Author Topic: KX Reference  (Read 26975 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TiN

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2936
  • Country: tw
  • Volt-bolt
    • xDevs.com
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #200 on: November 03, 2017, 10:07:03 PM »
Lab temperature visible on the graph, dashed cyan line, Ambient C. It's around 27-29 this week, as I didn't do much stuff, also needed to keep it constant so I can compare run1 to run9 (3458A runs at same ACAL +/-1c span since last weekend, to avoid shifts in reading from own 3458A TC).

I never know what CalMachine's intention to use these two modules, but since he installed 12.5K resistors to get 60C setpoint, that's what I test to, minus the 5C margin room. Maybe he desire to fit one module into K2001 instead of original LM399, and "ambient" temp inside that box can reach well around +50C. Obviously since test include 20C-55C points, it's easy to process data to smaller span without any effort.

I'm done with these anyhow, and hooked HP 3458A A9 module (STD) for a spin. Let's see what she is made of.  :box:
xDevs.com | Have test gear documentation to share? Upload here! No size limits, firmware dumps and teardown photos welcome.
 
The following users thanked this post: CalMachine

Online Dr. Frank

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1301
  • Country: de
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #201 on: November 04, 2017, 01:04:55 AM »
BFX
... All measurements done over 3458A in stable room temp (+/-1C), so own DMM tempco nulled out....

Except MX1 ref data, which was tested in similar box, but controlled by ILX 5910B controller instead. Meter is 3458A as well.
MX1 reference definately needs more work, so stay tuned  :)

Hi Illya,

I went through your different LTZ1000 - T.C. - measurements, but maybe overlooked the decisive hint..

How do you cancel the 3458As own T.C., of about 0.5ppm/K?

If your room temperature is varying +/-1°C, then you will definitely see that variation overwhelmingly in the KX reference measurements.

The TEMP? function also deliver 1/10°C degree of resolution only, so it's quite difficult to numerically equalize temperature changes of the 3458A, when you want to measure DUTs T.C. below 0.05ppm/K.

Frank
 

Offline TiN

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2936
  • Country: tw
  • Volt-bolt
    • xDevs.com
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #202 on: November 04, 2017, 02:09:16 AM »
Hi Dr.Frank,

Well, hint for that is contained in my old KX datalog. You can see two runs with same config there, one with +24.2 +/-0.1C ambient temp, and second one with temperature raise to +27.2 by 3C. By using LTZ1000 output under test as a reference one can establish DMM's tempco in order of +0.1 ppm/K, so it's better than 0.5 ppm/K you mentioning.

Most of CM's KX run are with ambient temperature varied only by 0.2-0.4 C, not even full 1C. Also since we don't care about comparing absolute value from one run to another, absolute errors can be ignored.
Another confidence check is using both ramp up and ramp down curves from DUT to calculate tempco correlation. If I'd see different magnitude or output voltage not converging in the same temperatures, that would be a red flag. Of course, I would not give a guaranteed certificate on any of above listed tempco measurements, but for relative comparisons and hobby-level use I'm satisfied with numbers.

So in the end, temperature exercise on DUT is at least 70 times larger in magnitude than ambient temperature change, and meter's tempco have non-significant effect on the correlation result.
To further illustrate the point, take a look on this plot from our fellow member's lab 3458A setup. This is good example how ambient variations, like AC cycling affects LTZ DUT measurement (which is in TEC box, controlled by ILX 5910B). Yes, there is significant ~0.8ppm wobble, but you still clearly can plot a linear trend, without too much error from +2C ambient change.
xDevs.com | Have test gear documentation to share? Upload here! No size limits, firmware dumps and teardown photos welcome.
 

Offline TiN

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2936
  • Country: tw
  • Volt-bolt
    • xDevs.com
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #203 on: November 04, 2017, 03:08:25 AM »
And since you asked, here's today jem.



This is A9 STD reference, unmodified.

And updated summary LTZ tempco's, all together.

« Last Edit: November 04, 2017, 06:39:25 PM by TiN »
xDevs.com | Have test gear documentation to share? Upload here! No size limits, firmware dumps and teardown photos welcome.
 
