| Literature DB >> 29151737 |
Yoshihiro Ohno1, Georg Sauter2.
Abstract
A bilateral intercomparison of photometric units between NIST, USA and PTB, Germany has been conducted to update the knowledge of the relationship between the photometric units disseminated in each country. The luminous intensity unit (cd) and the luminous flux unit (lm) maintained at both laboratories are compared by circulating transfer standard lamps. Also, the photometric responsivity sv is compared by circulating a V(λ)-corrected detector with a built-in current-to-voltage converter. The results show that the difference of luminous intensity unit between NIST and PTB, (PTB-NIST)/NIST, is 0.2 % with a relative expanded uncertainty (coverage factor k = 2) of 0.24 %. The difference is reduced significantly from that at the 1985 CCPR intercomparison (0.9 %). The difference in luminous flux unit, (PTB - NIST)/NIST, is found to be 1.5 % with a relative expanded uncertainty (coverage factor k =2) of 0.15 %. The difference remained nearly the same as that at the 1985 intercomparison (1.6 %). These results agree with what is predicted from the history of maintaining the units at each laboratory.Entities:
Keywords: candela; intercomparison; lumen; luminous flux; luminous intensity; photometer; responsivity; total flux; units
Year: 1995 PMID: 29151737 PMCID: PMC4887250 DOI: 10.6028/jres.100.016
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Res Natl Inst Stand Technol ISSN: 1044-677X
Fig. 1Realization and maintenance of the luminous intensity unit at NIST. (A/W: ampere per watt; A/Ix: ampere per lux.)
Fig. 2Realization and maintenance of the luminous flux unit at NIST.
Fig. 3Realization and maintenance of the luminous intensity unit at PTB.
Fig. 4Realization and maintenance of the luminous flux unit at PTB.
Relationship of NIST and PTB units of luminous intensity (candela, cd) and luminous flux (lumen, lm) since 1985 CCPR intercomparison, relative to the world mean of 1985
| Units | Participant | 1985 CCPR intercomp. | 1987 Bilateral intercomp. | 1988 BIPM report | 1990 New Int’n Temp. Scale | 1992 NIST New unit | 1993 Predicted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Candela | BIPM | 1.0100 | 1.000 | 1.000 | |||
| PTB | 1.0032 | 1.003 | 1.003 | ||||
| NIST | 0.9942 | 0.994 | 0.9977 | 1.0014 | 1.001 | ||
| PTB–NIST | 0.0090 | 0.009 | 0.0055 | 0.0018 | 0.002 | ||
| Lumen | BIPM | 0.9930 | 1.000 | 1.000 | |||
| PTB | 1.0056 | 1.006 | 1.006 | ||||
| NIST | 0.9899 | 0.990 | 0.990 | ||||
| PTB–NIST | 0.0157 | 0.017 | 0.016 | 0.016 |
Fig. 5Structure of the intercomparison. Circles indicate lamps, squares indicate photometers. A circle in a square indicates instruments. Arrows mean the flow of calibration.
Summarized results for PTB luminous intensity transfer lamps measured at NIST and PTB with average differences between the values
| Lamp no. lamp current dist. temp. | Date 1993 | Lamp voltage | Luminous intensity | Difference | Burning time | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| NIST | PTB | NIST | PTB | (NIST–PTB)/PTB | |||
| 260S | March | 27.847 | 196.22 | 40 | |||
| 5.500 A | May | 27.851 | 196.65 | 60 | |||
| 2740 K | October | 27.850 | 196.39 | 60 | |||
| October | 27.845 | 196.06 | 40 | ||||
|
| |||||||
| Average | 27.851 | 27.846 | 196.52 | 196.14 | 0.19 % | Total 200 | |
| Δ | 0.00% | 0.01 % | 0.13 % | 0.08 % | |||
|
| |||||||
| 264S | March | 27.953 | 198.64 | 80 | |||
| 5.500 A | May | 27.956 | 199.09 | 60 | |||
| 2750 K | October | 27.957 | 198.64 | 60 | |||
| October | 27.950 | 198.43 | 40 | ||||
|
| |||||||
| Average | 27.957 | 27.952 | 198.86 | 198.54 | 0.16 % | Total 240 | |
| Δ | 0.00% | 0.01 % | 0.23 % | 0.11 % | |||
|
| |||||||
| 0.21 % | 0.10 % | ||||||
|
| |||||||
| Difference of luminous intensity values measured by NIST and by PTB: + 0.18 % ± 0.24 | |||||||
Δ is the difference of the two measurements of each lamp at each laboratory, [I(first)-I(second)]/I(first).
Ulab is two times the standard deviation of luminous intensity values of each laboratory normalized by the average of each lamp. U is the quadrature sum of Ulab(NIST) and Ulab(PTB).
