Volume calibration using a comparison method with a transfer leak flow rate
Open accessAbstract
This paper describes a volume comparison method carried out under a fine/rough vacuum using a small transfer flow rate from a capillary leak artefact. This method is suitable for volumes of vessels with complex shapes such as tubing arrangements equipped with various pneumatic parts (valves, gauges …), sample volumes, etc. The calibration, based on pressure rise measurements performed with a constant-volume flowmeter set-up, exhibits a standard relative uncertainty between 0.03 % and 2 % for volumes ranging from 1 to 3000 cm³, which is only about one order of magnitude higher than capabilities of the gravimetric volume calibration.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- P. Otal, F. Boineau, J.-C. Legras, Etalonnage des fuites d'hélium: méthodes de référence et dissémination de 10 -10 Pa•m 3 •s -1 à 10 -2 Pa•m 3 •s -1 , Revue française de métrologie, vol. 1, n° 17, pp. 3- 9, 2009 (in French).
- K. Jousten et al., Final report of key comparison CCM.P-K12 for very low helium flow rates (leak rates), Metrologia, vol. 50, no 1A, p. 07001, 2013, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/0026-1394/50/1A/07001 · DOI
- D. Mari et al., « Realization, characterization and measurements of standard leak artefacts », Measurement, vol. 61, p. 249-256, 2015, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2014.10.045 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Indirect Determination of the Internal Diameter of Glass Conical Volumetric Instruments
Purata Sifuentes, O. J. (2023) · Entreciencias: Diálogos en la Sociedad del Conocimiento · doi:10.22201/enesl.20078064e.2023.25.85557 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Boineau, F., Plimmer, M. D., & Mahé, E.
- Affiliations
- Laboratoire National de Métrologie et d'Essais (FR)
- Venue
- ACTA IMEKO
- Published
- 2020-12-31
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 343
- ISSN
- 0237-028X (ISSN-L)
- 2221-870X
- OpenAlex
- W3120888725
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2
- FWCI
- 0.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- ACTA IMEKO (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Scientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanics of Materials › Flow Measurement and Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Advanced Measurement and Metrology Techniques
- Keywords
- volume calibration, volume comparison, relative uncertainty
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
