Influence of envelope geometry on the sensitivity of ‘‘nude’’ ionization gauges
Abstract
This article presents the results of some measurements of the influence of envelope size and shape on the N2 sensitivity of two nominally identical ‘‘nude’’ extractor ionization gauges, and three common ‘‘nude’’ versions of the Bayard–Alpert ionization gauge. Measurements were made over the pressure range 10−7–10−1 Pa, using typical gauge operating parameters and with vacuum chamber and gauge envelope at ground potential. Sensitivity values corresponding to the three different envelopes used in this work differed by as much as a factor of 2 (comparing maximum value to minimum value for each gauge) for the Bayard–Alpert gauges. For the extractor gauges, the differences were as large as 7%.
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?
Nude gauge sensitivity is profoundly affected by the mounting configuration.
“Nude gauge sensitivity is profoundly affected by the mounting configuration.”
From Review Article: Recommended practice for calibrating vacuum gauges of the ionization type (2018) · cites this paper as [48]
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
- Authors
- Filippelli, A. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology A: Vacuum, Surfaces, and Films
- Publisher
- American Vacuum Society
- Published
- 1996-09-01
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 2953-2957
- ISSN
- 0734-2101
- 1520-8559
- Cited by
- 8
- 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
