MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE BY ANDERSON'S METHOD,

USING ALTERNATING CURRENTS AND A VIBRATION GAL-

VANOMETER.

By Edward B. Rosa and Fredeeick W. Grover.

1. HISTORY OF THE METHOD.

Several modifications of Maxwell's method ^ of comparing an induc-

tance with a capacity have been proposed in order to obviate the double
adjustment of resistances necessary in that method. Maxwell showed

Fig. 1. Maxwell's method.

that if (1) the bridge is balanced for steady currents and ar the same

time (2) the resistances are so chosen that there is no deflection of the
galvanometer when the battery current is suddenl}^ closed or broken,
then
L=OEQ=OPS (1)

where L is the inductance in the arm A D^ the resistance of which is

Electricity and Magnetism, 778.

291
292 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [vol. 1, NO. 3.

Q^ C is the value of the capacity in parallel with B^ and P^ B, and S

are noninductive resistances.
In order to satisfy both of these conditions two of the arms of the
bridge must be varied simultaneously, so that the balance for steady
currents ma}'' be maintained while the balance for transient currents
is sought. This is general^ a tedious process, although by means of
a small variable inductance in Q^ in addition to the inductance to be
measured, and a multiple valued condenser the process might be con-
siderably accelerated.
In 1891 Professor Anderson proposed" an important modification
of Maxwell's method, which consisted in joining the condenser to a
point ^, separated from (7 by a variable resistance r. The bridge
being balanced for steady currents by varying any one of the four
arms of the bridge, the balance for transient currents is then made by
c

BATTERY OR
A.C.GENERATOR

Fig. 2.Anderson's method.

varying 7\which does not disturb the balance of the bridge for steady
currents. This change, which rendered the two adjustments independ-
ent, removed at once a most serious difficulty and made the method
thoroughly practicable.
Anderson's demonstration for the case of transient currents gives
for the value of the inductance (changing the letters to correspond to
fig. 2)
Z = 0[r{Q+S)^FS] (2)

If r=^0, L = CPS, as in Maxwell's method.

In the use of Anderson's method r may be small, so that OPS is
the principal part of the expression for the inductance, or it may be
larger, and the term, Cr {Q-\-S)^ represents the larger part of L.
first

Thus a considerable range of values of inductance may be measured

Phil. Mag., 31, p. 329, 1891.
 ROSA,
GROVER. ] MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 293

without changing the arms of the bridge or the capacity of the

condenser.
Stroud and Oates have proposed another modification of Maxwell's
^'

method, which they have used with much success in measuring induc-
tances. Instead of employing an interrupted current from a battery,
as Anderson had done, they used an alternating current and an alter-
nating-current galvanometer, the latter being essentially a d' Arson val
galvanometer, with the field magnet laminated and strongly excited
by an alternating current from the generator. The galvanometer was
thus made very sensitive, and to increase the sensitiveness still further
the resistance r was placed outside the bridge, as shown in Fig. 3. It
will be seen that this arrangement differs from Maxwell's only in
separating the point Bfrom the terminal of the condenser by the

Fig. 3. Stroud's method.

auxiliary adjustable resistance which in Anderson's method is in
?',

the galvanometer circuit between C and D. As the resistance r is

sometimes several hundred ohms, it reduces the sensibility when in
the galvanometer circuit, whereas in the arrangement of Fig. 3 the
electromotive force can be increased if r is large, and so keep the
same current in the bridge as when r is small, and thus maintain the
sensibility.
The expression for the inductance L in Stroud's method (changing
the letters to correspond with Fig. 3) is

Z=C\t{Q^P)-\-PS\ (3)

which closely resembles the formula for Anderson's method, but dif-

fers in having Q^P'wi the first term instead of Q^8.

Phil. Mag., 6, p. 707, 1903.

294 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [VOL. 1, NO. 3.

Prof esssor Fleming has pointed out that Stroud's arrangement may
be regarded as conjugate to Anderson's, the galvanometer and source
of current being interchanged, Fig. 4. In this case the formula is
exacth^ the same as for Anderson's method. If, however. Fig. 4 be
rearranged so as to agree with Fig. 3, it will be found that the arms P
and S are interchanged, and consequently that these letters must be
interchanged in the formula for L. This changes equation (2) into
equation (3).
Fleming and Clinton have employed Anderson's method for the
measurement of small inductances, using a battery and a rotating
commutator and galvanometer," and later Fleming employed an inter-
rupted current, produced by a vibrating armature, and a telephone.^
c

GALVANOMETER

Fig. 4.
o
Showing Stroud's method as conjugate to Anderson's.
During the past two years we have employed Anderson's method for
the measurement of both large and small inductances, using (1) a bat-
ter}' as a source of current and a d'Arsonval galvanometer, with a
rotating commutator to interrupt and reverse simultaneously the cur-
rent and galvanometer terminals; or (2), what has proved more satis-
an alternating current and a vibration galvanometer, the lat-
factor}^,
ter being tuned to the frequency of the current furnished by the
generator.
2. ADVANTAGES OF THE METHOD.

We have found the method rapid and convenient in practice and the
vibration galvanometer sufficient!}^ sensitive to permit very accurate
settings. As compared with other methods of accurately measuring
inductance, it possesses striking advantages, some of which will here
be specifically mentioned.

Phil. Mag.,o, p. 493; 1903. &Phil. Mag., 7, p. 586; 1904.

GROVER.] MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 295

{a) All methods of measuring inductances without the use of a con-

denser (or other known inductance) require an accurate knowledge of
the frequenc}^ of the alternating current employed. It is not difficult
to determine accurately the mean f reqaenc}" of an alternating current,
even when the generator is inaccessible, as a counter may be employed
to record on a chronograph the number of revolutions in a given time;
moreover, the speed of the generator may be maintained sufficiently
constant to enable good settings to be made. But to hold the speed
steady enough to make settings of a high order of accuracy is difficult
and requires an assistant to control the speed. With Anderson's
method, even with a tuned galvanometer, slight changes of frequency
are not detrimental, and hence the labor of taking the observations is
greatly reduced.
(b) The inductancedetermined in terms of a capacity, in addition
is

to several resistances, which are also required in other methods of

measuring inductance. A capacity can be measured by Maxwell's
bridge method, using a commutator, with very great exactness, pro-
vided care is taken in choosing the resistances of the arms of the
bridge," and also provided the temperature of the condenser is taken
and a temperature correction subsequently applied whenever necessary
The capacit}^ of a condenser is not the same for slow charges as for
rapid charges, and hence, if Anderson's method is used for transient
currents, the capacity employed in the formula should correspond
to the conditions of the experiment. As the successive makes and
breaks of the current are likel}^ to be irregular, the result would
be that the effective capacity would vary slightly in successive trials,
even with the best mica condensers. On the other hand, using an
interrupted or alternating current of constant frequency, the capacity
is uniform and definite, and if it is measured at the same frequency
there is no uncertainty as to its value. In our experiments we employ
an eight-pole generator, giving four complete cycles in each revolu-
tion. To this generator is joined the commutator which is employed
in charging and discharging the condenser when measuring its capacity,
the commutator having four segments, and hence charging and dis-
charging the condenser four times in each revolution. Thus the fre-
quency of charge and discharge of the condenser may be made exactly
the same in use as when its capacity is measured. The change of
capacity of a condenser with the frequency is very slight, but in meas-
urements of the highest accuracy it is well to eliminate the slight
uncertainty due to change of frequency.

a Bulletin of the Bureau of Standards, No. 2, 1905.

296 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [vol.1, no. 3.

(c) The formula simple, and com-

for calculating the inductance is

parativel}^ few quantities have There is, however,

to be measured.
a sufficient number of variables
to permit measuring inductances of a
ver}^ wide range of values with the same bridge, using comparatively
few values of the capacity.
{d) The method is particularly well adapted to measure inductance
b}^ the substitution method, where the inductance to be determined is
replaced by a standard of nearly equal value. The difference between
them can then be measured with very great precision, the residual
errors of the bridge being nearly if not entirely eliminated.
There are no disadvantages of the method that are not shared by
other methods, except so far as the use of a condenser may be deemed
a disadvantage. There are, however, some sources of error to be
guarded against which we shall discuss later.

3. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF A VIBRATION GALVANOMETER.

When the bridge is completely balanced (the conditions for a resist-
ance balance and an inductance balance being simultaneously satisfied)
the current will be zero in the galvanometer at every instant. If,
however, the steady current balance is slightly disturbed b}^ the heat-
ing of the resistances, especially that of the inductance coil to be
measured, no adjustment of the variable resistance r will make the
current in the galvanometer zero. The result is that the needle of the
galvanometer will have a certain minimum amplitude of vibration
when r is correctly set. If now one of the resistances (say Q) is
slightly altered, a complete balance may be attained and the needle
will be perfectly still. This will be seen to be a distinct advantage,
for one is always certain, when the needle is quiet, that hoth of the
conditions of the hridge are satisfied; namely, the condition of the
simple Wheatstone bridge {P S=jR 0, and the condition imposed by
the presence of the inductance which requires a particular value for
the resistance r. But the vibration galvanometer does more than
merely save the trouble of going back to the use of a direct current
and a direct current galvanometer to see whether the balance still

holds; for, when an appreciable current is used, the resistance ma}^ be

changing sufficiently to render such a test insufficient. The vibration
galvanometer, on the other hand, insures that at the very moment
when the inductive balance is attained the resistance balance also holds,
and thus no error from this cause can enter.
Still further, if the resistance of the inductive coil, or of the arms
of the bridge, is different when carrying alternating current from its
resistance when carrving direct current (as it always is, although the
difference is very small for tine wires and low frequencies), the vibra-
 ] MEASUKEMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 297

tion galvanometer takes account of the true resistance under the con-
ditions of the experiment as a direct current galvanometer could not
do. This is of considerable importance in measuring the inductance
of coils of large wire. Neither a telephone nor an alternating current
d' Arson valgalvanometer possesses this advantage.
In practice it is not necessary to make a close adjustment of the
direct-current balance at all, as this can be determined just as well by
the vibration galvanometer. In our work a graduated scale is viewed
in a telescope by reflection from the mirror of the vibration galvano-
meter, the filament of an incandescent lamp used to illuminate the
scale being also seen in the telescope. When an approximate adjust-
ment of T and Q is secured, the filament will appear somewhat broad-

20
\
(\
s \
\
.

h \
\ 1
/ \
315 \
2 \
H \ \
\
1 ^
\
\ 1
\
h \ /
Q y
y ^"^
^^ y
5 -^
\

(0 M2' 1U 116 118 120 T22 124

Periods per Second

Fig. 5. Sensibility curve of the vibration galvanometer.

ened by the slight vibration of the needle of the galvanometer. Small
changes in r and Q are then made successively until the filament appears
as a fine line and the lines on the scale are perfectly distinct^. This
adjustment can be made so delicately that a change in r or Q of one
part in a hundred thousand can be detected, when measuring induc-
tances of large values.
The chief disadvantage of the vibration galvanometer lies in the fact
that its sensibility decreases rapidly when the frequency of the cur-
rent varies from the natural period of the galvanometer. The sensi-
bility is nearly constant for a range of about one-half per cent in the
frequency but falls off rapidly when the frequency goes beyond this
range.

Wien: Ann. d. Phys., 309, p. 441; 1901.

298 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [vol.1,no.3.

In order to maintain the frequency at the point of maximum sensi-

bilit}^ a Maxwell bridge is emplo3^ed, as when measuring the capacity
of a condenser. The condenser capacit}^ and resistances of the bridge
remaining constant, any change in speed causes a deflection of the
galvanometer. An adjustable carbon resistance in the armature cir-
cuit of the driving motor permits the speed to be adjusted so that the
deflection is reduced to zero. The motor is driven by current from a
storage battery, and hence the changes in speed are relatively small.
A glance at the galvanometer scale at an}^ time shows whether the
speed is correct, and if not, it is quickly adjusted by means of the
rheostat.
Fig. 5 gives the sensibility curve of the vibration galvanometer,
showing two peaks of high sensibility at 110.6 and 120 vibrations per
second, respectiveh . At a frequency of 115 the sensibilit}^ is very
low much less than it is at frequencies outside the peaks of maximum
sensibility. The curve is by changes of temperature, and can
affected
be altered at pleasure b}^ varying the length and tension of the suspen-
sion wire.
4. THE APPARATUS.

A Rubens vibration galvanometer,^ having a resistance of 200 ohms,

is used. Its frequency may be varied between 100 and 200 per sec-
ond, but has been used chiefly at about 110.
The several resistances are of manganin, and are all submerged in
oil, to prevent heating and temperatures to be more
to enable their
accurately determined. The values of these resistances have been
carefully measured every day that measurements of inductance have
been made, when results of the highest accuracy have been sought.
In series with the resistances r and Q^ and forming part of them, are
two slide wires which enable these resistances to be adjusted to 0.001
ohm, or even less, when necessary.
In order to eliminate as far as possible the errors due to slight
changes in the arms P
and It of the bridge, as well as any difference
in their residual inductance and capacity, these resistances are alwaj^s
made equal and a commutator is emplo3^ed to reverse them; a pair of
readings is taken in every case, the mean of which is used in the cal-
culation. The resistances Q and 8 were taken from two resistance
boxes, in which the higher coils are subdivided to reduce the electro-
static capacity of the coil. We found in some of our early work that
the residual capacit}^ or inductance of noninductive resistances may be
considerable; in the lower resistance coils the inductance predominates,
and in the higher coils the capacity predominates. The connecting

W. Oehmke, maker, Berlin.

 KOSA,
GROVEE. MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 299

^ 00
X
CM
'*
1

>;
~^
i^'
O
o
II
d

02 O . 1^
T
SU^g .. CO
CO 13 c S 5~
o
, 1

1
T? ^
o O
(M
CO
cr oq
lO
'f
si I

O; -* '^ CO
o
I L measure values.
r^
5~
c
I-H
c O
I-H

1 O c
, <3 ^
I-H
j_,
^H
5 iC ut5
Oi O g g g g
" ii

Png S* C<1 (M
GO gSs o
cr. Ot
H-^^

a, .
CC
c GO
<M
C<I
i>
o 'tl
C<1
CO

t^ + g 1>
GC
I-- iC
iC oc
1>^

^
r-s;

o Ol o
<M
CO CO
rH
CO
CO
<M

o W
"6 CO "* O c^
c^ C
iC CO iC CO

^ S" g GO oq iC CO
CO rS CO c Thi
s ^ o GO j> 1>
o
"

c<i iC
lO
-*
CO c
GC
CO CD
i
iC
i1 o
CO
oo
00
o
I> 1>-
CO
^
lO

rH
oq oq (M p_l
CO t^ Oi GO
o 1
Tfl 5--^ ^ (N
O u^ CO

"i
o t> !>
Tfl
lO
Ph

CO GQ g ^ tt -

_cc Q
<M pR o ^ O +

I c rH C<1 CO -* lO
300 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [VOL. 1, xo. 3.

"-^

h
5-
IC
I
a>
11
t^
l-H
t^
1
11 "^
l-H

Tf
1

-c
s o o o o o o 1

1
!<?*
o d d d d d
II

+ ++ + ++
CO lo ^ CO
o O
:

=8ums 1 <% 00 lO c Oi c
i^^
d ^
"*
single
"^ g
CO
I-H
alues. 1

CO
$
k^
^1
(M
8 g cc CO
.q-'S^

oq QO CD IC lO !>. IC CO Tti
1 =c iO
o CD
-*o CO
1

t^ c?> CO
o o o
O lO
o ^ d
o c d
Tt
measured

o g (M
o o o
i

CO* c:
o oN
c ^ o o o o
values.

^ r< GSl <N CO l-H r-( l-H

iO lO tJh CO (M cq ^_i 11 c o o o
^
>-
i-H
iO
1 l-H
lC
l-H l-H 11

Oi O o e g 3 3 3 3 3 3
^ l-H
"' "" ^ ^ -^ 1 rA H

con-
o g o o rH

1
:
^
00 denser. o oi
1

oi oc Oi ai OJ oi
Temp, T 1-H
of
1
;

1 o
o o Cvl <M
T
-*
lO
00 CO
^ ^
LO
CO
l:^
CD
^
00
1
CO
O CO
TtH
o GO 1>- 1>- -^ t^ Oi Oi CD TtH CO t^
O o t^
t 1 t^ t^ )0 IC ^ CD 1> 1>^ i>I d
Cq
o CO
OS
CO
o
^ ^
CO
Oi
t^
O)
05
O:
^
05
"^
Oi
"^
O
lO
l-H

U o
'd 11
o \o
lO
CO
I--
00
o cq
t^
^
t^
t^
00
CO
l-H
00 O
o lO
CO
t^
05 GO OO 00 oc CO OO
< o r i
CD mean
CO CO CO 00 c4 00 CO CO CO d
eorrecte

o I-- t^ b- I> t^
(M
IT-
(M
t^
CO
t^
CO
CO
^H
CO CO
I 1
CO
11

(M' (M (N
t-
(M CD IC
CD
(M
CO
t^ ^
00
iC
t-
CO rt( CO
CO
o a c ^ 1>- (M
GO
Tfl
CO 00 '^ l>
I>-
CD
i-H
CO 00
o Oi GO 00 TJH

iC ^-;3
^< CO CO CO GO t^ <m' (N' 00 CO CO CO d
o
!

'S t>- t- 1>- t^ i t^ 1>. t^ t^ oc CO CO CO

Q CO c^ CO CO l-H T
ft
~
I-H Tt^
o CD
o
GO
t^
CO
t^
o -.D
CO
VO
CO
^
CO
00 Th
CO
CD
OO
Oi 00 GO t^ Oi IC lO 00 J>- CO 00
o
Tfl s>.^
.!-<
J
/-v
tJ^*
1--
CO
I>-
CO
t^
00
t^
t^
t^
(M'
t^
CO
t^
od
l^
CO
c^
co
CO
CO
CO
d
CO
C<1 C<J CO CO 11 l-H T
1
(M (N 00 ~0D
o o
I
CO
Q CC
Q
CO ^ 1 o - " ^ ( "*
^ "*
^ "* "

o lO
c^
lO
c^
o
(M
c
c^

CD
O pq Q
<M < m ffi a 4-
+ + + ^ w W o
8 ffi ^ < w

11 (N CO -^ iC CO t^ OO OS o l-H CO
i l-H I-H T
 ROSA,
GROVER. J
"I MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 301

leads have substantial terminals and the resistances of these leads, in

thousandths of an ohm, is stamped on the terminals. Their values are
always included in making up the corrected resistances of the bridge.
The measurements shown in Tables I and II, made March 23, illus-
trate the results obtained in the determination of inductances of one
henry and one-tenth henry. An electromotive force of about 50 volts
was employed on the bridge.
Fig. 6 shows how the commutator was connected to the bridge so
as to reverse P and i?, which are equal. Formula (2) in this case
(QS) reduces to
Z=6'x^(2r+P).

Columns 4 and 5 give the nominal values of r in the two positions

of the commutator, and column 5 the mean value, corrected from the

Fig. 6.Showing commutator for interchanging two

arms of theAnderson Bridge.

results of the latest comparison of the resistances with standard

resistances.
Column 9 gives the capacity of the condenser C. Where two
inductances are measured in series the measured sum is given in col-
umn and the sum of the separate values are given in the next col-
10,
umn. The
last column gives the differences between these measured
values and the sums of the separate values. While these differences
are very small, averaging less than one in ten thousand, they are
appreciable and always positive. This indicates that there may be
some constant source of error in the bridge.

5. SOURCES OF ERROR.
The results given above show that measurements of inductance of
very great precision can be made by Anderson's method, provided
there are no constant errors of appreciable magnitude entering into
302 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [vol.1, no. 3.

the results. Such errors might be due to any one of the following
causes:
(a) The residual inductance or capacity of the resistance r and of
the arms of the bridge (not including, of course, the inductance of
the coil in Q which being measured) may introduce a constant error
is

in Z. As stated above,we have always made the arms and P ^

equal in value and reversed them by a commutator, in order to
eliminate any difference there may be in their resistances or in their
inductances or capacities. But the differences between Q and S can
not thus be eliminated. The total resistance of Q is, of course, equal
to S, since PB, (except for a small change due to residual induct-
ances, to be discussed later), but part of this is in the inductive coil
itself. Residual inductance in the noninductive part of Q makes the
measured value of L too large, and, conversely, capacity would make
it too small. The effect of inductance or capacity in 8 is of opposite
sign to that of Q^ and hence if the resistances of Q and S are similar^
that is, made up as far as possible of the same kind of coils, then
their effects will balance except for that part of 8 which equals the
resistance of the inductive coil. In our work S was fixed in any given
case, and Q was varied to secure a balance; thus Q usually contains
a number of small resistances in addition to the slide wire, and these
can not be counterbalanced exactly by S.
(b) The inductive coils must be removed some distance from the

bridge and from each other when two or more are measured at once.
This requires leads of one to three meters in length (for the larger
inductances), and these leads may affect the measured value of the
inductance. If they are close together, so as to be noninductive (as
twisted lamp cord, for instance), they possess an appreciable capacity;
and if far enough apart to be free from capacity, they possess measur-
able inductance. In measuring small inductance coils the capacity
effect is small, and it is better to have the leads close together and as
short as is safe. With large inductances the capacity of the leads is
more important, and it is better to have them farther apart, to reduce
it to a minimum. The inductance of the leads can then be calculated
(or separately measured) and applied as a correction, if desired, or
the same leads may always be employed with a given coil and consid-
ered as a part of the coil. The inductance of the wires joining the
condenser to the bridge tends to reduce the capacity in the ratio of

pi to or jpHc to unity, where I is the small inductance of the leads;

on the other hand, if these leads are close together, their capacity is
added to that of the condenser. In our experiments, where the leads
 ROSA,
GROVER, ] MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 303

were short and wide apart, both these effects were inappreciable. But
ifcurrents of high f requenc}^ are used, particularly with large capacity,
the error due to the inductance of the leads may be appreciable; on
the other hand, with small condenser capacity, the error due to the
capacity of lead wires near together (as a twisted lamp cord) may be
considerable and of opposite sign to the other. In precision measure-
ments, therefore, care should be taken that no error is introduced in
this manner.
(c) The inductive
coil itself has a certain electrostatic capacity which
modifies measured inductance by an amount depending on the fre-
its

quency of the current and the inductance of the coil, as well as its
capacity.'* The approximate value of the expression for the measured
inductance Z' in terms of the true inductance Z is

where and jp^n times the

c is the electrostatic capacity of the coil
frequency. In practice, c is found by measuring Z' at two different
frequencies; it is too small to be important for the smaller values of
inductance at low frequencies. One of our inductance coils, having
an inductance of 1 henry, has a capacity of 1 X 10"^" farads. For a
frequency of 112, this value makes the correction term j?^ 6Z in the
above expression .00005, a quantity which can be detected, but which
is not a large error. If, however, the frequency were ten times as
great, this term would become .005, a very important correction.
The electrostatic capacity of a coil can be made relatively small by
winding deep channel, so that there are many layers and com-
it in a
paratively few turns in a layer. This, however, reduces its induct-
ance, and in practice it is better not to depart very far from the form
giving maximum inductance. The electrostatic capacity of the cord,
as already pointed out, increases the value of this correction term.
{d) The capacity of the condenser, as already stated, can be deter-
mined with very great accuracy, and by taking careful account of the
temperature of the condenser and its temperature coefficient, there
will be very little uncertainty in the value of the capacity. The ques-
tion remains, however, as to what effect the absorption in the con-
denser produces on the measured value of the inductance when used
in Anderson's method. The effect of absorption is to cause the
current to lag a little behind its phase in a perfect condenser. That
is, it is in advance of the electromotive force by a little less than 90.

