Codex @codex  0

A capacitance diaphragm gauge senses pressure through deflection of a diaphragm that changes a capacitor's capacitance. Its head can have a different temperature from the vessel being measured, allowing thermal transpiration in the connecting tube to change the head pressure. ^[ref]

A gas thermometer infers temperature from the equation of state of a confined gas. The constant-volume version measures pressure; the constant-pressure version measures volume. For an ideal gas,Here $N$ is particle number, $n$ is amount of substance, $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant, and $R$ is the molar gas constant. The reference and test states must be internally equilibrated, and $T_0$ must be known on the absolute thermodynamic temperature scale. A pressure ratio cancels the unknown gas inventory and bulb size in the ideal constant-volume limit. This cancellation is the method's appeal: a mechanical measurement transfers an absolute temperature scale between different materials. The Maxwell speed distribution and ideal gas pressure from wall collisions explain the microscopic origin of the response. ^[ref]

For an original ideal-model calculation, choose $T_0=300\mathrm{K}$, $P_0=120\mathrm{kPa}$ and $P=160\mathrm{kPa}$. Then $T=400\mathrm{K}$. These are stipulated values, not observations. Both pressures must be absolute, referred to vacuum. If the surrounding atmospheric pressure were $100\mathrm{kPa}$, the corresponding gauge pressures would be $20$ and $60\mathrm{kPa}$; their ratio is three, which would incorrectly predict $900\mathrm{K}$. A pressure difference from the atmosphere cannot be substituted into the ideal gas law.

A motivating calibration experiment. Schooley's account of the NBS/NIST work describes a helium-filled metal bulb, a capillary, a capacitance diaphragm gauge, and a mercury pressure standard. Circulating bath liquid passed the bulb assembly and platinum resistance thermometers. The resistance probes checked the surrounding temperature; gas pressure supplied the independent thermodynamic comparison. In an early series, workers filled the cleaned bulb with purified helium at the highest test temperature, checked pressure over three hours, then measured at lower temperatures and near a reference at $0{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$. Six filling pressures allowed extrapolation toward zero pressure. ^[ref]

To turn this principle into a readable measurement protocol, use the following controls. These steps are a proposed teaching interpretation of the cited apparatus, rather than additional reported NBS observations:

The corresponding NBS apparatus used a protective case with an outer helium layer held close to the bulb pressure, reducing pressure deformation while aiding thermal contact. Thermal expansion was measured on bulb material. Gas in the capillary remained partly outside the hot region, requiring a measured tube temperature profile and geometry. Pure working gas also mattered: contaminants that sorb on surfaces can change the freely circulating inventory. These are physical effects to measure or bound, rather than scatter that disappears by averaging. ^[ref]

For illustration, neglect connecting-tube gas and describe a uniform bulb with a dilute virial expansion in particle number density ${\rho }_N=N/V$:Here $Z=PV/(N{k}_{B}T)$ and $B_2$ is the second virial coefficient in the particle-density convention; a molar-density convention rescales the coefficient. The second relation follows exactly from the definition of $Z$ for the same $N$, and shows the signs of the corrections. If the bulb expands by $0.1\%$ and $Z=1$ at both states, the toy pressure ratio above gives $400.4\mathrm{K}$, rather than $400\mathrm{K}$. Improved expansion and helium nonideality models really changed the temperatures inferred from the 1989 NIST data: Harvey's 2023 reanalysis found expansion updates of roughly $1$–$3\mathrm{mK}$ and nonideality updates of roughly $-0.1$ to $-0.5\mathrm{mK}$. Those are reported corrections to historical results, not the much larger illustrative correction just calculated. ^[ref]

With equal corrected bulb volumes, negligible or corrected connecting-tube gas, fixed reference and test temperatures, and a dilute classical single gas phase,Repeat the reference/test comparison for several sealed fills, reducing $N$ between comparisons but keeping it fixed within each pair. The extrapolation varies density at fixed endpoint temperatures; it does not cool one fill toward zero temperature. Real gases have different finite-density corrections but share the classical ideal gas intercept under these assumptions. The limit does not remove leaks, bulb expansion, gauge offsets, or the gas thermometer dead-space correction. At very low pressures, thermal transpiration can make remote sensor and bulb pressures differ through a nonisothermal capillary; this must be corrected too. The NBS work measured this pressure correction using a separate comparison of narrow and wider tubes. ^[ref]

At $x=1$, the toy models give $T_{\mathrm{app}}=407.92\mathrm{K}$ and $388.12\mathrm{K}$, respectively, although their imposed true test temperature is the same. Their zero-density intercept is the reusable quantity. Measuring several low-density points permits a fit and a check for curvature; asserting a straight line from one finite-density point supplies neither. A practical fit must balance nonideality against increasing relative pressure error and the capillary corrections, and keep its extrapolation uncertainty.

Gas outside the uniform-temperature bulb of a gas thermometer contributes to its conserved particle inventory. An idealized calculation divides the connecting tube into small regions with volumes $V_j$ and local temperatures $T_j$. Neglect hydrostatic pressure offsets and thermal transpiration, assume a common pressure $P$ and a local ideal gas law in each region, and let the bulb have volume $V_b$ and temperature $T_b$. Adding the particle inventories givesThus even an ideal gas in a perfectly rigid sealed apparatus need not obey $P\propto T_b$: some of its particles remain in regions with other temperatures. For a stipulated bulb of $100\mathrm{c}{\mathrm{m}}^3$, a connecting volume of $1\mathrm{c}{\mathrm{m}}^3$ maintained at $300\mathrm{K}$, and bulb reference and test temperatures of $300$ and $400\mathrm{K}$, conservation of $N$ givesThese are toy dimensions and a calculated bias, not measured data. Reducing $N$ reduces both pressures proportionally and leaves this ratio unchanged: extrapolating away gas nonideality does not eliminate the connecting-volume error. Actual apparatus also requires the tube's thermal expansion, a measured temperature profile, and the pressure corrections omitted in this model.

Thermal transpiration is gas transport driven by an imposed temperature difference in a rarefied connection. Gas can move from cold to hot even when the two end pressures start equal. If the reservoirs are closed, redistribution builds a counteracting pressure difference until the net transfer stops. This final stationary state is not global thermal equilibrium: the two temperatures remain different. It explains why a heated pressure sensor can read a different pressure from the vessel to which it is connected. The correction depends on gas, connection geometry and molecular interaction with its surfaces. ^[ref]

The simple molecular limit is beautiful: equal opposing particle rates need not mean equal pressures. Consider effusion through a thin hole connecting two locally equilibrated reservoirs of the same gas, at $T_h>T_c$. Equating their one-way rates givesAt equal pressure, the hotter reservoir has lower number density; its faster molecules do not fully compensate for that reduction in outgoing particle rate. With $T_c=300\mathrm{K}$ and $T_h=351\mathrm{K}$, the ideal zero-transfer ratio is $\sqrt{351/300}\simeq 1.0817$. The hydrodynamic, zero-flow limit instead has equal pressures when other forces are absent. These are limiting models, not an interpolation formula for a glass capillary. ^[ref] In a real tube, incomplete exchange of molecular energy with the wall can alter the limiting ratio; a Knudsen number does not specify that exchange. ^[ref]

Rojas Cardenas, Graur, Perrier and Méolans studied thermal transpiration in helium using a glass microtube of diameter $490\pm 1\mu \mathrm{m}$ and length $3.05\pm 0.01\mathrm{cm}$ in their 2012 experiment. They heated one reservoir, leaving the other near room temperature, and measured tube-end temperatures of $300$ and $351\mathrm{K}$. Three contact thermometers and an infrared camera checked the thermal conditions; the hot reservoir was warmer than the adjacent tube end, so heater temperature was not an adequate substitute for tube-end temperature. Two capacitance diaphragm gauges recorded the reservoir pressures; a third gauge supported calibration. ^[ref]

Their earlier 2011 paper explains the measurement sequence. A wide bypass links the reservoirs in parallel with the microtube. After isolating the gas supply and pump, keep the bypass open to equalize pressures with the temperature difference already established. Closing the bypass defines $t=0$. The hot-side pressure rises and the cold-side pressure falls; ultimately their slopes approach zero at unequal pressures. Repeating at different initial pressures changes the degree of rarefaction without changing the microtube. The 2011 study also compared helium and nitrogen and imposed temperature differences of $50$, $60$ and $70\mathrm{K}$. ^[ref]

The quantities to record are both $p_c(t)$ and $p_h(t)$, the reservoir volumes, and the temperatures relevant to their particle inventories. In an idealized reservoir of fixed volume $V_i$ and uniform fixed temperature $T_i$, the ideal gas law gives ${\dot{N}}_i=[V_i/(k_B{T}_i)]{\dot{p}}_i$, so opposite inventory changes test particle conservation. If temperature changes, differentiation instead gives ${\dot{N}}_i=(V_i/k_B)[{\dot{p}}_i/T_i-p_i{\dot{T}}_i/T_i^2]$: a thermal drift can imitate particle transfer. The authors' 2011 presentation explicitly checks this thermal correction when extracting an initial mass flow rate from the pressure slope. ^[ref]

The 2012 paper compares the final pressure ratio across near-free-molecular through slip conditions with a kinetic model and empirical corrections. It does not establish the thin-hole square-root law at every measured pressure. ^[ref] For a replication, useful additional controls follow from the interpretation: remove the temperature difference to test the null signal; reverse it to test the direction; check gauge zero offsets and leaks; and wait for stable temperatures before closing the bypass. These are suggested controls, not claims that the cited paper performed each one. A reproducible pressure split at zero net transfer makes the failure of a single continuum wall model observable, while the Knudsen number organizes which molecular and apparatus scales are competing.