Hi,
On 08/29/2015 10:01 AM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) wrote:
On 28 Aug 2015 23:05, "Oz-in-DFW" <li...@ozindfw.net> wrote:
The uncertainly listed seems to be 7.6 mHz (milliHertz, or .0076 Hz. A
bit better that you mention..
No, please look again.
The first line does show an uncertainty of 7.6 mHz, but that is when the
LCR meter was set to 1 kHz. The last line shows an uncertainty of 7.6 Hz
(1000x higher) when measuring 1 MHz, which is obviously 1000x higher in
frequency than 1 kHz. So the original uncertainty I quoted was correct.
The uncertainty rises proportionately with frequency.
I agree. That's how I read it too, and it is very obvious as you look at
the table.
The calibration is in line with Chapter 10 of the manual:
http://wiki.epfl.ch/carplat/documents/hp4284a_lcr_manual.pdf
It might be that the 7.6 ppm number was a practical uncertainty measure
found in deeper analysis along the lines of GUM and was added to the
calibration chart afterwards. For the peak-error of 100 ppm, this
provide a good margin anyway.
So, it's the instrument and the way it behaves, nothing in their
test-setup which is way better than needed for this particular instrument.
In short, don't worry about it, it's OK.
Cheers,
Magnus
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