We give below a theoretical investigation of this question, and also

Wien: Ann. d.Phys., 44, p. 711; 1891. Dolezalek: Ann. d. Phys., 12, p. 1153;
1903.
304 BULLETO OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [vol. 1, no. 3,

experimental measures, wherein the phase of the condenser current is

shifted back b}^ placing a resistance in series with it. Fortunately, the
error due to the slight displacement of phase produced by the small
absorption in a good mica condenser, is inappreciable. The effect of
slight leakage is also inv^estigated below, and proves to be inappreciable.

6. CALCULATION OF THE EFFECT OF THE RESIDUAL INDUCTANCES AND

CAPACITIES OF THE ARMS OF THE BRIDGE.

Inductance in any arm of the bridge causes the current to lag, while
capacity advances its phase. The angular lag due to an inductance I is
^, and the angular advance due to capacity is jpcR. The latter value

follows from the fact that the capacity c is in parallel with the resist-

ance. The current through the resistance is -^ / the capacity current

90^^ ahead of this hpcE. The ratio of these two currents is pcB^ and
pi
this is the angle of advance of the resultant current. If pcR^
R
the current will have the same phase as though both capacity and
inductance were absent. Thus, if Z = cB^ the coil may be considered
free from inductance; if Z < <?i^% it may be considered to possess nega-
tive inductance equal to cB^ I.

Fig. 7. Network of Anderson Bridge, with currents,

resistances, inductances, and impedances of the arms
separateiy indicated.

The actual values of these residual positive or negative inductances

vary widely, according to the length of wire on a coil, and its size, thick-
ness of insulation, and manner of winding. High-resistance coils,
made of many turns of fine wire wound in the usual noninductive
manner, have relatively large capacity, which we here regard as nega-
tive inductance. In low-resistance coils of fewer turns of coarse wire
the inductance predominates, and I is therefore positive.
 ] MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 305

To calculate the effect of these residual inductances, we shall forna

the equations for the networks of the Anderson bridge, assuming each
branch to have positive or negative inductance, and solve for L the
inductance of the coil to be measured. In fig. 7 the resistances,
inductances, impedances, and currents in each arm of the bridge are
indicated, and the positive directions of the currents are shown by
arrows. Thus,

g^ P, Q^ B^ S^ r^ 0, B are the resistances.

^0, Zj, Zg, Zg, ^4, 4, 0, Z7 are the small inductances, + or
a^^ (^1, <3^25 <^37 <^4? <^5? ^6? ^7 ^^^ ^^ impcdauccs.
u^x^y^x z^y -\-u^2^z u^x-\- y are the currents.

The values of the impedances in the eight branches of the bridge are
then as follows:

2=^+^> (^2+-^)
a^B-\-ip \
a^ S-\rip l^
\ (5)

ari
B-\-ip l^

Applying Kirchhoff's law to the four circuits A C D^ CB E,

E B D^ A D B^wQ have the following equations:
a-^x -\-a^z-\-aQU a^y =0
aj^x z) a^{z u) ar,z 0
(6)
aj^zu) aj^y-]ru) a^u^Q

Rearranging the terms of these equations, we have

a^u-^-a^xa^y-^-a^z =0

{a^-\-a^-\-a^)u-\ra^ya^z =0 (7)

a^u-\-a^x-\-{a^-\ra^ ~\ra^)y=E

Solving for u^ the current through the galvanometer, we obtain

a^ a^ a^
1 3 (6^3+^5+^6)
~
E + 5 + 6)
~A a^ 6 A a, (3 (8)

E a^ (3+fl^4-h7)

2\^4No. 305 2
306 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [vol. i, no. 3.

If w=0, we then have

or,

Substituting the values of the impedances given in (5) above, we

have

(10)

-{Q+ip{k-\-L)) {R+ipQ^=0
Separating the real and imaginary parts, we have first, for the real
part

Transposing and dividing by y^")

(r)

or,ifA=(7s[r(^)+p],
L=L,+a-ft (12)

If the small inductances Zj, 4, hi h-, h ^^^ ^ zero, as in the ideal

case, the last two terms disappear and

fP ] (13)

and since in the Wheatstone

P^Q
bridge ^=-^ we have

L=0\:r{Q^-SnPS\,
which is the expression (2) given above for the inductance by Ander-
son's method.

The last term ft in equation (12), having a coefficient ^^^-d" is negli-

gible, unless the freauency is very high or the residual inductances

excessive.
 ROSA,
GROVER. ] MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 307

The second term a gives the principal correction due to the induct-
ances in the four arms of the bridge. It will be seen that the induct-
ance of the resistance r enters only in /?, which is negligible when l^
is small, and the galvanometer inductance has disappeared entirely
from the equation. The second term oc consists of four parts, two of
which are positive and two negative. The part -q {liSl^Q), due
to the two arms P and ^, is eliminated in our experiments by making

P=R and reversing P and E. The remainder -^ (l^ P\ ^) = ^4~^2

(since PR) is due to the two remaining arms Q and S. As stated
above, if made up of similar
these two arms consist of resistances
coils, (i. e., coils of the same resistance wound in the same manner with
the same size wire) their inductances will be nearly equal. They
might be exactly equal, if the inductive coil L had no resistance. It
is therefore desirable to have l^ and l^ as nearly equal as possible, and
then when necessary apply a correction for their difference.
If we divide the expression for oc in equation (11) above, by Q^
P^
= -p-
remembering that Q (approximately), we obtain

Q _^ _^ ^ ^
Q 'Vk A Aj_Ph~\ (14)
p
Q
V
where ^i, ^g? ^3? ^4 ^re the phase angles of the currents in the four
arms of the bridge, due to the combined inductance and capacity of
the resistances jP, Q^ B^ S^ neglecting, of course, the inductance
L in Q, which is to be measured. These angles may be positive or
negative. If they are all equal, or if (l>^-\-(l>^=(^^-{-(^^ (algebraically)
the correction term reduces to zero.
As we shall show below, these angles are appreciable in the "nonin-
ductive" windings usual in resistance boxes, and the correction a is
therefore important in precision work. The resistances may, how-
ever, be so wound and adjusted as to make the angles ^ inappreciable.
The imaginary part of equation (10) above gives

PS-RQ=j>\l, l,-k (h+L))+p'0iPRl,+8E (l,+ l,) \,.,.

'
+P8(i,+k)+r{Sk+Sk+Pk+Rk) ^-p'C(k k+kh+ij.) h=ry
If Zj, 4, Zg, Z^, Z5 are all zero, this reduces to PSRQ0^ which is the
308 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [vol.1, NO. 3.

condition for the Wheatstone bridge and the condition assumed in the
ideal Anderson bridge. But when these quantities are not zero this
pa
condition does not hold and Q is not equal to y^. Consequently, an

error is introduced in calculating Z from the formula (2) of Anderson,

unless Q is assumed equal to ^^, instead of using its actual value.

The variation of Q, due to changes in one or more of the small

inductances I {P^ i?, and 8 remaining unchanged), is illustrated in some

of the examples given below.

7. ILLUSTRATION OF THE FORMULAE.

In order to ascertain the order of magnitude of the corrections a

and /? of formula (12), and the variation of from zero in PSRQ
(15), we shall assume the following values of the constants for cases I,
II, and III:
Z=l henry,
C=l microfarad,
P=P=^50 ohms,
S = 500= Q (approximately),
r=8T5,
y= 500,000.
Inductances in Microhenrys.

Case. I II III IV

^1 - 2 +25 50 -1, 500

k + 2 +40 +100 250

h + 2 +25 + 50

h - 2 +50 -100 -5, 000

h 4-10 +50 +100 + 100

Case I is supposed to represent a specially wound bridge in which

all the inductances are small, but in order to make it represent the
most unfavorable case two are taken positive and two negative, so as
to give a maximum
value to the error a.
Case II represents a favorable arrangement where the coils are sim-
ilar and the inductances
all positive, but with larger values than those

of case being such as might be expected in practice.

I,

In Case III we have assumed that /^is a single coil of fine wire, hav-
ing the capacity effect greater than the inductance by an amount
 ROSA,
GROVER. ] MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 309

equivalent to a negative inductance of 50 microhenrys, whereas is B

made up of several coils of coarser wire, giving a smaller capacity and
larger inductance, and hence Zg is taken as +50. Similarl}^ S is sup-
posed to be a single coil of 500 ohms, with capacity predominating,
and equivalent to a negative inductance of 100 microhenrys, while Q
is the sum of several smaller coils, and l^ is therefore positive and

equal to 100 microhenrys. This is perhaps an extreme case, but not

an improbable one.
In case IV larger resistances are assumed, viz:

P=l, 000 = (approximately).

^==^=5,000.
7'=833.3.
6^=0.1 microfarad.

P, Q^ and S are assumed to have negative inductances, each being

supposed to consist of a single coil (or mainly of large coils, as in the
case of Q)^ while Bis supposed to be made up of smaller coils having

the inductance and capacity balanced. The values of the inductances

chosen for P, Q, and S are approximately those found in noninductive
resistances of such magnitudes.
Substituting the above values of the constants in equation (11) we
find the following values of a and /?:

Case. Lo a fi

I 1 Henry -0. 000012 + 4 X 10~''

II 1 " +0. 000010 - 1. X 10~ '

'
III 1 " -0. 000400 + 1. 2 X 10"

IV 1 " -0. 002250 -34 X10~'

These results show that the f3 term is small in comparison with ^,

and may be neglected. The correction a is as large in case I as in
Case II, showing that if the several small inductances are all of the
same sign, and proportional to the resistances, they cancel out, except
for the necessary inequality in 4 and Z^, due to the resistance of the
coil to be measured. If the inductances of the coils are adjusted to
as small values as 2 microhenrys for each arm, they may be either
positive or negative without making the error appreciable, as the error
in case I, with l^ and l^ opposite in sign to 4 and Zg is the greatest pos-
sible for such values of Z^, Zg, Zg, Z^.
310 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [VOL. 1, NO. 3.

The results shown in Table III illustrate the importance of the cor-
rection term a for coils of smaller inductances, namely: 100, 10, 1, 0.1,
and 0.01 millihenry s.

Table
III. Showing the Values of the Correction a for Various Values
OF Inductances and the Corresponding Values of Capacities and Resistances.

Induc-
tance to Capac-
be meas- ity.
P=E h h Q=S h h r a
ured.

Milli- Micro- Micro- Micro- Micro- Micro- Milli-

henry s. farads. Ohms. henrys. henrys. Ohms. henrys. henrys. Ohms. henrys.

100 1.0 250 +2 -2 250 -2 +2 75 0.008

10 0.4 100 +1 -1.0 100 -1 +1 75 0.004
1 0.1 50 +0.5 -0.5 100 -1 +1 25 0.004
0.1 0.05 20 +0.5 -0.5 50 -0.5 +0.5 10 0. 0045
0.01 0.02 20 +0.5 -0.5 20 -0.5 +0.5 2.5 0.002

be seen that the error a in the case of 100 millihenrys is

It will
it is appreciable and in
scarcely appreciable, but that in the others
the smaller coils it amounts to several per cent. These computed
errors, as before, are the maximum values for the assumed residual
inductances, since we have
taken l^ and l^ of opposite sign to 4 and l^.
In practice we should therefore expect smaller errors on the average
unless the values of the Z's are larger. If the coils are not wound to
a minimum value of the inductance, the errors may be much larger
than those above. It is therefore our practice in measuring small
inductances to take them by difference, leaving P, i?, and S unchanged
and altering Q to compensate for the resistance of the coil to be meas-
ured. If the inductances of the resistances of Q^ or at least of the
part to be replaced by the coil to be measured, are accurately known,
the difference of two determinations gives the true inductance desired.
The value of PSBQ
is found from equation (15) by substituting

the values of the resistances and residual inductances. In case /above,

SQ is only .003 ohm, while in Case /F it is 4.55 ohms. In
other words, Q is larger b}^ 4.55 ohms in a total of 1,000 when the
bridge is exactly balanced for alternating current than it is for a
direct-current balance. Consequently, if, as is sometimes done, the
bridge balanced with direct current, and then an alternating current
is

is applied, the resistance balance no longer holds, if there are residual

inductances and capacities, and Q may require a change of several
ohms to secure the resistance balance, the inductive balance being
 ROSA,
GROVER. ] MEASUEEMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 311

effected as we have seen above by varying- r. In calculating Z, how-

ever, no account need be taken of Q^ as it is eliminated from the
expression (13) for L. Hence there is no occasion to calculate the
value of y in (15).

