The measured power (in red) and the power applied to the electrical heater (in black) are shown as a function of the time. The yellow line corresponds to an exponential fuction with τ = τ Ce. The green line corresponds to the error band of 0.2% on the measured power. 

Contexts in source publication

Context 1

... the INFN-TUM calorimeter, the calibration results, performed by applying to the heaters a constant and well known power, demonstrated that, under optimized conditions, the losses are always less than 0.2% and compatible with zero since the final statistical uncertainties of 0.2% resulted. In Figure 2 the measured power as a function of the time is shown, as acquired when a decaying power with the lifetime equal to the Cerium lifetime was set to the electrical heater. After an initial phase of around 2 days, necessary to the system to thermalize (that is present also when the power is set constant), the calorimetric measured value becomes close to the set value and after about 3 days its behavior follows the exponential function of the set power with the same time constant. In fact after the thermalization phase, the difference between the set and the measured power is found to be almost constant during the time and dependent not only on the heat losses (that would increase such difference), but mainly on the time necessary to the heat to be propagated from the inner source to the external copper jacket (that on the contrary decreases the difference itself). However, since the Cerium lifetime is much bigger respect with this propagation time, the final dif- ference between the set and the measured value after the 3 days of thermalization results inside the statistical error of 0.2% (see Figure 2), confirmating that the expected calorimetric measurement accuracy is about ...

Context 2

... the INFN-TUM calorimeter, the calibration results, performed by applying to the heaters a constant and well known power, demonstrated that, under optimized conditions, the losses are always less than 0.2% and compatible with zero since the final statistical uncertainties of 0.2% resulted. In Figure 2 the measured power as a function of the time is shown, as acquired when a decaying power with the lifetime equal to the Cerium lifetime was set to the electrical heater. After an initial phase of around 2 days, necessary to the system to thermalize (that is present also when the power is set constant), the calorimetric measured value becomes close to the set value and after about 3 days its behavior follows the exponential function of the set power with the same time constant. In fact after the thermalization phase, the difference between the set and the measured power is found to be almost constant during the time and dependent not only on the heat losses (that would increase such difference), but mainly on the time necessary to the heat to be propagated from the inner source to the external copper jacket (that on the contrary decreases the difference itself). However, since the Cerium lifetime is much bigger respect with this propagation time, the final dif- ference between the set and the measured value after the 3 days of thermalization results inside the statistical error of 0.2% (see Figure 2), confirmating that the expected calorimetric measurement accuracy is about ...

Context 3

... the INFN-TUM calorimeter, the calibration results, performed by applying to the heaters a constant and well known power, demonstrated that, under optimized conditions, the losses are always less than 0.2% and compatible with zero since the final statistical uncertainties of 0.2% resulted. In Figure 2 the measured power as a function of the time is shown, as acquired when a decaying power with the lifetime equal to the Cerium lifetime was set to the electrical heater. After an initial phase of around 2 days, necessary to the system to thermalize (that is present also when the power is set constant), the calorimetric measured value becomes close to the set value and after about 3 days its behavior follows the exponential function of the set power with the same time constant. In fact after the thermalization phase, the difference between the set and the measured power is found to be almost constant during the time and dependent not only on the heat losses (that would increase such difference), but mainly on the time necessary to the heat to be propagated from the inner source to the external copper jacket (that on the contrary decreases the difference itself). However, since the Cerium lifetime is much bigger respect with this propagation time, the final dif- ference between the set and the measured value after the 3 days of thermalization results inside the statistical error of 0.2% (see Figure 2), confirmating that the expected calorimetric measurement accuracy is about ...

Context 4

... the INFN-TUM calorimeter, the calibration results, performed by applying to the heaters a constant and well known power, demonstrated that, under optimized conditions, the losses are always less than 0.2% and compatible with zero since the final statistical uncertainties of 0.2% resulted. In Figure 2 the measured power as a function of the time is shown, as acquired when a decaying power with the lifetime equal to the Cerium lifetime was set to the electrical heater. After an initial phase of around 2 days, necessary to the system to thermalize (that is present also when the power is set constant), the calorimetric measured value becomes close to the set value and after about 3 days its behavior follows the exponential function of the set power with the same time constant. In fact after the thermalization phase, the difference between the set and the measured power is found to be almost constant during the time and dependent not only on the heat losses (that would increase such difference), but mainly on the time necessary to the heat to be propagated from the inner source to the external copper jacket (that on the contrary decreases the difference itself). However, since the Cerium lifetime is much bigger respect with this propagation time, the final dif- ference between the set and the measured value after the 3 days of thermalization results inside the statistical error of 0.2% (see Figure 2), confirmating that the expected calorimetric measurement accuracy is about ...

Context 5

... the INFN-TUM calorimeter, the calibration results, performed by applying to the heaters a constant and well known power, demonstrated that, under optimized conditions, the losses are always less than 0.2% and compatible with zero since the final statistical uncertainties of 0.2% resulted. In Figure 2 the measured power as a function of the time is shown, as acquired when a decaying power with the lifetime equal to the Cerium lifetime was set to the electrical heater. After an initial phase of around 2 days, necessary to the system to thermalize (that is present also when the power is set constant), the calorimetric measured value becomes close to the set value and after about 3 days its behavior follows the exponential function of the set power with the same time constant. In fact after the thermalization phase, the difference between the set and the measured power is found to be almost constant during the time and dependent not only on the heat losses (that would increase such difference), but mainly on the time necessary to the heat to be propagated from the inner source to the external copper jacket (that on the contrary decreases the difference itself). However, since the Cerium lifetime is much bigger respect with this propagation time, the final dif- ference between the set and the measured value after the 3 days of thermalization results inside the statistical error of 0.2% (see Figure 2), confirmating that the expected calorimetric measurement accuracy is about ...

Context 6

... the INFN-TUM calorimeter, the calibration results, performed by applying to the heaters a constant and well known power, demonstrated that, under optimized conditions, the losses are always less than 0.2% and compatible with zero since the final statistical uncertainties of 0.2% resulted. In Figure 2 the measured power as a function of the time is shown, as acquired when a decaying power with the lifetime equal to the Cerium lifetime was set to the electrical heater. After an initial phase of around 2 days, necessary to the system to thermalize (that is present also when the power is set constant), the calorimetric measured value becomes close to the set value and after about 3 days its behavior follows the exponential function of the set power with the same time constant. In fact after the thermalization phase, the difference between the set and the measured power is found to be almost constant during the time and dependent not only on the heat losses (that would increase such difference), but mainly on the time necessary to the heat to be propagated from the inner source to the external copper jacket (that on the contrary decreases the difference itself). However, since the Cerium lifetime is much bigger respect with this propagation time, the final dif- ference between the set and the measured value after the 3 days of thermalization results inside the statistical error of 0.2% (see Figure 2), confirmating that the expected calorimetric measurement accuracy is about ...