Subject: Calibrating dataloggers
In the recent exchanges about the advantages and disadvantages of different makes of dataloggers, several people mentioned the difficulty or expense of calibrating them. I thought my experience of calibrating dataloggers might be of interest. In my previous job at English Heritage, I used several types of logger: ACR (old and new versions), Humbugs, Tinytags, and I always calibrated them myself, using saturated salt solutions. I had three desiccator cabinets with the solutions in the trays in the bottom. I chose salts whose RH change very little with temperature: potassium acetate (approximately 23%), magnesium nitrate (approximately 54%) and ammonium chloride (approximately 79%), the data being taken from an NBS compilation. The cabinets were kept in a room where the temperature did not vary too much, though an insulated cabinet can be improvised from an old refrigerator or freezer (not switched on!). After setting the calibration factors to zero, I placed the loggers in the lowest RH cabinet for at least three days: I found it takes two or three days for the sensors to respond fully to low RH, then in the medium RH cabinet for three days, and finally in the high RH cabinet for three days. I then downloaded the loggers and picked points on the three regions of the graph where the temperature and RH had been steady for at least 12 hours. These points were then used to calculate the calibration factors. For ACR loggers, I used a simple spreadsheet to calculate the calibration factors. I then used the "Modify file" function to insert these calibration factors into the calibration graphs. If the calibration is correct the graph should now show the theoretical RH for each of the saturated salts. I checked this by using the "Compound equation" function to calculate the theoretical RH for each saturated salt solution, using the measured temperature data and the temperature dependence given in the NBS paper and overlaying them on the calibration graph. It is useful to do this because you can then ensure that the whole calibration graph is a reasonable fit to the theoretical values, rather than just at the points you have chosen. Using this method I have usually got the calibration graph to fit the theoretical values to within 2-3%, which is as good as can be expected for general-purpose RH measurements. If anybody would like further details of the spreadsheet or compound equations, please contact me off-list. Dr Barry Knight Head of Conservation Research The British Library 96 Euston Road London NW1 2DB +44 20 7412 7229 Fax: +44 20 7412 7658 *** Conservation DistList Instance 17:4 Distributed: Monday, June 23, 2003 Message Id: cdl-17-4-002 ***Received on Monday, 23 June, 2003