Thread: RTD equation...
View Single Post
  #2   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic
Glen Walpert[_2_] Glen Walpert[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default RTD equation...

On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 00:17:16 -0800, Robert Baer wrote:

Start with the tables available from the Minco.com site.
Pick and print a table for Platinum:PE TCR=3.85e-3, R0=100,temp range
20C to 220C inclusive.
Minco indicates A=0.0039083, B=-5.775e-07, C=-4.183e-12. Put the data
in a spreadsheet and do an XY error curve, tabular data
VS equation.
Note that i had to fiddle with B and C to get a reasonable fit, and
one is challenged to get two digits of significance for C.
See attached pic of error giraffe.


Interesting giraffe. Were you bragging about the goodness of fit or
complaining about it?

I see that your ±.00005 ohm deviation is well within the tolerance for
even IEC 751 Class A 100 ohm Pt RTDs, at ±(.06+.0008Tˆ’2E-7(T^2)) ohms -
less than 0.1% of the allowable tolerance.

It looks like you either have measurement data in your tables, with
measurement noise (rather than tables reconstructed from equations LMS
fitted to measurement data), or perhaps just round-off error.

I have used the equations (or as many terms of it as were useful for my
range), and then done a two point calibration against two temperature
standards near the ends of my measurement range with the actual RTDs to
be used, for final equation adjustment on a per-RTD basis, when setting
up temperature monitoring for test purposes where better than 1 C
accuracy was desired. The accuracies expected without individual sensor
calibration make the bounce in your giraffe seem pretty much irrelevant.

Regards,
Glen