Comparison CCEM-K4.2017 of 10 pF and 100 pF capacitance standards

Author:

Gournay P,Rolland B,Chayramy R,Overney F,Yang Y,Huang L,Lu Z,Wang Y,Koffman A,Johnson L,Xie R,Belliss J,Giblin S,Thornton B,Schurr J,Lee J,Semenov Y

Abstract

In 2017 the Consultative Committee for Electricity and Magnetism (CCEM) commissioned a key comparison of electrical capacitance standards, the second time this quantity has been compared since the implementation of the Mutual Recognition Agreement by the Comité International des Poids et Mesures (CIPM—MRA) in 1999. This comparison—CCEM-K4.2017—was piloted by the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM) and included seven National Metrology Institutes (NMI) belonging to four Regional Metrology Organizations. The measuring scheme adopted for the comparison was that of a star comparison consisting of a set of bilateral comparisons between the participating NMIs and the BIPM, whose capacitance reference base served as a common reference. For each of the bilateral comparisons, the measurands were the capacitance values of 10 pF travelling standard capacitors belonging to the NMIs and, optionally, the values of 100 pF standards. All the participants have been chosen from those able to realize and maintain a representation of the farad at the best known level of accuracy. Four of them, including the BIPM, were taking their traceability from dc or ac quantum Hall effect standards and, the four others, from a calculable capacitor. The comparison results analysis have evidenced an agreement within about ±5 parts in 108 for the mandatory 10 pF measurements and within about ±10 parts in 108 for the optional 100 pF measurements. Also, excepted for one of the participants, a good agreement has been found for the ratio 100 pF:10 pF (within ±5 parts in 108). In addition to the comparison, it has been possible to evaluate the difference between the value of R K (von Klitzing constant) measured by electrical means from calculable capacitors and its last CODATA recommended value (CODATA 2014 adjustment). A difference of (43 ± 23) parts in 109 (k = 1) has been found which is consistent with the difference that can be computed from the experimental data used in the CODATA 2014 adjustment of fundamental constants. This report presents the details of the measurements and analysis having led to these results. Main text To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/. The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCEM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).

Publisher

IOP Publishing

Subject

General Engineering

Cited by 5 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3