Results of the Seventh International Comparison of Absolute Gravimeters ICAG-2005 at the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures, Sèvres

Vitushkin, L. F.; Jiang, Z.; Robertsson, L.; Becker, Matthias; Francis, Olivier; Germak, Alessandro; D'Agostino, G.; Pálinkáš, Vojtech; Amalvict, M.; Bayer, R.; Bilker‐Koivula, Mirjam; Desogus, S.; Faller, J. E.; Falk, Reinhard; Hinderer, J.; Gagnon, C.; Jakob, T; Kalish, E. N.; Kostelecký, Jakub; Lee, Chiungwu; Liard, J.; Lokshyn, Y.; Luck, B.; Mäkinen, Jaakko; Mizushima, Shigeki; Moigne, Nicolas Le; Origlia, Claudio; Pujol, E. Rodríguez; Richard, P.; Ruess, D.; Schmerge, D.; Stus, Yu. F.; Svitlov, S.; Thies, S.; Ullrich, Ch.; Camp, Michel Van; Vitushkin, A. L.; Wilmes, H.

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-10634-7_7

Cited by 11 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The AG suppliers have worked with the pilot laboratory at the BIPM (Task Group on Technical Protocol and Budget of Uncertainties of the CCM WGG and the IAG SGCAG 2.1.1) to reach agreement over potential distortions and it was decided that for ICAG 2005 the conventional assignment of the instrument u depending on the type of AGs would be used [8]. The expanded uncertainty U of an AG was then evaluated in principle, according to the International Standardization Organization (ISO) Guide [13].…”

Section: Uncertainties Of Ags a Metrological Kc Results Consists Of Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 1 lists the number of AGs which have participated in ICAG meetings. The 7th ICAG and associated RGC took place at the BIPM in 2005 [8][9][10]. The Consultative Committee on Mass and Related Quantities' Working Group on Gravimetry, Study Group 2.1.1 on Comparison of Absolute Gravimeters of the International Association of Geodesy (IAG) and the BIPM jointly organized the 7th ICAG.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Final report on the Seventh International Comparison of Absolute Gravimeters (ICAG 2005)*

et al. 2011

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM), Sèvres, France, hosted the 7th International Comparison of Absolute Gravimeters (ICAG) and the associated Relative Gravity Campaign (RGC) from August to September 2005.ICAG 2005 was prepared and performed as a metrological pilot study, which aimed:(1) To determine the gravity comparison reference values;(2) To determine the offsets of the absolute gravimeters; and (3) As a pilot study to accumulate experience for the CIPM Key Comparisons.This document presents a complete and extensive review of the technical protocol and data processing procedures. The 1st ICAG-RGC comparison was held at the BIPM in 1980-1981 and since then meetings have been organized every 4 years.In this paper, we present an overview of how the meeting was organized, the conditions of BIPM gravimetric sites, technical specifications, data processing strategy and an analysis of the final results. This 7th ICAG final report supersedes all previously published reports.Readings were obtained from participating instruments, 19 absolute gravimeters and 15 relative gravimeters. Precise levelling measurements were carried out and all measurements were performed on the BIPM micro-gravity network which was specifically designed for the comparison.

show abstract

Section: Uncertainties Of Ags a Metrological Kc Results Consists Of Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Final report on the Seventh International Comparison of Absolute Gravimeters (ICAG 2005)*

et al. 2011

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fortunately, portable and easyto-use commercial absolute gravimeters are available that can provide a local value of g with a relative standard uncertainty of a few parts in 10 9 . That these instruments can achieve such a small uncertainty if properly used is demonstrated by a periodic international comparison of absolute gravimeters (ICAG) carried out at the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM), Sèvres, France; the seventh and most recent, denoted ICAG-2005, was completed in September 2005 (Vitushkin et al, 2005); the next is scheduled for 2009. In the future, atom interferometry or Bloch oscillations using ultracold atoms could provide a competitive or possibly more accurate method for determining a local value of g (Cladé et al, 2005;McGuirk et al, 2002;Peters et al, 2001).…”

