Negative gauge pressure comparison: Range -95 kPa to +95 kPa

Markku Rantanen, Sari Saxholm, Aykurt Altintas, Richard Pavis, Guliko Peterson

    Research output: Book/ReportReport

    Abstract

    A pressure comparison in the negative gauge pressure range was arranged in 2009. The participating laboratories were CMI / Czech Republic, FORCE Technology / Denmark, AS Metrosert / Estonia and MIKES / Finland. Negative gauge pressures are a common range for pressure calibrations although uncertainty requirements are generally not very high. The results from the four participating laboratories suggest that calibrations in the negative gauge pressure range are not as easy as expected. Some of the claimed uncertainties were perhaps too optimistic, and the large variation in the results made it difficult to generate consistent reference values. The agreement of the results at positive gauge pressures on the same transfer standard was much better. Obviously there is a need for further comparisons in the negative gauge pressure range. The transfer standard was a multifunction calibrator Beamex MC5 equipped with an internal pressure module for the range -100 kPa to 104 kPa in the gauge mode. The resolution of the display was 0,001 kPa. The stability of the transfer standard was good. The comparison was registered as EURAMET Project No. 1131 and as the supplementary comparison EURAMET.M.P.-S8 in the BIPM key comparison database.
    Original languageEnglish
    Place of PublicationEspoo
    PublisherCentre of Metrology and Accreditation (MIKES)
    Number of pages34
    ISBN (Print)978-952-5610-57-4
    Publication statusPublished - 2009
    MoE publication typeD4 Published development or research report or study

    Publication series

    SeriesMIKES Publication
    NumberJ6
    ISSN1235-5704

    Keywords

    • interlaboratory comparison
    • negative gauge pressure

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Negative gauge pressure comparison: Range -95 kPa to +95 kPa'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this