Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The comparison CCM.P-K15 is a key comparison in pressure involving six laboratories in three regional metrological organizations (RMO). The measurand of the comparison is the accommodation coefficient of two spinning rotating gauge characterized in nitrogen from 0.1 mPa up to 1.0 Pa. The two transfer standards were circulated from November 2009 until March 2011. The circulation consisted of three loops, one for each RMO, and a new calibration by the pilot between each loop. The stability of one of the transfer standards was poor and was worse than expected based on the previous history of the transfer standard while the other transfer standard demonstrated good stability while circulated in Europe and America and a fair stability while circulated in Asia. All the participants demonstrated equivalence to the definition of pressure in their respective primary standards.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5514878 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0026-1394/54/1A/07003 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!