8. EFFECT OF RESISTANCE IN SERIES AND IN PARALLEL WITH THE

CONDENSER.

a mica condenser is not entirely free from absorption and might

As
also show vslight leakage, it is desirable to ascertain how large an error,
if any, is produced by using such a condenser instead of the ideal con-

denser assumed in the theory of the Anderson bridge, namely, one in

which the impedance is ^-^. Resistance in series with a perfect con-

denser produces the same phase displacement as a certain amount of

absorption, and resistance in parallel with the condenser has the effect
of leakage or imperfect insulation. In a good mica condenser the

Fig. 8. Resistance in series and in parallel with the condenser.

phase of the current with a frequency of 100 per second should dif-
fer from quadrature with the electromotive force by not more than
one minute of angle, and may be as small as 30", although it may be
several minutes in inferior condensers (even as high as 30'). For paper
condensers the angle may be as small as 4' and as large as several
degrees. For a condenser of one microfarad capacity, with a f requeue}^
of 100 per second, 30" of angle corresponds to a resistance in series
with the condenser of 0.23 ohm, whereas 30' would correspond to a
resistance of 11 ohms.
In other words, such resistances in series with perfect condensers
would give currents of the same phases as the imperfect condensers
employed. A leakage resistance less than a thousand megohms would
never occur in a good condenser. We shall now calculate (1) the effect
312 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [vol.1,no.3.

of introducing resistance in series with the condenser to correspond

with absorption and (2) of placing a high-resistance shunt around the
condenser to represent leakage. In fig. 8 these two resistances are
represented b}^ r^ and. i\. If we substitute the values of the impe-
dances of the arms of the bridge in formula (9), we shall obtain an
expression for the inductance to be measured in the same manner as
before. In this case, however, we assume for convenience that the
resistances P, Q^ R^ jS, and r are all free from inductance or capacity
(except, of course, Z in Q), and hence

a^ R

^fi=^i+"= Tyin the first case,

and a^ -^\-'^fi in the second case.

{a) Resistance in series with the condenser. Equation (9) becomes,

when the above values of the impedances are substituted,

PRS^PSr^PS {r,^-^^R&r-{Q^ipL) (n+j^) ^=0 (16)

Separating the real and imaginary parts, we have, first, for the real
part,

PS {R+r^-r,)^-RSr- QRr,-^ R=0

or, Z= CS[r^-^^^P]+ Or, [^- Q] (lY)

The first term of this expression is the same as that of (13), and is

the value of Z when r^ is zero, -o Q would be zero in the ideal

bridge. To find its value in this case we make use of the imaginary
part of (16) above.
This imaginary part is

PS-RQ .
^ ^

or, PS- RQ^ -fLRr^ C,

Whence Q=^+p'Lr, C. (18)
grS^ek.] measurement OF INDUCTANCE. 313
DO'
Substituting the value of ~~p~Q^ derived from (18), in equation (17),

we have
Z= CSlJ'-^^^^-P^-pWLC' (19)

In fig. 9 , which is the impedance diagram of a con-

denser, 7\ is the series resistance, equivalent (in its

effectupon the phase angle) to the absorption, and B is

the small angle by which the current falls short of
90 in its phase relation to the impressed electromo-
tive force. Hence tan dpCr^. Substituting in (19)
above,
L=L,-L tan^ d

or, Z=Zo(l-tan^ ^) (20) ,

Fig.9.Impedance
since Z^, the value of Z when the correction is zero, is
diagram of an im-

substantially the same as Z. In the best mica con-

densers, as stated above, 6 is about half a minute, and tan 6 is
0.00015; tan^ 6 is therefore only about two parts in a hundred million.
Hence the angle 6 might be ten times as large without producing an
appreciable error, although in some mica condensers that we have
tested the angle is large enough to produce a sensible error.

(b) Resistance in parallel with the condenser. Substituting -i\-'^p

for a^ in equation (9) above, we get a solution for the case of resistance
in parallel with the condenser. The direct substitution gives

The real part of this is

PBS-^PSr-^BSr^{PS-RQ)r, =
^
Hence, ^ PS S^{PB).^^
^~^^VS^' ^^^ B

Thus, the variation in Q is inversely proportional to r^^ the shunt

resistance, and to the capacity of the condenser, and directly propor-
tional to Z. The leakage resistance through a condenser is inversely
proportional to the capacity, so that in general r^ C is independent of
the value of the capacity, but depends on the quality of the condenser.
314 BULLETIN OF THE BUKEAU OF STANDAKDS. [vol.1,xo.3.

If /2=1000 megohms and 0=1 microfarad, 7^2^=1000 and the varia-

tion of Q is in that case very small.
The imaginar}^ part of equation (21) above is

or, Z=CS[r^-'^^^+F] = Z, (23)

This is equation (13), and shows that 7\ has no effect whatever on the
measured value of L.

9. VERIFICATION OF FORMULA 11, 18, 19, 22, 23.

In Table IV the results are given of a series of measurements made

to verify formulaintroducing a small inductance successively
(11) b}^
in each of the arms of the bridge; the fi term in this formula is negli-
gible, in comparison with , except for the case of inductance in r
only, in which case a is zero and the ft term has then been computed.
This the fifth case in the table, where the observed change (^ ft in
is

this case, as Aa=o) is 0.01 millihenry, whereas the calculated effect is

still smaller. But the inductance coil measured has an inductance of
1 henry, and hence the observed change is only one part in a hundred
thousand, a quantit}^ barely measureable.
If we differentiate formula (12) we have, since L does not change
when the inductance coil is inserted in any arm of the bridge, and ft
is assumed zero,

or, Aa= ALo

where ^<^ is term by the insertion of the
the change produced in the o(

given any arm of the bridge, and ALo is the change in the first
coil in
term of equation (11) or (12); that is, in the computed value of L
apart from the correction terms.
For example, in the first case, 0.5 millihenry was inserted in the
arm Q^ and hence l^ was increased by 0.5 millihenry. The second
term of the a correction was therefore increased by 0.5X-d=0.500
millihenry. The observed value of ALo in this case was the same. In
case 3, the addition of 0.5 millihenry in P changed the first term of

the correction by 0.5 X-^= 1.000 milliheniy, whereas the measured

change was 0.999 millihenry. In the fourth case the difference

 ROSA,
GROVER. J
"I
MEASUREMENT OF USTDUCTANCE. 815
(M
TJ ^
O ^
<3
^
Q ^
<3 <^
1

11 ^1
1

"42
so
gi ^ IC O o o
d d
r-l
S|? 1
r-H

1
15

1
Q
O OS Oi
Oi
Oi
00
o
rH
m ;2 gi
w?
^ Ic Ol a. o
o
J
4l d d d d
S| + I
1 + +
O
^
a.
^ ^ rSS O o d o o
i

+
'^
1

1

CJ:^

ft^ t^
^
I
1

1
^ 1 o o d o

CO
'

or Oi
^ g
!>.

^ ^s; o d o o o
i!

Hi O
j t^
^ CO
l-H
Q
Ol
t^
oo
o
r-H
J.
cA
1 Tt^ 1 t^ CO o
CO
^ Oq oq d
iO
o + 1 1 +
o ^ II

fe
o
g
1
lo oc CO
(M
a
CO
!>.
t^
t^ TjH
iC
1>-
CO
^ ^
CO kO
h)
1 TJH O- 00 o: 1 a CO Ol 05 Ol
o "^ 5-
$ 1-5 CO ^ CO CO CO CO
6 tl
1

B ^
^ GO
00
GC
QC
00
00
oc
oc
00
00
c:
oc
oc
00
00
00
00
00
00
CO
00
;

(M" O CC 1-1 cc * CO GO CO CO 00
^ CO o: '^i iC 00 oc CO 00 00 ir-
!>. oc o oc <M oo 00 00
^
4 r<
o g
^* c:

S^
1-A
00
cc
CO
oc
oc
00
00
CO
oc
oc
oo
oo
00
GO
CO
00
00
CO
00
00
1 i

o
I

l-H
o
O C
'\

1-1
rH
iC
(N t- iC
Oi
CO
1-1
lO 0
o Tti
r,'

1 iC c c Tt^ O o o
CO
-I <;
= s s
-^ Tt' T-5
oo
00
-^
oc
oc
l-H
oo
cc
oc
oc 00 00
00
GO
00
00

H "o
1 i

, ,

o , ,

"o r^
a.
!

'c
0)
T3
0!

.
ri
a;
:

1
^<^
(M c > > > : > , >
o c o
^ i -i 1 Qs" ^ 1
.

"k a
.^ f
;-
c:
.-H <P
;-! _g ?^
;h
a
.-1
p
^
fl
^ p
^
*" " "^
hS "7^ T^ r" r^ "Th Th "Ti
o o o o o o o o
Q C
c
Q O O C
o
O O oo
I - !

(M cc " iC
1 1
316 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [VOL. 1, NO. 3.

between the observ^ed and calculated value was larger, namely, 0.011
millihenr3^ This is, however, onl}^ 11 parts in a million compared
with the coil being measured, and is a very small discrepancy. These
results may be regarded as fully verifying the formula when the
inductances are positive.

Table V. Effect of placing a Capacity of 0.00945 Microfarad in Parallel

WITH THE Arms of the Anderson Bridge.

[P=R=250 ohms. 8=500 ohms. 0=1 microfarad. L=l henry.]

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Position of
r r r
No. the con-
position position mean.
J r
1. 2. observed. calculated.
denser.

Milli- MiUi-
Ohms. Ohms. Ohms. Ohms. henrys. henrys.
Condenser
around Q. 882. 265 882. 065 882. 165 -1. 529 -1.536 -1. 550
1
Condenser
removed . 883. 793 883. 596 883. 694

Condenser
around S 886. 195 885. 930 886. 062 +2. 351 +2. 367 +2. 362
2
Condenser
removed . 883. 827 883. 595 883. 711

Condenser
around P. 884. 997 884. 793 884. 895 +1.171 +1. 176 +1. 181
3
Condenser
removed . 883. 825 883. 623 883. 724

Condenser
around R 882. 618 882. 435 882. 527 -1. 183 -1. 188 -1. 181
4
Condenser
removed . 883. 820 883. 600 883. 710

Condenser
around r . 883. 860 883. 671 883. 766 +0. 047 +0. 047 -0. 0004
5
Condenser
removed . 883. 818 883. 620 883. 719
 KOSA,
GROVER, ] MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 317

In the columns headed ^ S^^ B^A P, the quantity 0.794 represents

the resistance of the inductance coil of 0. 5 millihenry inserted in the arms.
To formula for the case of negative inductances, a capacity
test the
was inserted in parallel with each of the five arms of the Anderson
bridge in succession, and the changes in r observed. From these
changes ALo was determined and the result compared with the com-
puted change in the oc correction term. As stated above, a capacity C
placed in parallel with a resistance B
is equivalent to a negative

inductance Z, determined by the expression

This capacity may be located in the resistance coil itself or in a con-

denser joined in parallel with it.
In the first case of Table V the resistance of Q was 405 ohms non-
inductive and 95 ohms in the coil whose inductance was 1 henry.
The condenser was placed in parallel with the former, and had an
effect proportional to 405^ as compared with an effect proportional to
500^ in given in case 2. It will be seen that the differences between
/S,

the observed and calculated changes, due to capacity, is only a few

thousandths of a millihenry that is, only a few parts in a million of
the coil each time measured. Hence the formula may be regarded as
completely verified for negative inductances as well as positive.

