COMPARISON OF CALIBRATION METHODS OF CLIMATIC CHAMBER

T. Sinhaneti, T. Keawprasert, U. Norranim

Humidity Laboratory, Thermometry Metrology Department
National Institute of Metrology (Thailand)

A comparison of two calibration methods for evaluating the performance of

climatic chambers was carried out. In this work, a 4.5 cubic foot PGC climatic
chamber was calibrated for its instability and uniformity both in terms of air
temperature and relative humidity.
In the first method, the absolute humidity inside the chamber was assumed to
be uniform, and therefore a dew-point hygrometer was used to measure only at
a corner of the chamber. The second method used 9 probes of high accuracy
thermo-hygrometer installed at different positions to evaluate the chamber
performance with out the uniform assumption as in the first method.
For both methods, the dew-point hygrometer and the thermo-hygrometers was
calibrated traceable to a NIMT 2 pressure primary generator. Due to the higher
accuracy of the dew-point hygrometer, the calibration uncertainty was lower
than that by the method using 9 probes of hygrometer.
For calibration results, the stability obtained from the two methods are in good
agreement within 0.1 %rh cover the measurement range, while the maximum
deviation of uniformity was larger than 0.5 %rh at the relative humidity of 92
%rh

The direct method

9 high accuracy thermo-hygrometers were located at the measuring positions
in Fig. 2., instead of the dew-point hygrometer and the thermometers [2].
For relative humidity, the stability and uniformity were evaluated in the same
way for temperature according to the G-20 in Ref.1.[1]

COMPARISON RESULT

2.10

1.60

Uniformity / %rh

ABSTRACT

direct

0.10

Fig. 1 illustrates variation of measurement temperature at different positions in a

climate chamber and an example for evaluation of stability and uniformity of the
test chamber in temperature.

0.40
20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Relative Humidity/%rh

Figure 3. Uniformity by comparison between indirect method and direct method

Stability = tmax-tmin
= 23.17-23.14
= 0.03oC = +0.015oC

23.25

1.50

1.00
23.2

1
2
3

23.15

4
5

0.50

Stability / %rh

indirect

0.60

PRINCIPLE

Measurement temperature( C)

1.10

0.00
indirect
direct
0.50

6
23.1

1.00

8
ref
23.05
0

10

15

20

Time (min)

25

30

Uniformity = Max (ti-t Ref)

= 23.2-23.07
= 0.13oC = +0.065oC

CALIBRATION METHODS
The indirect method
9 thermometers and a dew-point
hygrometer were placed at measuring
t3
t7
positions as shown in Fig. 2.
tdp.
t ref.
The stability and uniformity in
temperature
were
determined
t2
t6
according to G-20 guideline [1].
The uniformity in relative humidity
t1
t5
was calculated via the measurement
temperature distribution and dew-point
Figure 2. Schematic diagram for installing temperature [2].
t8

the thermometers and the dew-point

thermometer

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Relative Humidity/%rh

35

Figure 1. Illustration for determination of stability and uniformity for air temperature

t4

1.50
20.0

Figure 4. Stability by comparison between indirect method and direct method.

CONCLUSION
The stability and the uniformity of climatic chamber when compare between
indirect and direct method deviated about +0.1%rh excepting the uniformity at
92%rh (~0.5%rh). Estimate measurement uncertainty in indirect method is lower
than that in direct method because of high accuracy of dew-point hygrometer and
the uniformity assumption in dew-point temperature. However the direct method
is still more convenient without complicating to calculate the relative humidity
via dew-point temperature. Finally, both method are capable to calibrate the
climatic chamber but the indirect method should be carried out due to lower
measurement uncertainty.

REFERENCES
[1] G-20 Guidelines for Calibration and Checks of Temperature Controlled
Enclosures
[2] DKD-R 5-7 Guideline for calibration of Climatic Chamber.