The following users thanked this post: pitagoras

Offline TiN

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2936
  • Country: tw
  • Volt-bolt
    • xDevs.com
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #204 on: November 04, 2017, 05:24:49 PM »
Since Andreas asked, here is how it looks like when LTZ reference is out of oven thermal margin:



I'm testing two references with zeners in sockets, same TEC box, two meters.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2017, 07:36:25 PM by TiN »
xDevs.com | Have test gear documentation to share? Upload here! No size limits, firmware dumps and teardown photos welcome.
 
The following users thanked this post: Andreas

Online Dr. Frank

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1301
  • Country: de
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #205 on: November 04, 2017, 06:30:52 PM »
And since you asked, here's today jem.



This is A9 STD reference, unmodified. Single digit ppb/K tempco till +47C box temperature !

And updated summary LTZ tempco's, all together.

Sorry Illya,

but I suppose, that you have a fundamental bug in your calculus of the T.C.

You obviously want to calculate the T.C. each 1°C step, by calculating the derivative delta(U)/delta(T), where delta(U) is the change of the reference voltage over 1°C, already expressed in ppm of this reference voltage, as this is already divided by the baseline reference voltage, and delta (T) is the change of the temperature, that is identical to 1°C.

So, the column 'ppm dev' already gives your 'momentary' T.C. value, but in your column 'T.C.' you again (for the second time) divide by the reference voltage 7.184V, which gives insanely small values, because of the quadratic division in Uref.

I also see a numerical problems with your calculus of the T.C., as the measurement of the reference voltage has a typical standard deviation, or reference rms noise of 0.02 .. 0.04ppm already, if you measure at NPLC100.
This noise is not reflected at all in your T.C. curves; they look smooth as a babys butt.. which should you also make you think, that something is fishy here..   :-//

For sure, your measurements of simply Uref over T look exactly like mine, that is with a lot of overlayed noise, and then you would have to use a reasonable smoothing algorithm, or a graphical method, i.e. box method, to get the correct T.C. numbers, or function of T.C. over temperature.

Regarding the T.C. of your 3458A, it would be great if it would really have 0.1ppm/K, but I would also like to see a reliable and solid measurement, assuring that parameter.
 
Frank

« Last Edit: November 04, 2017, 06:33:18 PM by Dr. Frank »
 
The following users thanked this post: TiN

Offline TiN

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2936
  • Country: tw
  • Volt-bolt
    • xDevs.com
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #206 on: November 04, 2017, 07:24:50 PM »
Aha, I hear what you saying now. Perhaps I got over-excited there a bit, and got too much zeros.

I acknowledge this calculation topic have icebergs under, perhaps good time to establish common definition to avoid further confusion?

Here's same plot, with actual every data point over the temperature.



Dashed line is step approximation fit, which is not subjected to noise and smooth.
Here also see typical 0.1ppm-ish noise derived from 3458 & DUT.

Is all this look right?

On second part, 3458 tempco, it's great time now, so I'll stabilize temperature of the DUT (2 x LTZ1000) at let's say +24.000 +/-0.005C and variate ambient temperature from current +28 to +22. That should give us 6C of 3458A temperature change to estimate DMM TC?
xDevs.com | Have test gear documentation to share? Upload here! No size limits, firmware dumps and teardown photos welcome.
 
The following users thanked this post: Dr. Frank

Online Dr. Frank

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1301
  • Country: de
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #207 on: November 05, 2017, 12:21:32 AM »
Illya,

that all looks much more reasonable and solid.
Anyhow, now one can really see the good quality of your measurements, in relation to the reference noise.


I don't know, where to find an official definition of this 'box method'.
 
As implemented by Vishay for the determination of the T.C. of their resistors, they probably use 3 temperature points only, like -55°C, +25°C and +125°C.
Their German representative once measured my VHP202 at 25, 60, 100 and 125°C only, and calculated the average T.C. between these points.

