1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Precision sampling measurements using ac programmable Josephson voltage standards
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.2901683
/content/aip/journal/rsi/79/4/10.1063/1.2901683
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/rsi/79/4/10.1063/1.2901683
View: Figures

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Schematic of the differential sampling configuration used for comparing the voltages synthesized by two ACPJVS systems. All the generated clock input signals are locked to the same reference (not shown).

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Time-dependent voltage plot showing the sampling windows for a waveform containing 16 samples at an rms amplitude of . In this example waveform, alternating gray and white time slices represent different time integration windows of the sampling voltmeter. The gray zones are free of transients and therefore sample only the parts of the waveform where the voltage is accurately established. We discard the white sampling zones that contain the transients where the voltage is changing between steps.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Sampled voltages from a differential waveform containing 64 steps with peak amplitude for five different frequencies. The inset shows the stepwise voltages for a full waveform period and the rectangle illustrates the data range presented in the main frame, namely, steps 43 through 51.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Difference between the expected Josephson voltage and the measured voltage, for 64 sample waveforms of different frequencies. Step numbers 43–51 are presented here. The uncertainties are clearly independent of the differential amplitude (, , and ) of the waveform and dependent on the waveform frequency. Thus, the uncertainty depends primarily on the sampler’s aperture time.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Type A uncertainty (, averaged over the number of samples) measured for amplitude waveforms with various sample numbers (4, 32, and 64) as a function of the waveform frequency.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Measured Type A uncertainties (for differential waveforms) as a function of the aperture time of the voltmeter. The dashed line shows slope as a guide to the eye.

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

Standard deviation (for differential waveforms) as a function of the voltmeter aperture time. The line slope gives the general trend of the data dependence for this aperture time range.

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

Expected step voltage differences (calculated) between a chip and a chip (both generating rms sine waves), for (a) 32 and (b) 64 samples plotted vs the sample number for one complete waveform period.

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

The upper part of the figure [(a)–(c)] schematically shows how the sampling windows shift (, 0%, and ) relative to the center of each ACPJVS waveform step. (d) Difference between the reconstructed rms voltage and the expected ideal rms voltage for array B ( chip, rms) as a function of the relative time alignment with the sampling voltmeter. Array A ( chip) provides the voltage reference levels for reconstructing the rms voltage of array B. Both plots (60 and ) use 32 samples.

Image of FIG. 10.
FIG. 10.

Difference between the reconstructed rms voltage and the expected ideal rms voltage for array B ( chip, rms) as a function of the dither current flowing in array B. Array A ( chip) provides the rms reference for reconstruction of the rms voltage of array B. Measurement results are shown for two different waveforms with 32 and 64 samples. The upper plot shows a 100 times smaller voltage range.

Image of FIG. 11.
FIG. 11.

Difference between the reconstructed measured rms voltage and the expected ideal rms voltage for array B ( chip, rms) at different frequencies. Array A ( chip) provides the voltage reference for reconstructing the rms voltage of array B. Waveforms with both 32 and 64 samples were synthesized at each frequency. Both plots (a) and (b) show the same voltage difference, but on different voltage scales. The combined uncertainty of the measurement is only shown in (b).

Image of FIG. 12.
FIG. 12.

Voltmeter gain and linearity on the range in (a) dc mode, and (b) the sampling mode, with 32 sample triangular waveforms. . The plotted uncertainties correspond to the standard deviation of the mean with (a) three measured points and (b) 500 measured points.

Image of FIG. 13.
FIG. 13.

Voltmeter gain and linearity in the null detector configuration ( amplitude voltages) in (a) dc mode and (b) sampling mode, with 32 sample triangular waveforms. . The plotted uncertainties correspond to the standard deviation of the mean with (a) three measured points and (b) 500 measured points.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/rsi/79/4/10.1063/1.2901683
2008-04-21
2014-04-20
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Precision sampling measurements using ac programmable Josephson voltage standards
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/rsi/79/4/10.1063/1.2901683
10.1063/1.2901683
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM