Regional comparison of absolute gravimeters, EURAMET.M.G-K2 key comparison

In the framework of the regional EURAMET.M.G-K2 comparison of absolute gravimeters, 17 gravimeters were compared in November 2015. Four gravimeters were from different NMIs and DIs, they were used to link the regional comparison to the CCM.G.K2 by means of linking converter. Combined least-squares adjustments with weighted constraint was used to determine KCRV. Several pilot solutions are presented and compared with the official solution to demonstrate influences of different approaches (e.g. definition of weights and the constraint) on results of the adjustment. In case of the official solution, all the gravimeters are in equivalence with declared uncertainties. == Main text To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report [http://www.bipm.org/utils/common/pdf/final_reports/M/G-K2/EURAMET.M.G-K2.pdf] . Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/ [http://kcdb.bipm.org/] . The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA)

Regional comparison of absolute gravimeters, EURAMET.M.G-K2 key comparison

In the framework of the regional EURAMET.M.G-K2 comparison of absolute gravimeters, 17 gravimeters were compared in November 2015. Four gravimeters were from different NMIs and DIs, they were used to link the regional comparison to the CCM.G.K2 by means of linking converter. Combined least-squares adjustments with weighted constraint was used to determine KCRV. Several pilot solutions are presented and compared with the official solution to demonstrate influences of different approaches (e.g. definition of weights and the constraint) on results of the adjustment. In case of the official solution, all the gravimeters are in equivalence with declared uncertainties