# RTD temperature equations

• posted

Morning

I am looking for equations that solve for temperature in terms of RTD resistance. I find lots of references to equations that only include the lower order terms or that solve for resistance.

I am writing firmware for a temperature measurement instrument. The instrument will work with 100pt, 1000pt, 120ni, and 10cu type RTDs and cover below zero ranges. I have found second order equations that solve for temperature for Platinum and Nickel. I have found just a first order equation for Copper. It looks like I need to include higher order terms for accuracy below zero.

Any ideas where to look Thanks Jim

• posted

Copper is pretty linear, and nobody makes precision copper RTDs, so a

2nd or even 1st order fit is probably good enough.

We usually use lookup tables and interpolation.

John

• posted

Here are a few comments based on my experience as a mathematically inclined hobbyist, but certainly not an electronics professional.

In the past, I looked up some information about negative temperature coefficient thermistors, and came across an article containing some equations for resistance versus temperature.

I was disappointed from a purely scientific viewpoint when I realized that the equations, tagged with the names of people who developed or promoted them, were simply the result of curve fitting some measured calibration data to, typically, a third degree polynomial. There is NO scientific content in the derivation of those equations, at least from what I saw.

The equations are simply ad hoc, ex post facto, or purely empirical (take your pick of adjectival phrases).

The article,

that John Larkin mentioned is quite in the same vein as the thermistor article that I came across, except that the Callendar-Van_Dusen_equation article is a mere stub.

John's comment "We usually use lookup tables and interpolation" seems to me to be at least as good an "explanation" as any of the equations.

--- Joe

• posted

Welcome to the real world. Most transmission-line impedance equations are the same, accidental coincidences of shape that were tweaked to work. It's just like fitting a polynomial to experimental data, but using any old equation that looks good. Such fits tend to produce insane results out of their sweet spots, like negative impedances for wide pcb traces.

Incidentally, there are NIST polynomials for thermocouple voltages, up to something absurd like 14th order, also probably free of deep theory.

I doubt that theory exists to calculate RTD or thermocouple R:T curves from first principles, to millikelvin accuracy. And don't even think about thermistors.

It's a lot faster to compute. I usually work in bare-metal assembly language, so interpolation is easier than high-order polynomial expansion or whatever. The tables can be generated directly from the NIST polynomials with a little BASIC program, and the resulting source file tossed into the assembly program.

I'm an engineer. I don't have to understand it, I only have to make it work.

I did these:

This one also does cryogenic diode sensors, where there's even less theory to explain what's going on:

John

• posted

• posted

Here is a longer wikipedia article that mentions the

Callendar-Van Dusen equation: