Sensitivity variation of Bayard–Alpert gauges with and without closed grids from 10−4 to 1 Pa
Abstract
Since the accurate range of the spinning rotor gauge (SRG) does not extend below 10−4 Pa, constant sensitivity of high vacuum gauges for at least one decade above this value is important for their calibration when using an SRG. Two pairs of nude Bayard–Alpert (BA) gauges were compared with an SRG over the range 10−4–1 Pa. One pair was made from two identical, commercial, nude ultrahigh vacuum (UHV) BA gauges by removing the grid caps from one gauge. At 1.0 mA emission, the sensitivity of the gauge with closed grid started to decrease at 10−3 Pa, falling from 0.18/Pa to 0.047/Pa at 1.6 Pa. With open grid, the sensitivity was constant at 0.096/Pa to 10−3 Pa, increased slightly, and then fell to 0.047/Pa at 1.6 Pa. A pair of nude gauges was built with grids 16 mm in diameter by 26 mm long, identical except that one had a closed grid and the other did not. The sensitivity of the gauge with closed grid was nearly constant at 0.069/Pa to 1.3×10−2 Pa, decreasing to 0.033/Pa at 1.6 Pa, and with open grid was constant at 0.049/Pa to 4×10−1 Pa, falling to 0.033/Pa at 1.6 Pa. At an emission current of 0.10 mA, constant sensitivity extended to higher pressures for all gauges.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The sensitivity of many gauges can be more consistent at reduced emission currents.
“On the other hand, the sensitivity of many gauges can be more consistent at reduced emission currents.51”
From Review Article: Recommended practice for calibrating vacuum gauges of the ionization type (2018) · cites this paper as [51]
Closed grids prevent generated ions from escaping the ionisation volume and therefore increase sensitivity up to a factor of 4, depending on collector diameter.
“Closed grids prevent generated ions to escape from the ionisation volume and therefore increase sensitivity up to a factor of 4, depending on the collector diameter [11,17,20].”
From A review on hot cathode ionisation gauges with focus on a suitable design for measurement accuracy and stability (2020) · cites this paper as [20]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Jousten, K., Boineau, F., Bundaleski, N., Illgen, C., Setina, J., Teodoro, O. M. N. D., Vicar, M., & Wüest, M. (2020) · Vacuum · doi:10.1016/j.vacuum.2020.109545 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Review Article: Recommended practice for calibrating vacuum gauges of the ionization type
Fedchak, J. A., Abbott, P. J., Hendricks, J. H., Arnold, P. C., & Peacock, N. T. (2018) · Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology A: Vacuum, Surfaces, and Films · doi:10.1116/1.5025060 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Peacock, R. N., & Peacock, N. T.
- Venue
- Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology A: Vacuum, Surfaces, and Films
- Publisher
- American Vacuum Society
- Published
- 1990-07-01
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 3341-3344
- ISSN
- 0734-2101
- 1520-8559
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 0
- 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