Determination of the photometric responsivity of the NIST transfer photometer compared to that of a PTB photometer
| Date of measurement 1993 | Pack. temp. | Photometric responsivity | Corrected responsivity | Difference | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| NIST | PTB | NIST | PTB | (NIST-PTB)/PTB | ||
| April | 297.0 | 23.120 | 23.120 | |||
| August | 297.5 | 23.174 | 23.183 | |||
| October | 297.1 | 23.176 | 23.178 | |||
| December | 297.4 | 23.135 | 23.142 | |||
|
| ||||||
| Average | 297.3 | 23.131 | 23.181 | −0.22% | ||
| Δ | 0.09% | 0.02 % | ||||
|
| ||||||
| 0.13 % | 0.03 % | |||||
|
| ||||||
| Difference between photometric responsivity values measured by NIST and PTB: −0.22 %±0.14 %(U) | ||||||
Δ is the difference of the two measurements at each laboratory, [s*(first)-s*(second)]/s*(first).
Ulab is two times the standard deviation of the responsivity values at each laboratory. U is the quadrature sum of Ulab(NIST) and Ulab(PTB).
Determination of the mismatch correction function of the NIST photometer by a parabolic fitting from values measured at four different distribution temperatures
| PTB | NIST | |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| 2000 | 1.00173 | 1.00194 |
| 2366 | 1.00098 | 1.00090 |
| 2600 | 1.00068 | 1.00042 |
| 2856 | 1.00000 | 1.00000 |
|
| ||
| 1.00313 | 1.0129 | |
| 1.4525 × 10−7 | −7.7218 × 10−6 | |
| −4.341 × 10−10 | 1.1248 × 10−9 | |
Fig. 6Mismatch correction values k*(T) and the fitted function k*(Td) determined at PTB (solid curve), and the mismatch correction function ccf*(Td) measured at NIST (dashed curve). The uncertainty bars show 2 standard deviations of the PTB measurements.
Summarized results for PTB and NIST luminous flux transfer lamps measured at NIST and PTB including relative differences between the values and the related statistical uncertainties
| Lamp no. lamp current dist. temp. | Date 1993 | Lamp voltage | Luminous flux | Difference | Burning time min | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| NIST | PTB | NIST | PTB | (NIST−PTB)/PTB | |||
| PTB9 | April | 21.497 | 1231.0 | 30 | |||
| 3.800 A | May | 21.511 | 1249.5 | 45 | |||
| 2828 K | October | 21.510 | 1250.2 | 45 | |||
| November | 21.501 | 1232.6 | 60 | ||||
|
| |||||||
| Average | 21.511 | 21.499 | 1249.9 | 1231.8 | 1.47 % | Total 180 | |
| Δ | 0.01 % | 0.02 % | −0.06 % | −0.13 % | |||
|
| |||||||
| PTB10 | April | 21.863 | 1287.0 | 30 | |||
| 3.800 A | May | 21.877 | 1304.4 | 45 | |||
| 2844 K | October | 21.870 | 1306.2 | 45 | |||
| November | 21.867 | 1287.9 | 60 | ||||
|
| |||||||
| Average | 21.874 | 21.865 | 1305.3 | 1287.5 | 1.38 % | Total 180 | |
| Δ | 0.03 % | 0.02% | −0.14 % | −0.07% | |||
|
| |||||||
| NIST1205 | October | 24.080 | 489.8 | 45 | |||
| 1.660 A | November | 24.082 | 481.39 | 60 | |||
| 2760 K | November | 24.084 | 482.14 | 60 | |||
| December | 24.097 | 489.8 | 20 | ||||
|
| |||||||
| Average | 24.089 | 24.083 | 489.8 | 481.77 | 1.67 % | Total 185 | |
| Δ | 0.07 % | 0.01 % | 0.00% | −0.15 % | |||
|
| |||||||
| NIST1206 | October | 24.240 | 510.9 | 45 | |||
| 1.660 A | November | 24.242 | 502.87 | 60 | |||
| 2776 K | November | 24.243 | 502.75 | 60 | |||
| December | 24.245 | 510.6 | 20 | ||||
|
| |||||||
| Average | 24.243 | 24.243 | 510.75 | 502.81 | 1.58 % | Total 185 | |
| Δ | 0.02 % | 0.00% | 0.06% | 0.02 % | |||
|
| |||||||
| 0.09% | 0.12 % | ||||||
|
| |||||||
| Difference between luminous flux values measured by NIST and PTB: +1.53 %±0.15 | |||||||
Δ is the difference of the two measurements of each lamp at each laboratory, [Φ(first)−<Φ(second)]/Φ(first).
Ulab is two times the standard deviation of luminous flux values of each laboratory normalized by the average of each lamp. U is the quadrature sum of Ulab(NIST) and Ulab(PTB).