The European Comparison of Absolute Gravimeters 2011 (ECAG-2011) in Walferdange, Luxembourg: results and recommendations
O. Francis , H. Baumann , T. Volarik , C. Rothleitner , G. Klein , M. Seil , N. Dando , R. Tracey , C. Ulrich , S. Castelein , H. Hua , W. Kang , S. Chongyang , X. Songbo , T. Hongbo , L. Zhengyuan , V. Palinkas , J. Kostelecky , J. Makinen , Jyri Naranen , S. Merlet , Tristan Farah , Christine Guerlin , F. Pereira Dos Santos , N. Le Moigne , Cedric Champollion , Sabrina Deville , L. Timmen , R. Falk , H. Wilmes , Domenico Iacovone , Francesco Baccaro , A. Germak , Biolcai , Emanuele Biolcati , J. Krynski , M. Sekowski , Tomasz Olszak , Andrzej Pachuta , J. Agren , Andreas Engfeldt , Rene Reudink , Pedro Inacio , Daniel McLaughlin , Geoff Shannon , M. Eckl , Tim Wilkins , Derek Westrum van , Ryan Billson
AbstractWe present the results of the third European Comparison of Absolute Gravimeters held in Walferdange, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, in November 2011. Twenty-two gravimeters from both metrological and non-metrological institutes are compared. For the first time, corrections for the laser beam diffraction and the self-attraction of the gravimeters are implemented. The gravity observations are also corrected for geophysical gravity changes that occurred during the comparison using the observations of a superconducting gravimeter. We show that these corrections improve the degree of equivalence between the gravimeters. We present the results for two different combinations of data. In the first one, we use only the observations from the metrological institutes. In the second solution, we include all the data from both metrological and non-metrological institutes. Those solutions are then compared with the official result of the comparison published previously and based on the observations of the metrological institutes and the gravity differences at the different sites as measured by non-metrological institutes. Overall, the absolute gravity meters agree with one another with a standard deviation of 3.1 µGal. Finally, the results of this comparison are linked to previous ones. We conclude with some important recommendations for future comparisons.
|Journal series||Metrologia, ISSN 0026-1394|
|Publication size in sheets||0.55|
|Score|| = 30.0, 05-02-2020, ArticleFromJournal|
= 35.0, 05-02-2020, ArticleFromJournal
|Publication indicators||= 33; = 38; = 63.0; : 2014 = 2.197; : 2013 = 1.653 (2) - 2013=1.474 (5)|
|Citation count*||69 (2020-09-13)|
* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.