Table VI. Effect of Placing Resistance r^ in Series With the Condenser

OF THE Anderson Bridge.
[P=i?=250 ohms. S=250 ohms. i=l henry. C=2 microfarads. ^2=474^300. ?j=llO per second.]

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

r
r r
^1
Position 1.
Posi-
Mean.
^L^ pWC'l Q' ^Q p\CL
tion 2.

Milli- Milli-
Ohms. Ohms. Ohms. Ohms. henrys. henrys. Ohms. Ohms. Ohms.
871. 82 871. 59 871. 705 155. 27

5 871. 89 871. 68 871. 785 +0.08 +0.05

20 872. 625 872. 40 872. 51 0.80 0.76 173. 86 +19. 43 +19. 00
40 874. 92 874. 72 874. 82 3.12 3.05 189. 80 35.78 38.00
80 884. 07 883. 98 884. 025 12.32 12.19 225. 99 72.39 76.00
153. 18

Table VI gives the results of measurements made to verify formulae

(18)and (19). Resistances of 5, 20, 40, and 80 ohms were placed in
318 BULLETIN OF THE BUEEAU OF STANDARDS. [vol. 1, NO. 3.

OI
i-H C^ Tt^ Oi 05 Oi
rH CO

kII^

o^ r^COCC-^lOOOC^CMiICO (Mt^t^O^i-HrJHQOCDOfM
Tli<rHrHiIt-Hi-HtIC<1t I

.sli 00 (M 05 (M CO Ttl (IC^

TIOSCOt-HiIT
Tt^ lO lO CO CD CO OiOOt^OiOOOOOt^
100 o ooooo
oooooo oooooooo
IrHCNi
IIt-Ht ii-Hi
single

= ohms). o o ooo o oooooooo

Capacity

.f.,
coil
oooooo oo' oooooo
a- 1

T-H T rHI C<J (^J (M Tfl

(M CO 05 Ttl rH t^ OirHlOOOOOC^Jrfl
rH (M lO <M lO T-H 1lC<J(MC0lOCD051r^

i O OO
oooooo rH (M lO OOOOOOOrH
oooooooo
oooooo oooooooo
fe
<=> o o oo o oooooooo

^TtiTtiCOCOC^JOCOT-l TtlCOCOCOCOCOC<JilO'*
OooOOOOOOGOGOt^t^ OOGOGOGOGOGOOOOOGOGO
llo ^"'0500500050505 05 05 O 05 O 05 05 05 O 05
oooooooo oddddooddd
iC OO lO lO o o vOiOiOOOOOiO
, oj

1O CD i(MCO(MiO
iOOt
CO 05 rH iO >0 050C<l05iOOCOCO
OrHrHrHCqCO'^OO
4 ^
2
Ssi

s '
O O O O O rH cq* dxd: S d> d> d> d> di
^^ : I
I I I I I I I I I I I I
I
I

t^i:^cDiO00C<)i:^(>q>100
l:^(X)C0C0iOiO'Tt^C005t^
r^iIrH,IrHr-iT-HOOrH r-HrHrHi-HrHrHi-Hi-HdrH
a ^QOGOQOOOOOGOOOGOCO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

o^OOlOOOCOOt^OOCO
gcOiOiO'^COOCOOCD
rSrHT-HrHr-irHrnddrH rHiiiIrHrHi-HrHilOrH
^OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

COCOI>THTt^COOrHCO
g0000l>-t^>O<MC0C000
r<rHrHrH,-HrHrHd05rH
^OOQOQOOOOOOOOOQOOO

oo ooooo
ooooooo oooooooo
oooooooo
g

OOOOOOiO oooooooo
^S 8 o d'o'^o'o'iLo'c^r o'd'd'd'd d'd^o" 8
OOt^-iO-^COC^i-H
 ROSA,
GROVER. ] MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 319

succession in series with the condenser, the latter having a capacity of

2 microfarads. The changes in r were determined as before, and the
changes in Zo resulting therefrom were computed, and these compared
with ^Vj C^L (formula 19). The changes in Q were computed from
equation (18) and compared with the changes in the noninductive part
of the arm Q, namel}^, Q
These measurements were made before the introduction into the
bridge of the slide wire, which permits settings to 0.001 ohm, and hence
were not quite as accurate as those previously given. Nevertheless
the agreement between the observed and calculated values is excellent.
Table VII gives the results of measurements made to verify formulae
22 and 23. Two series of measurements were made. In one a megohm
box, consisting of 10 coils of 100,000 ohms each, was used to give
resistances varying from 1,000,000 to 12,500 ohms, using various com-
binations of coils in series and in parallel. In the other a box of 10
coils of 10,000 ohms each was used, the coils being used in series
only. In both cases the capacity of the coils produces a distinct effect
on the measured value of Zo, and hence we have assumed formula (23)
to be correct and have calculated the values of the capacities of the
coils, which will account for the differences observed. They are given
in the seventh column, and the capacity of one coil deduced from the
measured capacity of the several coils is given in the eighth column.
These deduced capacities per coil, averaging 0.00186 microfarad in
the case of the second box, agrees quite well with an independent
measurement made some months ago by a dynamometer method which
gave 0.00195 microfarad for the average. It will be noticed that the
changes in Q are considerable and that the observed and calculated
values agree quite closely. These differences, however, can not be
determined with great accuracy, as the resistance of the inductive coil
(wound with copper wire) varies from time to time; hence Q' varies
from this cause when Q is constant. The results, however, abundantl}^
justify the formulae (22 and 23).

10. GRAPHICAL SOLUTION OF THE ANDERSON BRIDGE.

A graphical solution of Anderson's bridge is interesting and shows
very simply some of the results derived above analytically. If the
bridge is balanced and no current is flowing through the galvanometer,
we may consider that the connection \% removed.ED The condition
of the bridge is (the same electromotive force acting on the upper half
of the bridge from J. to ^
as on the lower half) that and are E D
always at the same potential.
To construct the electromotive-force diagram for the upper half of
the bridge, we lay off' CB (tig. 11) to represent the emf. acting on the
320 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [vol. 1, NO. 3.

arm E of the bridge. The same electromotive force acts on the

branches C JE B, consisting of the resistance r and the condenser of

impedance p. Therefore, in a semicircle described on (7^ as a

diameter construct a right-angled triangle C E B^ the sides C E and
B E being proportional to r and p^, respectively. C E is then equal

to ^5, the emf. acting on r, the fifth arm of the bridge, and EB e^^

Fig. 10.Anderson Bridge. When balanced, galvanometer may be removed,

the emf. on the condenser. C d and C h are the currents in r and B,^
respectively (calculated from the electromotive forces and resistances),
and their resultant C V equals the current in the arm that is, i^. P
Of course \ is also the current through the condenser. The emf. act-
ing on the arm Pis in phase with the current. CV ^ since Pis non-
inductive. Therefore, if we project CV backward to A^ so that

Fig. 11. Vector diagram of Anderson Bridge.

G A i^ X P, C A\s> the emf. e^ acting on P, and the vector sum
oiA C and C B^ oy A B, will be the total emf. on the bridge.
Since the lower half of the bridge has the same emf. acting on it
and the point D
has the same potential as E^ it is evident that the tri-
angle A EB
\s also the emf. triangle of the lower half This ABB.
enables us to find graphically the inductance Z in the branch Q.
 ROSA
k.]
GROVER, MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 321

Lay off DB (fig. 12) equal to EB

(fig. 11), since the same emf. acts

on these two branches, which terminate at the common point B^ their

initial ends ^and Dhaving the same potential. Draw lines and DA
BA so that the triangle ylZ^^ is equal to the triangle of fig. 11. AEB
ADB is then the emf. triangle of the lower half of the bridge, and

AD is the emf. e^ expended on the branch Q. Of this, DG^ perpen-

dicular to DB^ overcomes the reactance ^Z, and A G^ perpendicular
to D G^ overcomes the resistance Q. This construction gives L when
y is known.
But^ need not necessarily be known, as the values of the capacity
and resistances of the bridge are independent of p. The distribution

Fig. 12. Graphical solution of Anderson Bridge.

of electromotive forces is, however, affected by the frequency, and
hence the emf. triangle depends on p. If, however, any convenient
value of p be assumed in constructing figures 11 and 12, the same
value of L will be derived from G; that \^^ D DG
will always come
out proportional to p.
The inductance Z, derived from D
G^ is the total inductance of the
branch Q; hence, if that part of the resistance of Q not included in
the inductance coil to be measured possesses positive or negative
inductance (4), this must be subtracted from the measured value (Z^) to
obtain the true inductance of the coil Z.
If the branch B contains inductance Z^, DBB' will be its voltage

2214No. 305 3
322 BULLETIN OF THE BUEEAU OF STANDARDS. [VOL. 1, NO. 3.

triangle, and the angle (j)^ will be

S The triangle ADB, which still
represents the distribution of voltages, both in the upper and lower

Fig. 13. Solution when arm S has inductance Z4.

halves of the bridge, will therefore be rotated through the angle (f)^

into the position A'DB\ where

AA' = ADX(I>,
A'H^AA' sin A'AH^AA' sin ADG
Hence, GG' = ADX(l>,X^=^(f>,X Qh^^{pL)i,

This is the value of the correction due to l^ found above analytically

and given by equations (11) and (14), neglecting small quantities of
the second order occurring in the /? term. A similar construction
obviously applies to the case of capacity in the resistances; that is,

to negative inductance.

11. RESISTANCE IN SERIES AND IN PARALLEL WITH THE CONDENSER.

Fig. 14 is the electromotive-force diagram for the Anderson bridge

on which 100 volts is impressed, the frequency being such that
 ROSA,
GROVER, ] MEASUEEMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 323

jr>2_5Q0^OOO and jc>=707, approximately, and fig. 15 is the correspond-

ing case, with 50 ohms inserted in series with the condenser. now CF
represents the fall in potential through r and r^ (tig. 8); but since the
galvanometer is joined to E^ between r and r^, the triangle AEB^ and
not AFB^ represents the electromotive forces of the lower half of the
bridge. The values of the several electromotive forces and currents
have been accurately calculated from formula (19) and marked in the
figures. The efi'ect of inserting r^ in the condenser circuit is to

Fig. 14. Electromotive force diagram of Anderson Bridge, having 100 volts applied to terminals.
decrease the currents 4 and i^. Their resultant, however, is increased,
as the angle d^ between them is decreased sufficiently to more than
offset the decrease in the separate currents. The current i^ is there-
fore increased, and e^ is increased in consequence. The side EB^ the
fall in potential in S^ is This shows that the current in
decreased.
the lower half of the bridge 8 is noninductive.
is decreased, since
But AE^ the emf. on Q^ is increased; and since the current through Q
is decreased, it follows that the impedance, and therefore the resist-

e =100

Fig. 15. Case of Fig. 14 modified by 50 ohms resistance in series with the condenser.

ance, is increased, as is found in practice. In this case Q changes

from 500 to 525 ohms. The change in r is very slight in this case
from 875 to 876.25. The change in L^ is also very slight. Its value
is given by equation (19), but can not be deduced easily geometrically.

Fig. 17 shows the effect of placing 10,000 ohms in parallel with the
condenser. In this case the current % through r splits into two parts,
324 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [vol. 1, NO.

\ through the condenser and ir, through r^^ these two components being
at right angles to each other. The result is to reduce the voltage on
the condenser, and hence also the current through the condenser.
The current 4 (the sum of \ and i^) is less than before, and % is also

Fig. 16.Same as Fig. 14.

