Am Sat, 6 Jun 2020 17:30:08 -0500 schrieb Steve - Home <[email protected]>:
> Yes, for sure. I should have mentioned The difference between > metrology as in instrument calibration versus user calibration of the > system to account for the environment. The calibration procedure for > the 8510 is far more complex for sure. > > I had a good laugh in our metrology lab’s DC voltage section a few > decades ago. After lots of manual math to account for uncertainties > in our transfer from standard cells to DVMs, the “meter beaters” as > we nicknamed them would then check a dry cell battery they kept in a > drawer as a final check of the DVM! They never had a failure until we > drained their precious “standard” dry cell over a weekend and left it > for them. Monday by noon time they were sure something was horribly > wrong with their standard cell ensemble because the dry cell test > failed three consecutive DVMs! > Wow, that's mean. ;-) But certainly something to laugh at after a while. And of course also a good example of poor execution of a good idea. Checking for consistency is a good thing. You just have to keep in mind that this can also fail. Having another independent check is more resilient, but adds complexity. That's btw exactly what these VNA verification kits provide: an independent check of the correction introduced by the calibration kit as they have different known good values of reflection and attennuation than those provided by the calibration kit. That's also what makes calibration fun for nuts: You're always at the chase of effects most people don't even know exist. BTW @ David: Thanks a bunch for pointing out the NPL metrology courses. They're pretty good for starters, and the fact they're free right now makes it even better... Florian DH7FET _______________________________________________ volt-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/volt-nuts_lists.febo.com and follow the instructions there.
