties determined by the participants ranged from 0.02°C to 0.4°C and they were shown to be realistic in most cases.",
keywords = "air temperature, calibration, EURAMET, heat transfer, intercomparison",
author = "M. Heinonen and M. Anagnostou and J. Bartolo and S. Bell and R. Benyon and R.A. Bergerud and J. Bojkovski and N. B{\"o}se and C. Dinu and D. Smorgon and K. Flakiewicz and M.J. Martin and S. Nedialkov and M.B. Nielsen and {Oğuz Aytekin}, S. and J. Otych and M. Pedersen and M. Rujan and N. Testa and E. Turz{\'o}-Andr{\'a}s and M. Vilbaste and M. White",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1007/s10765-014-1654-9",
language = "English",
volume = "35",
pages = "1251--1272",
journal = "International Journal of Thermophysics",
issn = "0195-928X",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "6-7",

}

Heinonen, M, Anagnostou, M, Bartolo, J, Bell, S, Benyon, R, Bergerud, RA, Bojkovski, J, Böse, N, Dinu, C, Smorgon, D, Flakiewicz, K, Martin, MJ, Nedialkov, S, Nielsen, MB, Oğuz Aytekin, S, Otych, J, Pedersen, M, Rujan, M, Testa, N, Turzó-András, E, Vilbaste, M & White, M 2014, 'Comparison of air temperature calibrations', International Journal of Thermophysics, vol. 35, no. 6-7, pp. 1251-1272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10765-014-1654-9

Comparison of air temperature calibrations. / Heinonen, M. (Corresponding Author); Anagnostou, M.; Bartolo, J.; Bell, S.; Benyon, R.; Bergerud, R.A.; Bojkovski, J.; Böse, N.; Dinu, C.; Smorgon, D.; Flakiewicz, K.; Martin, M.J.; Nedialkov, S.; Nielsen, M.B.; Oğuz Aytekin, S.; Otych, J.; Pedersen, M.; Rujan, M.; Testa, N.; Turzó-András, E.; Vilbaste, M.; White, M.

In: International Journal of Thermophysics, Vol. 35, No. 6-7, 2014, p. 1251-1272.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of air temperature calibrations

AU - Heinonen, M.

AU - Anagnostou, M.

AU - Bartolo, J.

AU - Bell, S.

AU - Benyon, R.

AU - Bergerud, R.A.

AU - Bojkovski, J.

AU - Böse, N.

AU - Dinu, C.

AU - Smorgon, D.

AU - Flakiewicz, K.

AU - Martin, M.J.

AU - Nedialkov, S.

AU - Nielsen, M.B.

AU - Oğuz Aytekin, S.

AU - Otych, J.

AU - Pedersen, M.

AU - Rujan, M.

AU - Testa, N.

AU - Turzó-András, E.

AU - Vilbaste, M.

AU - White, M.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - European national metrology institutes use calibration systems of various types for calibrating thermometers in air. These were compared to each other for the first time in a project organized by the European Association of National Metrology Institutes (EURAMET). This EURAMET P1061 comparison project had two main objectives: (1) to study the equivalence of calibrations performed by different laboratories and (2) to investigate correlations between calibration methods and achievable uncertainties. The comparison was realized using a pair of 100 {\omega} platinum resistance thermometer probes connected to a digital thermometer bridge as the transfer standard. The probes had different dimensions and surface properties. The measurements covered the temperature range between -40°C and +50°C , but each laboratory chose a subrange most relevant to its scope and performed measurements at five nominal temperature points covering the subrange. To enable comparison between the laboratories, comparison reference functions were determined using weighted least-squares fitting. Various effects related to variations in heat transfer conditions were demonstrated but clear correlations to specific characteristics of calibration system were not identified. Calibrations in air and liquid agreed typically within ±0.05°C at +10°C and +80°C . Expanded uncertainties determined by the participants ranged from 0.02°C to 0.4°C and they were shown to be realistic in most cases.

AB - European national metrology institutes use calibration systems of various types for calibrating thermometers in air. These were compared to each other for the first time in a project organized by the European Association of National Metrology Institutes (EURAMET). This EURAMET P1061 comparison project had two main objectives: (1) to study the equivalence of calibrations performed by different laboratories and (2) to investigate correlations between calibration methods and achievable uncertainties. The comparison was realized using a pair of 100 {\omega} platinum resistance thermometer probes connected to a digital thermometer bridge as the transfer standard. The probes had different dimensions and surface properties. The measurements covered the temperature range between -40°C and +50°C , but each laboratory chose a subrange most relevant to its scope and performed measurements at five nominal temperature points covering the subrange. To enable comparison between the laboratories, comparison reference functions were determined using weighted least-squares fitting. Various effects related to variations in heat transfer conditions were demonstrated but clear correlations to specific characteristics of calibration system were not identified. Calibrations in air and liquid agreed typically within ±0.05°C at +10°C and +80°C . Expanded uncertainties determined by the participants ranged from 0.02°C to 0.4°C and they were shown to be realistic in most cases.

KW - air temperature

KW - calibration

KW - EURAMET

KW - heat transfer

KW - intercomparison

U2 - 10.1007/s10765-014-1654-9

DO - 10.1007/s10765-014-1654-9

M3 - Article

VL - 35

SP - 1251

EP - 1272

JO - International Journal of Thermophysics

JF - International Journal of Thermophysics

SN - 0195-928X

IS - 6-7

ER -

Heinonen M, Anagnostou M, Bartolo J, Bell S, Benyon R, Bergerud RA et al. Comparison of air temperature calibrations. International Journal of Thermophysics. 2014;35(6-7):1251-1272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10765-014-1654-9