Nevertheless, their sum is greater, as the angle 6^ is reduced

(as in the case of resistance in series) more than enough to offset the
reduction in the components. It is remarkable, in spite of all these

Fig. 17. Showing effect of 10,000 ohms in parallel with the condenser. Other conditions same as m
Fig. 14.

changes and the large change in Q (in this case from 500 to 600 ohms),
that r is entirely unchanged and the observed value of L is also
unchanged.
12. MEASUREMENTS OF INDUCTANCE.

We give in Tables VIII, IX, X, and XI the results obtained on

several inductance coils of 100 millihenrys and smaller, measuring
them singly and in series in groups of two or three. The two ratio
coils P and were each time reversed by a commutator and two
B,
settings of the variable resistance r made. These two independent
values of r are given in columns 3 and 4, and their mean value in
column 5. Referring to equation (13) above, if PR^ the inductance is

L^C 8{'lr-\-P) (24)

 MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 825

m OOt^tO CO
T-H CO t^ Oi to
1 +++ + +
CO II

I'
t
s

of 939 932
471 510 978 434 508 006

single values.
r-{
sums
202. 202. 199. 199. 202. 202. 200. 199.

971 927
024 985 954 486 472 930 023 949 983 434 508 999
T-H
202.504 102.485
99. 99. 199. 199.
99. 99.
100. 102. 202. 100. 202. 202. 199. 199.

025 993 955 494 477 969 932 031 950 986 494 516 004 928
o
T-H
milli-
henrys. 99. 99.
202.513

99. 99.
202.435

100. 102. 202. 199. 199. 100. 102. 202. 200. 199.

8 i ^7

00518 00517 00516 00515 00515 00514 00514 00514 00514

00 O 00518 00518

1.00516
00515 00514 00514 00514

1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1.

t^
con-
o
to to
00 OO 05 05 O 05 Oi O oooo
00 d
18.75 18.75
denser.
18.7 18.8
s a Temp,
o6 00 00 00 00 0(D Oi 05 Oi 05
of rH r-H T T-H I I-H T-H l-H T-H l-H I-H l-H l-H

250 135 001 128 121 359

022 271 227 094 278 992 032 995 282 092

CO
355. 355. 355. 364. 719. 719. 710. 710. 355. 354. 355. 364. 710. 710.
718. 719.

116 050 182

628 570 504 014 567 638 642 499 564 500 644 049
57.019
to mean
corrected. 52. 52. 52. 57. 52. 52. 52.
234. 234. 230. 230. 234. 234. 230. 230.

2.
476 987 529 146
598 543 604 082 015 613 471 534 991 465 608 015

'^t* r position
52. 52. 52. 56. 234. 234. 230. 230.
52. 52. 52. 56.
234. 234. 230. 230.

^ -

T-H 00 00 T-H i-H T-H !>. CO t^

CI
COt-T-l (M
CO to too
605 673
151
085 to o
r^ (M
CO to too
526 680
219 083

CO ^1 (m'c4 c<i i>^

to lO to to
234. 234. 230. 230. Oq (m" c<i i>;
to to to to
234. 234. 230. 230.

(M Coils.
<^WffiQ
OQKK
^IffiMO ++++
OOWpq

-^ C<l CO --tl to CO t^ 00 050t-H(M COrtHlOCO

l-H No. I-H T-H I-H I-H I-H Ti I-H-
3265 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [vol. 1, sro 3.

^
1 A ^ 00 11 rH CO
CO
1 CD I I
^ ^ rA CO CO co'

+ : :
+ 1 1 + + +
'*-'
OO t- CO
O o m . I--
CO
o
Tt^
1 "*
o I>.
o
o o o
. .

tH
I ^"gl"^ I*^
d
1

^'^> 1

1
1

1
^
o o d
CO
o
r-t
CO rA
1 1 Ov Tt

OTt< 00 OS CO -*
CO CD CO OS t^ iC rH COCO 00 lO) o
t;i^ CD Oi
Tti
005 05 o OS c5
OS i-H
rH CO
rH OrH
rfi
Tfl
ooE
CO CO TfH
888 ooo
<* IC
lOiOO
CO
11
T ^?S Ooici
.

odd OOO
. ,
lO lO o rH rH CO d d rH
8osO
r- OOSOi
11 T 11c<
lOiCO 1
rHCO
rH 1

OtJHOO cot- OS CO t C^ rH CO t-
^ OTt^Oi CO o^ cc CO OS OS lO CO
c< CO OS oi

o
i
o^2 h
Ttl
005 05
CO OS
ooo C<J !M Tj^
OrH
1-H
O
OOOo I
888 oo
o o co o oo
lO lO o
r-t Hg,
-^izS fl
ooioj ooc
.

S<Ddi ooo
, .

o ,

OO rH
,

O
rH
OlOi
1-1
ooo
1 1
1 ( C<1
U5 lO o
1
rHCO
tH
lO o
rH
1-1 rH CO

+H N-l +H <4H

O a s
(M
a a a "a
' C<l CO CD ca OS
00
05
CD -^ CO
OS
Thi CDTt^ ^^ o
Tt< 11
5J
C^O
11o 11O 8 00 O
o* Oo
00 TH
oco
O
^ G<lO CO b- 11

O
CD
iH d
CD
1 do OSrH
OS
osd
OS
os'd
OS
osd
'Tfl
(N (N CO

!>. .!>. t^ !co CO CO

O
O o o
o 1 C<l
o

CO
o CO
o I
o
t^
;0

o ;g o :8 :8 8 g
(M CN CO ' r-{ < r-i 1

O t^ iC
l:^l>.(M
rH CO
OS C<1 CC
a 1 1 1
1

lO (M 't
1 rH ic
00 OS OC
a 00 t- 1>
OOCO r-
CO OS CO
CO t- r-
t- GO 00
1-H 050
Oh iC <M OC lO rtH 0" ^ OS CO TtlTtlO- 00 ot- OOOOQ
CO (M -^
iM* (m' c<i -^ CO o4 cc SSc:
ooo ic CO r- d
ooo rH*r- loSo
^
c^
00 OO cc
CO CO I>
00 CO cc
CO CO o
t^ t^ Th
<N CO IC rH 11 C<!
CO CO lO
1 rH C\
1 rH rH OJ
r-i

"6 CO (M cc
CO T^l r-
t^lOOC
OSrH a
OS 'stH Tj-
CO CD1>
OS CD CO
CO CO OC
rH CO t^
CO CO Tt
O CO
rH COO-
lit O 00 lO
t- t- CO
^il C<1 1-1 -<t r^ Tf r- CO CO <* OS OC O ^ lOlC lO^o
iO CD CO l^ CO CO l> rH rH OC ddo co'CO jr: <6(6<z d d CO
s| CO CO ir:
cq
CO CO ir:
Cs
rH 11 Tt iC rH rH t- ic CO

c<i CO CO
lOOCC
a CO TfH>
CD COO-
COCO
OTtH
CC CO rH OC coco
rH OC^
r- lOiOC
OS rH t-
lO lO
CO rH CO in CO t- CO
o (M rHO- C<1 rH Tt
5
t-^ r- CO CO ^ osoa COiOiO O
lO) TjH
Tfl
^:l cD :d t^
CD CO ir:
CO CD I>
cocou: )
rH* r-;
^ T-i
a
^ d'd'C:
in
coco'io
rH rH t-
J Sgc:
IC
d d CO
CO
o Cs Ov
Ph
r-5 TjH
OS'*
CO l>
Tt
rH
O O C^
(M Cv
5 CO lO 1-
CO COO-
Tti CO Cv
CO CO a
OO CO
CO rH
Tt
I-- ICOIO
oco a
) lOO
t OO CO
o (M rH Tt CO c^ u->
J

t^ 1- * CO CO Tt osoa
i

) TjHlOlO lO Ttl O
CO
^s CD CO l>
CDCDi^
'.

)
CO
cocoir
cc5 1>-
5
rH rH OC
rH rH Tt
ScDc:
10
CO*
1-1
CO ir
rH t-
5 d'd'C:
10
ddcD
CO
Cv1 c^1 r-
s
Oh
!

^W <|W
C
<1M ^w
(M
3

-
<imp:
^rH-
s

[ ffiffi^i
^ i wffi^
WWW
'o
o dd< i C^^^ 1 S< 5 ^^'< ' ^^'^ ^ ^^'^
lO lO
5 > ss lO ^ rH rH
dd
I 6 rHoqo-^ -^iccc> t^ 00 o 5 O rH
tH rH
Cv
r-
1 CO TjH ir5
i T-{ r-
CD t- a ) OSO H CO
rH
c^
^2;
GROVEE.] MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 3i^7

The values of '^t-\-P are given in column 6 of the tables. The

temperature of the condenser is given in column T of Table VIII, and
its capacity at the given temperature in column 8. In Tables IX, X,
and XI the temperature of the condenser was kept constant. The
values of Z, calculated from equation (24), are given in column 10,
and in column 11 are given the corrected values of Z, obtained by
applying the value of a^ which is sometimes positive and sometimes
negative. In column 12 the sums (ZJ of the separate values of Z are
given, for comparison with the values opposite to them in column 11,
obtained by measuring the coils in groups of two or three. The dif-
ferences between the values of Z^ and Z are given in column 13.
These differences are discrepancies which indicate errors in the meas-
ured values of the inductances, but which amount on the average to only
five parts in 200,000 for the 100-millihenry coils, and are sometimes
positive and sometimes negative. They represent the errors of obser-
vation, the errors of the resistances, and the imperfections in the cor-
rections for inductance and capacity of the arms of the bridge. The
errors due to differences in P and R are eliminated by the commutator;
the error due to inductance in r we have seen to be inappreciable; the
condenser is so good that no correction needs to be applied for its
very slight absorption and leakage. In the second half of the table
the results are given for a remeasurement of the coils under conditions
similar to those under which the first measurements were made. It
will be noticed that the values agree very closely.
In Table IX the results are given of measurements on coils of 100,
50, 10, 5, 1.0, and 0.5 millihenr3^s, using 4 of 100 millihenrys and 2
each of the other denominations, measuring them separately and in
series in each. The residual differences between the corresponding
values in columns 11 and 12, and which amount to a very few micro-
henrys, are as small as could be expected.
In Table X the results are given of measurements on a coil C of
nominally 100 millihenrys, and of two coils, A and B, of 50 milli-
henrys each, measured together as one coil and in series with the coil
C. The residual differences between the sums of the separate values
(column 12) and the measured sum (column 11) are given in column 13.
They average about 4 in 200,000, being sometimes positive and some-
times negative. In Table XI similar results are given for the two 50-
millihenry coils measured separately and in series, with the residuals
in column 13 averaging 6 parts in 100,000.
In both these tables the measurements are made with three different
values of the resistances of the bridge (P, R, and S being equal in
every case) and three different currents for each separate value of the
328 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [VOL. 1, NO. 3.

J! a^

O <D 02

CD 00 (M
t^
TjH
O
1
CO
,-t

a^ c<i
o o
o o c<j
II
1 I C<1

lO (M Tj^ CO lO t^
CO
Ttl
(>1
i-H
o
CO
05
Ttl
CO
rH
Oi
lO

!
8
1

(N
o O
c4
o o <M*

of gag

GO CO
O CO
1-t
(M
o d

o
II

Ph

O
O tH
05
CO O
O (M o
TtH cq
Oi
CO
Oi
CO
CO
tM
CO
O
CO
GO
CO
(M 00
TtH 1>. CO T-l t^ O CO
00 t^ CO 00 t- Ir^ 00 CO Oi CO t^
a>
CO
o
Tft
O
00
05
CO
o
* O
tH
Oi
CO
o
GO
O
lO
Oi
Tt^
o
o

rH 00 lO .-I CO t^ t^ lO CO oqCO
05
7-H
CO
CO
OiO
O (M O)
CO
00
00
00
T-H
t^
O CO
00
o o
O GO
at:
o

t^ T)H C<) CO G^ lO CO O
T-H

IS i (M
O CO
T-H
CO
GO
lO CO CO
^ B ^
OO 00 GO 00 GO CO
2^1
Tji rfi TjH
t^ t^ t^ j:^ !>. t^ j:^ t^ t^
C<1

o
CO
CO
Ol
oq
Oi
Oi^
O O y-i
Oi
CO
CO
t^
r^
(M
t^
TtH
O t^
CO
O T-H 00 (M
r-l CO GO T-H CO O GO
00 '^ CO 00 rJ^ CO GO Tt^ GO
r^ t^ t^ t^ t- t^ t^ t^ t-
o C<1 C<J

+ pq + W M +
< + O < -^ ^ Q H- ^ Q + ^
Q o
^ lO CO o 1I
c^
 BOS A, 1
QROVER. J MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 329

(M CO Ov 't CD
+ ' + +

^
05
1>
a )
<M
oc
CC
i>
CO
Tfl
iC IT> u: iC 10
Cv (M oc
o
<N*

(N
(^
Cs
C
(N oc

lO
05
r-
Cs
cc
!>
CQ
1>
^ ^
Q-
Tj-
oc
Tt oc
CC
(M
CC ,
Tj- i>-
CO
a>
Tt^
lO r- Tt Tf T u: lit "* ^ 1 lO Tt<

(r4
o c (M
c c
esq
c cc Cs
^
c
c <M
c (M
c c
c c
c oc oc
'" "^ oc 1-1

TJH
l-H
C^
-<*
cc
c:
CC
CO
^
(^
oc
X 0: CC
1>
c
x>
<M
t^
CC
Tt^
00
lO
<X> 1- T^ CC iC -* Tf ut r- 10 T)H

(m"
o c c
c (M (M
c c C<1 (M
c
(M
c oq
c C< ^
(^
c
C:
oc oc
C^ I iH rn g (M " oc r-i

c
(M
c C oc
CO CO (M I-l

c c C d
~
00
CO
^ CO

'^,

11

1

T<

11

o II II

OQ
II

Cq
<N
CO
CD
CO CD
CO
00
Oi
^ <M
1--
(M
CO
.

10
00 Ttl
00
t-- Oi <M
t>- o t^ CC "^ Oi iC TtH 02 oc T^H

t^ 00 00 t^ CO OJ 05 CO CO CO oi
O 0:1
T^

lO
Oi
Tf
^
CO
t^
CO
l>-
CD
^
CO
CD
CO
Tt^
CO
t-
CO
T-^ 1- T- 7

00 o 10 10 co CO t^ 1-- CD rH CO 00
_l<
(J^ t- (^ CO '^ Oi I-- t^ 11 CO
00 00 00 1>- t^ !>- t^ 01 Oi CD l:^

CO oi
-^ ;^
Ttn'
10
oi
^ CO cd
Oi
^ CD
CO
Oi
CD
10
CD
lO
CD
02
Ttn'
CO
Tt" 11 T T TtH _LO Cq (M iO <N oc 10 oc

^ K"
CO
IC
00
oc
CO
(M 10
CO
CD
)lO
00 CO
t^
r^
^
CC
VO
1>-
10
-*
t^
Oi
00 OS 00 CO Oi 00 t^ Oi l:^ !>- CD Oi 00 10 CO
CO 06
-^
^ Tin
10
00
'*
CO CD
05
CD
10
^
CO
^
CO
CO
Oi
cc5
10
CO
Oi
"Tt^
CD
lO
^ 11 1 T r-\ '^ 10 C<l oc ^ 10 oq 10 oc

11 t
00
CO
00
CO lO
10 TJH
^ ^
00lO
CO
CD
lO)
oc
1>. C<1 00 CC c^ Tfl
o5 00 00 Oi oc CD Oi t^ r^ CO Oi 00 CO t^
CO 05^
^ s T^
s ^ 00 CO CD
05
CO
10
T^
CD ^
CD
Oi
CO
lO
CO
lO
cc5
O)
Tt^
CO
Tt^ l-< 11 tH T tH 10 G^ ^ <N 10 oc oc 10 oc

^^ ^_ ,^^
w ^ w . s S ,_ .. w
+ w pq -f 4-m + w s +
^ -h + < i + +
< i
4-
< ^
i <
+ ^ +
'

+ i ' + '

Q
CO '^ 10 CO t^ 00 O) 11 oq CO Tji 10 CO 1>-
r-i I I t c^ (N oc oq CC oc oc oc
1
330 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [VOL. 1, NO. 3.

^
1

eo Ls t
00M Sh
c cc T-H
rH
CD

I1
1^ + + + +
^ 1
1
!l

'

^
c OO
11
I ^ S 2 g c
c c
iC
o
o o
o
I l-H
>
c ^ ,_
^
c
CC
c Tt< CO cc '^
t^
c
c 5
CD
^ s -H o:
o: c 1
'" c 05
o
1
ut
c g
c iC c ^
iC iC
c
IC
a:
Tf
(J
o IC
o 8
c IC
T
^ -^ '"^ l-H

cc ^ ^_ cc c IC ^ cc CT o
o
c i c c
1> <~
O c > 1-H o: o l-H
11
milli-
lenrys.

c c c o c o: c c ^ o
^ iC iC g
""^
iC iC IC Tf o
r-<
lO iC o
rH

c
cc
c
CO
CO CO
Oi Total
bridge current
peres.

am-
c c c c

O cc^ cc cc 00 OO
c 5
c E ot Q
o CO
'C
c O: c c
^ o o .

s 1 O: c ^_
IC lit)

CO CiQ
1 1 7 II T IT
Oh a: p: c p? w.

Qo SH 03

(^
1

Ph
O
cc
TT
c
IC
CO CO
cc
cc
c ^
cc
cc
cc
cc
1>
cc
cc
Tfl
05
C
IC
C<1

Q. IC iC GC iC ^ cc cc IC oq cc ^
CD +s^
o:
c c c
Csl ic IC
c
CO
c
cc
c
cc
c c
CO
^ IC Coi
CO
r-
cc cS
(>5 in ir: c iC lit IC IC o CO cc CO
- 1 -"

^ ir:
CC
i>
cc
GC
CC CO
lit CO
cc
IC
1>
c
cc
IC
1>
CO
TJH
r-
CO
t^

iC
i> <M o: o-
Tt'
CO 1> cc 1> l-H OC ^
r mean rrecte

^ C<1 CO ^ r- , CO ^ G CO
c
C\
5
(M
iC
-+
ir.
Tf
c
CO
c
CO CO
c ^
c CO IC O)cr lO
CO,
8
(M*
CC) cr.
1>
1>
o:
iC) IC
CO
IC
Tj
IC
iC
c
cr
O Co
CT
o
t^
Tfl ^1
r* CC>
1>. (M c
Ti
CT
c<-5
Co 1> cc T 1> ^ ^

1> 00
-4J ,_ cc Cs y 1 CO c CD
'S c C iC
>

^
ir. c c > c c iC
^
CT> cr lO
Q Cs (M Tt Co CO CO CO C<l
^1
r^
ir.
c ^ iC u:
a
lit> k: IC IC c
* CO OC
c o
c (^ cr t> Tl Tj CO
a OS
CO vl 1> C< O" a T cc cc I> l-H

-u ,_ c< Co ,_ 1 T CO 7-H C CD>

'zD c c ) lit ir.

^
c c c c iC
<*
05 CT ip
cq
Q Cs (M Tf Cs CO CO CO
Ph

tf p: fC P5
, c c > c o
rS < PC ir.
p:=
< < cc <i1 a:
C<J c C J

1
> 4- c c > c c .^ o c +
lO IC -<
Q u: u:
<
>

c
<
c
lit lit iC IC
<
c o
^

iC IC iC lO

I 6 Ov Ct- Tt u:5 cc I> cc a o

^ ^ ^ 1

^ li
||
r-
1
 J MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 331

'

o
I
2

O t^
C<Jo iC
o O O r-l
rH O T-l

t^ rf CO CO GO Oi
CO
O 00
CO IM
GO O
CO
GO
CO
o o o
CO CO CO
r-l O I^ O i-H ,-1 o ^ C<J
1 I O rH I O I
I

P5 Q

00
lO
CO
CO
00
CO
(M
Tt(
CD
05
(M
CD
C^
IC
(M
CO
CD
1-1
CO
i-H
C<l
CO
o
lO
CD
O C^
CO
00
<M
OS CO CO CO CO 05 O 00 CO CO CO O O QO CO
CO i-H (M CM rH CO CO CO Oi Oi 00 GO GO CO Oi
CD CO CO CO CO CO 05 T^ Tf Tfl Tfl Oi a> Tt^ Tti
CO CO CO CO CO CO Tj^ Oq (M (M C<J Tfi Tfi <M c<i

lO Oi iC COCO lO CD CO (M O CD
05 O
i-H
t^
05
CO
00
CD
T-l GO Oi O O
.-H
^ -*
CD CD Tt^ O Oi Tt<
lO
CD
CO
if:)
O
Oi
r-H*
Oi
O CD

CO
CO
!>.
r
o
Tt^
00
Tfl
tM
CM
:m
CD
Ol
QO
ct:
00
cr.
C<j
Oi
Oi
iC
00
CD
00
I-H
CD
lO
00
o
CO
Ol X 1-H 00 05 Oi CO CO CD CO Ol 05 CO CD
CO
iC
(~)
Oi
^
Oi
^ ^
o; Ol
CD
iC
CO
Th
^
c^
'^
c^
-*
(M
^
<>4
GO
-^
OO
Ttl
Tfl
<M
'^
<N
CM <M '"' '"'

CO o 00 Ttl OS ^ T CO t^ CD lO lO (M t^
CD
OS
(M
OO
Tf Tfl
rj^
(M
OO
CO
OS 8 OS
CO
CO
CO
=2
CD
OS
CO
o
o 00
OS
O
TJH
"*
CO
CO
lO
O ^
OS
(T.
^ O
OS OS
CD
lo
OS
^
"^^
(M
'^
!M
Tf '^
(M
OS
-*
GO
^
Tfl
(M
Ttl
Oq
(M

^ ^ 03 w cq
O o o o
^

O

i

< ^ + Wo <
iC
+ o o o o + o
<^
O o -T- + PQo ^
o
^ UO IC >o ^ ^ <3
uO o lO iC
^ <l
lO lO
o
'

IC
o
iC
o
IC
o
o
o
lO
332 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [vol. 1, NO. 3.

Table XII. Summary of Values of Inductances Shown in Table X, with

THE Deviations from the Mean.

1 2 \ 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Devia- Devia- Devia-

Total
tion
C tion
C+U+B) tion
P=:R = S.\
1

No. current milli- milli-

from from from
amperes henrys. henrys. henrys.
j

mean. mean. mean.

1 250 0.12 100. 120 0.005 102. 477 0.007 202. 605 0.019
2 0.20 100. 126 .011 102. 480 .010 202. 612 .026
3 0.30 100. 118 .003 102. 476 .006 202. 602 .016

4 200 0.12 100. 114 .001 102. 469 .001 202. 578 .008
5 0.20 100. 121 .006 102. 476 .006 202. 595 .009
6 0.30 100. 115 102. 472 .002 202. 590 .014

7 150 0.12 100. 094 .021 102. 449 .021 202. 537 .049
8 0.20 100. Ill .004 102.462 .008 202. 569 .017
9 0.30 100. 114 .001 102. 468 .002 202. 584 .002

Means 100.115 .006 102. 470 .007 202. 586 .018

Table XIII. Summary of Values of Inductances Shown in Table XI, with

THE Deviations from the Mean.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Total Devia- Devia- Devia-

current
A tion
B tion tion
No. P=:R = S. am-
milli-
from
milli-
from
A^B. from
henrys. henrys.
peres. mean. mean. mean.

