Cited by 93

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Description of the parallel thermal conductance technique for the measurement of the thermal conductivity of small diameter samples

Zawilski, Bartosz M., Littleton, Roy T., Tritt, Terry M.·2001·Review of Scientific Instruments

Abstract

In order to measure the thermal conductivity of small needlelike samples (2.0×0.05×0.1 mm3) such as pentatellurides and single carbon fibers, we have developed a new technique called the parallel thermal conductance (PTC) technique. In the more typical steady state method that is used for measuring thermal conductivity, thermocouples are attached to the sample in order to measure the temperature gradient and a heater in order to supply this gradient. However, attaching thermocouples and heaters directly to small samples may be relatively difficult, and cause large heat losses and errors. Thus, the measurement of the thermal conductivity of small samples and thin films has been a formidable challenge, with only few successes, due, among other factors, to the heat loss. It is also difficult for the small samples to support the heaters and thermocouples without causing damage to the sample. In this paper we describe the recently developed PTC method providing measurements on standards as well as single carbon fibers, in addition to preliminary pentatelluride crystals measurements.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1063/1.1347980

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. 1999, Phys. Rev. B, 60, 13453, 10.1103/PhysRevB.60.13453 · DOI
  2. 1981, Cryogenics, 21, 118, 10.1016/0011-2275(81)90062-X · DOI
  3. 1975, Rev. Sci. Instrum., 46, 439, 10.1063/1.1134235 · DOI
  4. 1987, Measurement, 5, 2, 10.1016/0263-2241(87)90020-0 · DOI
  5. 1999, Phys. Rev. B, 59, R9015, 10.1103/PhysRevB.59.R9015 · DOI
  6. 1998, Appl. Phys. Lett., 72, 2056, 10.1063/1.121406 · DOI
  7. 1997, Rev. Sci. Instrum., 68, 2494, 10.1063/1.1148147 · DOI
  8. 1985, J. Phys. D, 18, 1307, 10.1088/0022-3727/18/7/016 · DOI
  9. 2000, Appl. Phys. Lett., 77, 2319, 10.1063/1.1316065 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Zawilski, B. M., Littleton, R. T., & Tritt, T. M.
Affiliations
Department of Physics and Astronomy, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina 29634
Venue
Review of Scientific Instruments
Published
2001-03-01
Volume
72
Issue
3
Pages
1770-1774
ISSN
  • 0034-6748
  • 1089-7623
Cited by
93
References
1
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review