Section: Special Quantities and Unitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

CODATA Recommended Values of the Fundamental Physical Constants: 2006

Mohr,

Taylor,

Newell

2008

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper gives the 2006 self-consistent set of values of the basic constants and conversion factors of physics and chemistry recommended by the Committee on Data for Science and Technology (CODATA) for international use. Further, it describes in detail the adjustment of the values of the constants, including the selection of the final set of input data based on the results of least-squares analyses. The 2006 adjustment takes into account the data considered in the 2002 adjustment as well as the data that became available between 31 December 2002, the closing date of that adjustment, and 31 December 2006, the closing date of the new adjustment. The new data have led to a significant reduction in the uncertainties of many recommended values. The 2006 set replaces the previously recommended 2002 CODATA set and may also be found on the World Wide Web at physics.nist.gov/constants. ContentsGlossary * This report was prepared by the authors under the auspices of the CODATA Task Group on Fundamental Constants. The members of the task group are:

show abstract

“…[6] Intercomparison campaigns have shown systematic errors (offsets) between the different absolute gravimeters that are larger than the declared uncertainties [Vitushkin et al, 2002[Vitushkin et al, , 2010Francis et al, 2005Francis et al, , 2010. Although the offsets can be determined by comparing the instruments, this is always within uncertainties and not always logistically feasible.…”

Section: The Absolute Gravimetermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other malfunctioning components may also bias the AG [Wziontek et al, 2008]; this is why, before and after each campaign, the instrument measured at the Membach reference station, where it was compared with the continuously measuring superconducting gravimeter [Van Camp et al, 2005; Van Camp and Francis, 2006]. Finally, the FG5#202 was regularly compared to other AG meters [Robertsson et al, 2001;Vitushkin et al, 2002Vitushkin et al, , 2010Van Camp et al, 2003;Francis et al, 2005Francis et al, , 2010Baumann et al, 2010]. The FG5#202 also benefited from maintenances by the manufacturer in 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2010, where it was also compared to other FG5s.…”

Section: The Absolute Gravimetermentioning

confidence: 99%

Repeated absolute gravity measurements for monitoring slow intraplate vertical deformation in western Europe

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In continental plate interiors, ground surface movements are at the limit of the noise level and close to or below the accuracy of current geodetic techniques. Absolute gravity measurements are valuable to quantify slow vertical movements, as this instrument is drift free and, unlike GPS, independent of the terrestrial reference frame. Repeated absolute gravity (AG) measurements have been performed in Oostende (Belgian coastline) and at eight stations along a southwest‐northeast profile across the Belgian Ardennes and the Roer Valley Graben (Germany), in order to estimate the tectonic deformation in the area. The AG measurements, repeated once or twice a year, can resolve elusive gravity changes with a precision better than 3.7 nm/s2/yr (95% confidence interval) after 11 years, even in difficult conditions. After 8–15 years (depending on the station), we find that the gravity rates of change lie in the [−3.1, 8.1] nm/s2/yr interval and result from a combination of anthropogenic, climatic, tectonic, and glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) effects. After correcting for the GIA, the inferred gravity rates and consequently, the vertical land movements, reduce to zero within the uncertainty level at all stations except Jülich (because of man‐induced subsidence) and Sohier (possibly, an artifact because of the shortness of the time series at that station).

show abstract

Results of the Seventh International Comparison of Absolute Gravimeters ICAG-2005 at the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures, Sèvres

Cited by 11 publications

References 5 publications

Final report on the Seventh International Comparison of Absolute Gravimeters (ICAG 2005)*

Final report on the Seventh International Comparison of Absolute Gravimeters (ICAG 2005)*

CODATA Recommended Values of the Fundamental Physical Constants: 2006

Repeated absolute gravity measurements for monitoring slow intraplate vertical deformation in western Europe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About