G.R. measured the new 120 Ohm resistor samples between: 23=> 35 =>45 => 35 => 23°C.
They let the DUTs settle for about 24h at each single point, before they take the measurement.
However, they got totally puzzled values, even with different signs for the T.C., and that was due to this big hysteresis of this special value.


Therefore, our method of continuously measuring the reference voltage en passant, i.e. while the temperature slowly changes, and then to draw a box around the horizontal and vertical limits of the measured graph, gives much better and more information about the DUT.
You only have to take care, that not too big a hysteresis or shift occurs, which often happens, when the temperature is changed too fast.
In a physical sense, the measurements have to be made in or near the 'equilibrium state'.. and it's always a problem to identify this correctly.

This box method is a kind of averaging, and necessary only, when a non-linear or hysteretic behaviour is present.

Yep, if you were able to change the temperature of your 3458A by 5°C, you'll get a real good measurement of its T.C. for DCV, w/o ACAL.
I assume, the root cause of this T.C. is located mainly in the A/D ASIC, i.e. these internal gain resistors, which you were very familiar with, I think  :-DD
This famous cal constant 72, related also to the AN18 stability problem, should directly depend on the environmental temperature (which is not considered in the AN18).
What do you think?

I have measured this CAL? 72 regularly, but could not find a real drift over time (fortunately), but a negative dependency over temperature (TEMP? CAL? 175), of about -0.3ppm/°C.
The graph over temperature has a lot of scatter, because the temperature sensor is on the opposite site than the A/D board.
But these -0.3ppm/°C are in good accordance with the DCV T.C. of +0.4ppm/°C, which my wife measured for my 3458A..
The difference in value might to be explained by the T.C. of the internal LTZ1000A  reference.

Frank

« Last Edit: November 05, 2017, 01:12:36 AM by Dr. Frank »
 

Offline TiN

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2936
  • Country: tw
  • Volt-bolt
    • xDevs.com
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #208 on: November 05, 2017, 12:39:51 AM »
Yes, hysteresis is the reason why I use slow ramp up/down for all TC data collection, instead of step gaps.
With Raspberry Pi and GPIB it's all easy to program.

For meter tempco data, be my guest : https://xdevs.com/kx56_test2_tc/
It's current live log. I'll leave it running as low as room AC can go.

Beginning of the graph is with ambient temp +29c (cyan dotted line)
TEMP? readings from both meters are bold blue/violet. One of my meters does not have A1 shield inside, hence RAW TEMP? data is offset by 4.9c. External covers are all on.
DUT reference are two LTZ modules, in own TEC box, controlled at +24C +/-0.02C peak (black is TEC box sensor temp, thermistor YSI 44006).
RAW CSV-datafile is in link under graph as well.

From what I can see - DCV 10V tempco is un-measureable here (<0.1ppm/K). Even if I take worst peak-peak 0.5ppm (dots are individual samples, lines are average) and divide by current TEMP? change (42C -> 38C = 5C) that gives 0.1ppm/K for blue meter. Second "B, green" meter shows only noise, no tempco.

If meter own TC would be 0.1ppm/K, then output reading should be already off by 0.5ppm, which is clearly not the case, if we go by averaged "noise-free" values.

For reference, if that worth anything, "blue" meter has new A3 Keysight ADC made in 2016, bought year ago, "green" meter has A3 Agilent ADC, made in 2004.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2017, 12:56:30 AM by TiN »
xDevs.com | Have test gear documentation to share? Upload here! No size limits, firmware dumps and teardown photos welcome.
 

Online Dr. Frank

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1301
  • Country: de
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #209 on: November 05, 2017, 12:54:15 AM »
By the way, I think it's instructive to refer to this old NBS Technical Note 1239, about the performance of solid state voltage references:
https://archive.org/details/solidstatevoltag1239fiel

In Design / Performance Goal P4, a T.C. of < 0.01ppm/K is recommended, which obviously none of the commercial references achieves..

A description, how to correctly measure and display that T.C., is also not available.

Frank
 

Online Dr. Frank

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1301
  • Country: de
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #210 on: November 05, 2017, 01:03:42 AM »
Wow, both your 3458A are really impressive!
Their T.C.s are practically zero.
But it's really hot, where you live.

 

Offline TiN

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2936
  • Country: tw
  • Volt-bolt
    • xDevs.com
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #211 on: November 05, 2017, 04:18:37 AM »
Outdoor temp today in here north of Taiwan is around +18C. I just had cold last week, so I did not turn on AC last week or so.
I don't have luxury of basement as of yet, it's apartment on 10th floor, with gear running 24/7, so ambient temps easy to climb 28-30c without aircon permanently on.

I think we saw enough on 3458A's tempco question, time to test some other's  :)
3458A Green = +0.048 ppm/K 10V TC (0.36 ppm with 7.4C drop).
3458A Blue = +0.06 ppm/K 10V TC (0.45 ppm with same drop).
xDevs.com | Have test gear documentation to share? Upload here! No size limits, firmware dumps and teardown photos welcome.
 
The following users thanked this post: splin

Offline bopcph

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 13
  • Country: dk
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #212 on: November 08, 2017, 02:41:27 PM »
@CalMachine

If you could get a smaller dome to fit a few mm inside the one you are using now.
You would create a dobb. wall dome decreasing the heat transfer thru the dome(s) and thereby also reducing the risc of turbulence/convection.

Drilling away the free areas around the LTZ, inside the guard-ring reduces the mass of FR4 material, it should make it easier for the LTZ to get the mass in equilibrium - just a guess :-)
« Last Edit: November 08, 2017, 02:57:27 PM by bopcph »
 

Offline TiN

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2936
  • Country: tw
  • Volt-bolt
    • xDevs.com
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #213 on: November 08, 2017, 03:10:49 PM »
Tested good old jumpy ACH. Funny enough, other than jumps it's fine ref.
It's reference of 0.6 ppm jumps. :D.

xDevs.com | Have test gear documentation to share? Upload here! No size limits, firmware dumps and teardown photos welcome.
 

Offline MK

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 178
  • Country: gb
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #214 on: November 08, 2017, 05:33:16 PM »
with the jumpy ACH perhaps you could try a set of different currents, at a bit higher current those jumps may go away?
 

Online beanflying

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 160
  • Country: au
  • Toys so very many Toys.
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #215 on: November 30, 2017, 12:27:35 PM »
Chasing Zero's and accuracy/stability is addictive  :scared:

Boards ordered. If anyone in Oz is interested I am going to keep two but one will be available for cost.

Now off to arrange components  :)

Freaky stable untrimmed Max6350 @ 21 C but I "NEED" more   8)
Coffee, Food, R/C and electronics nerd in no particular order :)
 

Offline kj7e

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 172
  • Country: us
Re: KX Reference
« Reply #216 on: December 09, 2017, 11:11:32 AM »
I was not entirely happy with the tempco of my KX reference with the LTZ1000A, it wasn't that bad, but I felt it should have been better.  The best I could test with a 34465A was about 0.08 to 0.1 ppm/K.  Since I had the A version I did as the data sheet said and omitted the 400K tempco resistor.  Just as an experiment I added the tempco resistor starting with 1M Ohm, then 680K, 470K and 300K.  Each time seeing an improvement and finally seeing a nearly flat tempco with 300K.   I even tried 270K and 330K but found the sweet spot at 300K, what a difference! I cant say how pleased I am now.  Since that time, I've added a Keithley DMM7510 and I'm able to further verify my findings.  Here is some data from a 15 Deg C to 35 Deg C temp sweep;

The meter was null'd when the reference temp was 15 Deg C in order to easily see the uV deviation.  The bump about mid scale is where I powered on the oven to continue warming from about 25 Deg C to 35 Deg C;




Zoomed in to show some of the noise and individual data points;


So there is about a 3uV (-1 to +2) change across the sweep, this was repeated about 5 times with the same results. 3uV = 0.42 ppm / 20 Deg sweep = 0.021 ppm/K.

This is on the second KX board I built, the first one (which had a better initial tempco) also improved significantly but sweet spot was 390K.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2017, 11:26:48 AM by kj7e »
 
The following users thanked this post: TiN, VK5RC


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf