message=20
being at=20
I=20
used a=20
1ma=20wire=20
the=20
Bradley=20
Platinum RTDs are about total repeatability, a real mantra in the = measurement=20 community. And 393 ppm/K is an exponential, like most all resistance = tempcos.
message=20
being at=20
I=20
used a=20
1ma=20wire=20
the=20
Bradley=20
Platinum RTDs are about total repeatability, a real mantra in the = measurement=20 community. And 393 ppm/K is an exponential, like most all resistance = tempcos.
Exponential? How so?
John
linearizes
out
widget
an
at
applications).
Thranx. I learned.
linearizes
out
widget
an
01005=20Basically it was 1000 K/W that triggered me. The fine leads in free air=20 is not always representative. Your other measurements show that. Part = of my=20 job task for years has been check for possible absurdities and request or= =20 require backup. It shows, eh?
message=20
linearizes
being at=20
C. I=20
used a=20
1ma=20=20
wire=20
the=20
Bradley=20
measurement=20
tempcos.
Each degree of temperature change is a multiplier on the degree base = before it. so the recurrence relation results in an exponential. Thus it can be = modeled=20 as r' =3D r(25) * k(1)e^[k(2)*t], an exponential. BTW just look at a R = vs T plot.
One interesting thing is that the self-heating of this 1206 part is so low if you solder it to a lot of copper. We've verified that with infrared measurement of the hot-spot temp on conventional thick-film resistors. Since most surface-mount resistors are the same thickness of alumina, theta from the element to their end caps depends only on their l/w ratio, which also tends to be the same. So an 0603 resistor can handle as much power as a 1206, half a watt maybe, if you mount it right.
Some people are making resistors on AlN substrates, and they have hard-to-believe power ratings.
John
What are the coefficients? The curve slopes down.
I've never seen the platinum RTD curve expressed as an exponential. The usual formulation is a polynomial.
John
at
ameasurement
tempcos.
it.
plot.
A curve whose normalized slope is constant is an exponential--for instance, tempco of resistance is generally defined as (1/R)dR/dT, which is d/dT(ln R). If that were really some constant alpha, then ln R would be proportional to T, so R would be something times exp(alpha T).
Of course, there's nothing that says the tempco is constant, IOW not all curves are exponential. The RTD curve is a simple rational function of T--it really linearizes beautifully with a bit of negative resistance, with theoretical deviations are of the order of 0.01K over wide temperature ranges.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
message
at
used a
Bradley
measurement
tempcos.
it.
plot.
Maybe 0.1°C over the full temperature range of an RTD (-200 ~ 850°C). R = -2311 ohms.
About +/-0.02° for 0 ~ 400°C. R = -2515 ohms
And almost nothing for 0 ~ 100°C R = -2687 ohms
message
being at
Iused a
1mawire
Bradley
measurement
tempcos.
it.
modeled
plot.
I can see we share some of the same odd taste in recreations.
Depends a bit on whether you like the European or US curves, of course. They have shinier platinum over there, like everything else--just ask them. ;) But then at that level it also depends on residual stress in the metal, CTE mismatch with the substrate....
Still, from a mathematical perspective, it's pretty.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
in message
linearizes
resistance being at
Degree C. I
they used a
with 1ma
RTD
sense wire
remember the
Allen Bradley
measurement
resistance tempcos.
before it.
modeled
R vs T plot.
=20
=20
=20
Interesting, i listen to you on this but not to JL.
in message
linearizes
resistance being at
Degree C. I
they used a
with 1ma
the RTD
sense wire
remember the
Allen Bradley
measurement
resistance tempcos.
before it.
be modeled
a R vs T plot.
which=20
would=20
all=20
=20
850=B0C).=20So please explain the various correcting "r" and the different = performance.
message
being at
Iused a
1mawire
the
Bradley
measurement
tempcos.
before it.
modeled
plot.
The "R" is calculated using a simple equation to exactly zero the linearity error out at mid-scale**. IOW, so Rt(Tmid) - Rt(Tzero)= 0.5* (Rt(Tfs) - Rt(Tzero)), where Rt is the parallel combination of the linearization resistor and the sensor Rt = Rsensor(T)*R/(Rsensor(T) + R)
This method of linearization is almost perfect over a relatively narrow span, and pretty good even over the whole usable range of the sensor (of course 100°C -- say -40°C ~ +60°C is a very wide range for human comfort, but only about 10% of the useful range of a general-purpose sensor).
** Since it's an imperfect fit, you have to come up with some kind of criteria for judging what is the 'best' fit. For ranges of a few hundred C or less, it looks like zeroing the error at midscale is pretty reasonable-- an S-shaped error curve that is centered on zero error and crosses the zero line at zero, full-scale and mid scale.OTOH, over the full range, it yields asymmetrical peak errors so it may not be optimal. Sometimes cost functions can be pretty strange- mathematicians like to use sum (or integral) of error squared, because it's easy to differentiate and find a closed form solution for the minimum error-- in some cases. Instrument designers, OTOH, are aiming for specs like worst-case error PLUS maybe there should be no systemic error at calibration points and/or some easy-to-check point like room temperature (or body temperature) for a temperature instrument or ~21% for an oxygen meter. Nobody in the real world is likely to request a sensor or instrument with a maximum integral of error squared over some range. ;-)
Anyway, these days we can often use a processor or FPGA to apply simple brute-force numerical techniques and reduce linearization errors to negligible levels in relation to the error budget-- or even below the noise floor. Thermocouples have ugly (but fairly small) nonlinearity... nothing a set of double-precision polynomials curve-fitted to the values can't handle. The same method can be used to linearize RTDs when you have a universal-input instrument-- no need to be clever for that part of the design... in fact it could be counterproductive.
message
being at
Iused a
1mawire
Bradley
measurement
tempcos.
it.
modeled
plot.
You still haven't put numbers on your exponential RTD thing.
John
which=20
would=20
all=20
of=20
resistance,=20
850=B0C).=20performance.
for
OK. I see now, it works much like the changes in quartz crystal cuts in=20 the 1960s through 1980s, with doubly rotated AT (DRAT) and later SC cuts. Set things up to create a "flat spot/range" in the tempco curve shape.
Thermal expansion coefficient (1/L)dL/dT, is similarly defined.
-- "Electricity is of two kinds, positive and negative. The difference is, I presume, that one comes a little more expensive, but is more durable; the other is a cheaper thing, but the moths get into it." (Stephen Leacock)
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.