Conclusions
1. Any difference between the operating principles (algorithm) of the instrument and the mathematical definition leads to calibration-inaccuracy errors; in measuring practice it is difficult to allow for these or to estimate them quantitatively. 2. In choosing the instrument operator A0, the most desirable one is an operator coinciding with the definition of the quantity to be measured, since correctly-calibrated instruments lead to smaller errors in the results of the measurements under real conditions of use (δk=0).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Literature cited
V. Ya. Volodardskii, Metrologiya, No. 11 (1971).
N. Ya. Vilenkin et al., Functional Analysis [in Russian], Nauka, Moscow (1964).
V. Ya. Rozenberg and M. I. Shumakov, in: Papers of the Third All-Union Symposium on Methods of Representation and Apparatus Analysis of Random Processes and Fields [in Russian], VNIIÉP, Leningrad (1970).
All-Union State Standard 13473-68, Electronic Voltmeters, Methods and Means of Verification at Frequencies 55 (50), 400, and 1000 Hz.
All-Union State Standard 16951-71, Electronic Pulse Voltmeters with Pointer Reading, Methods and Means of Verification.
Additional information
Translated from Izmeritel'naya Tekhnika, No. 10, pp. 18–19, October, 1974.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Volodarskii, V.Y. Correctness of the calibration of measuring devices. Meas Tech 17, 1493–1496 (1974). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00817068
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00817068