1 100 0.12 50. 092 0.012 49. 993 0.012 100. 074 0.033
2 0.20 50. 104 .000 50. 006 .001 100. 104 .003
3 0.30 50. Ill .007 50. 010 .005 100. Ill .004

4 150 0.12 50. 100 .004 50. 001 .004 100. 096 .011
5 0.20 50. 106 .002 50. 006 .001 100. 112 .005
6 0.30 50. 107 .003 50. 008 .003 100. 113 .006

7 200 0.12 50. 107 .003 50. 007 .002 100. Ill .004
8 0.20 50. 105 .001 50. 007 .002 100. 119 .012
it
9 0.30 50. 105 .001 50. 007 .002 100. 120 .013

Means 50. 104 .004 50. 005 .004 100. 107 .010
 ROSA, "1

GROVER. J MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 333

resistances. This gives nine measurements of each coil and of the sum
of the coils. These nine values of each coil and of their sums are
given in Tables XII and XIII, with their deviations from the mean.
In most cases the values are a little smaller with the smaller currents
and smaller resistances. We have not yet ascertained why this is so;
perhaps the resistances were not as accurately known as we supposed.
In Table XIV the measurements of April 21 are given, three coils
of 1 henry each being taken singly and in series in groups of two
and three.
The separate values found during the day for the three coils are
given in Table XV. The small increase in the value of L may be due
in part to uncertainty in the change of capacity of the condenser.
The latter changed in temperature, according to the thermometer, by
0^.75, and that corresponds to 11 parts in 100,000 in the capacity. The
slight progressive changes in the values of the inductances of the coils
may be accounted for by a quarter of a degree greater change in the
temperature of the condenser than indicated by the thermometer, or a
slightly greater temperature coefficient. We shall investigate this
further, keeping the temperature of the condenser constant, to decide
whether the coils really change in the manner indicated.

Table XV. Results of the Determinations of the Inductance of Three

Coils of 1 Henry each, April 21, 1905.

Coil F. Coil S. Coil C.

Henrys. Henrys. Henrys.

0. 99890 0. 99969 1. 01420
. 99892 . 999715 1. 01421
. 99894 . 99970 1. 01122
. 99895 . 999715 1. 01422
. 99895 . 99972

The regularity of this progressive change shows that some common

cause affects all the measurements, but the changes are very small
indeed, amounting to only a few parts in a hundred thousand. The
sensitiveness of the bridge is well shown by these results, and if we can
eliminate the small residual errors of the bridge completely, it will
make it possible to measure inductances with far greater accuracy than
has been done heretofore.
In order to make these measurements under the most favorable cir-
cumstances, we have designed and are now constructing a bridge espe-
334 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDAEDS. [vol. 1, NO.

^ (N
o (M
11
CO
(^
CO CO
Q
1 S o
o o
Q Q
Q Q
Q ^
^
^
1

CO ^'^
1 "^ o o o
d d d d d
II

1 + f + + +

2
o
I
rH
CO
CO
Oi
t^
CO
LO
, o3 5:. CO OO CO CO CO
11 11
I
^11 o o o o
1 15 C-1 CO CO

'S

'T^ iO
o
CO o OO
Q5 (M o
Oi on 02 tH 11 I>- ^ ^ CO
o ?55 CD a> i>. 00
CO OiCO 11

O T
1 leasure
5~ CO
CX)
I
TJH
11
Ol OO Oi ^
1
CO GO CO
1
CO
05 o o
value.

Oi OS Oi O) o o o: o o
S g
^ o c^ T-5 d d 15 d ^ CO d CO co"
u
< lO
.

'VI
o VO
>* 11 1 o
1 g
o o o lO
o lO
o lO
Oi

Oi Oi
'^
OS
CO
Oi
CO
CD
O lO
o o lO
o LO T^
o o o o o o
o o
o o o o o
o
T^
:?^ Oi
w (M o o o o o o o (3)

ffi ^ l-H T-H "^ 1-H 15 15 1-5 15 15 1-5 15 15

Pl<
^ 1
E^ <!
o o of lO IC lO lO lO o LO
T^ ^
era- riser.

H Ifl
GO Oi Ci O) Ol CO CO CO CO
'd
c^ 00
ture
ndei
o
oi
11
oi
11
d
1
d d
r-H 11
d d d
CO CO CO
d
^ CO d
d CO
o w g enip

UH ll
H 8
w CO
o z o -*
iz;< Thi
CD
CD
lO
(3
O)
CO
CO
t^
Oi
CO
lO
CO lO
lO
CO
CO
00
Oi
CO
LO
LO
-<
H o 1 t^ t^ to 1>- t^ CO OO OO CO OO CO t^
o f% fl 1
o CO
5~ ri d c4 (^i 15
^
T*H co'
^ o 15
^ o
Q H Oi
C<l
o -f
oq
CO
<M
'^
C<l (M
00
-^ CO
CD -*
CO t^
:z;
1
r-i
00 11 ^ rH 11 (M 11 ^ 11 CO <>.

o
w !K

03P
P^
ri ^
CD
-*
t^
CO
-^
o
CO
00
t^
lO
t^
CO
o OO
r^
CO
o CO
CO
^
CD
00
CO
W o a^ CO lO lO o
H Pi
lO 1 d
o CO rH d
(M ^
1-5 co' 15

o Izi
s f-i

O
o (M
<M oq
lO
OO
<M
(M CO 00 ^ CO
CO
^ lO
OO
CO
CO
l>- LO
00
I

H i
<M* CO
CO
o
t^
lO
t^
00
lO
0:>
t^
lO
Oi
00
Oi
CO
11
o
CO
OO
CO
CO
CO
OO
00
CZ2 a Oi th CO ^ Oi CO ^ lO Oi o 00 Thi
-T^l
"1 d d 15 CO 15 15 15 CO
t)
1 (M CO
(M C<J
lo
00
(M
C<J
C<1
<^
^
00
CO
CO
CO
O-l
LO
00
CO
C<l
r^
^ LO
00
o
Oi

rH CO
lO
(M
t^
^
CO
r-
lO
CO
t-
o
11
CO
o t^
tH
o
CO
o
CO
CO
CO
CO
o
o^ ^ CO lO lO Oi o OO lO
CO -1 13 rH d CO T d CO*

o c^
(M
CO
(>3
lO
00
(M
(M
<M
C<l
'tl
OO
CO
CO
CO
CO
LO
GO
CO
CO
t^ LO
GO
li
A

o
03 o ^ o + o
<>^ ^ Q + m p^ 4- Ul Q +
m
p^ rjl+
6 fe m -U t^
PIH

"^
6 t-\ (M CO -^ o CO 1>- 00 05 o 1
1
CO
1
 ROSA,
GROVER. MEASUREMENT OF INDUCTANCE. 335

CO t^ CO Ci
o o o
o o
o
o o
o o
o o
o
d d d d
+ + + +
05~
U5
CO
^
Oi
t^
T 00
00 CO CO J<J
Oi I 1-H 1-H
Oi o o o
15 (M* <m' CO

O lO (M t^ (M
o T^l lO <M Oq o
t- Oi lO GO (M t^ I-H o^ (M 1-- t^
CO^ Oi CO 00 ^ (M
Oi
O^
Ol
Oi
Oi
o:> o 1
11
o Oi
Ci o Ol
Ot) O Ol
cx>
T-H
o
d d 15 c<j i-< d o4 d 1-5 d CO

iC lO lO
i-H
Oi
11
Oi
lH
CS
o o o
05 05 Ci
o o o Q o
05 Oi 05 Oi Oi
Th -* ^ ^
o o o
o
Tf*

o o o o
o
T1 rH rH I-H t-5 15^ -15

IC lO iC CO CO CO CD CO CO CO CO
d d d
(M C^ (M
d
(N
d d
CM
C<1
d d d d d
oq <N oq (M C<l

CO CO 11 Oi 05 ^ 11 00 00 CO CO
lO
GO
01
o:>
CO
CD
O
1>-
o OO
Ol 00
CO
00
CO
Oi Oi
Gi
00
(M
lO
c<i ,-H ^ co ^
(^ CC *
c<i C<j 1-H (5 (M'lO
Ttl
(N
-<*i

(M
00
^ lO (M
C<] <
(3
lO
"^
C<l
CO
C<1
^
Oq
^ i:^
t-H 1-1 (M (M 1 1-H (M 1 1-H 1-H CO

CO lO CO ^ o t^
l:^ <M
^ lO 1-H

o o o C<l
nH
lO
lO
'^
^
Ci lO
CO
lO
CO lO
UO o lit)
CO
lO
iO
GO
15
C<l
r-H
(M
cq
'^
15^
lO CO
1-5
C<J
^ ^ ^
lO (M CO
t-5
oq
oq
t^
(M Cvl oo 00 oc <M oo (M Oq (>q
1-H

t^ GO oo t^ TjH
^ 1-H o 0005 CO o
I
o oq CO CO CO
o ^
lO CO
Ttl
lO
(

^ 05 lO lO lO lO lO Oi
TH
c<i
1
oq ^
c<i 15
lO
^
CO
15
<M
J_J
lO
1-5
(N
(^
CO
T-5
S<l
(M'

C<l (M oo GO (M 00 cq Oq (M -*

C<1
1-H
11
lO
00
CO
t^
t^ rlH
CO
<M
t^
CO lO
CO VO
Thi
CO
CO
o
CO
lO o -*<
^ lO lO lO o lO lO Ci
r-H
(M
11
C<J
c<i
TtH
15^
o CO
15
(M
^ ^
lO (M
(^
CO
15
C<l
f>i
t^
<M (M 00 GO C<1 00 cq Cq C<)
r

m
fe m o +
m &^ + + O m H- ^ Q oc O
m O p^ ^
pR

CO tH lO
11
CO
1-1
t^
1-H
GO
rH
a>
1
o
(N
1-H
C<1
(M
(M
CO
C<l
336 BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF STANDARDS. [vol.1, no. 3.

cially adapted to this work. The bridge we have been using has been
made up of several different resistance boxes. The resistances were
allimmersed in oil, the temperatures were accurately taken, they were
frequently measured against our standards, and every effort made to
get precise results. But with all combined in a single set, with shorter
and more permanent connections between the arms of the bridge and
the residual inductances and capacities eliminated more completely, we
hope to improve upon the results given above, and make sure of the
value of the inductance of a standard coil to at least one part in ten
thousand, barring the uncertainty in the ohm itself. When this has
been accomplished we hope to determine some inductance coils, the
dimensions of which shall have been accurately determined, and the
inductances computed therefrom, in order to obtain a check upon
the value of the ohm.
The Anderson bridge, used in the manner we have described above,
is admirably adapted to practical use in measuring inductances of a
great range of values. Its accuracy far exceeds most of the methods
that have been proposed, and it is more convenient than any method
we have employed that can compare with it in accuracy.
Note. Since the above was written we have discovered that the
serpentine spools on which the inductances i^and >(S'of 1 henry each
and several of 0.1 henry are wound are slightly magnetic, and that
their permeability is larger with higher magnetizing force. Conse-
quently the inductances of the coils are not quite constant, but vary
when the voltage on the bridge or the resistances of the arms of the
bridge are varied. This would cause the sum of two inductances
measured separately to be a little greater than when measured together,
and this accounts for the discrepancies A in column 13 of Table XIV,
all being of the same sign, and larger when coils i^and S (both being

wound on serpentine spools) are taken together than when 7^ and C

or S and C are taken together, C being wound on a mahogany spool
and therefore not magnetic.
In the case of coils of 0.1 henry or less the current is reduced very
little when two are put in series in the bridge, and hence the resultant

change in the inductance is much less.

We give in another article in this bulletin the results of tests made
to determine the magnitude of the effect of this small amount of mag-
netic matter in the spools.
;;;|!L.;::HiH<i!;^iiHnHH4#!iH^^^

feii.iii!iiiiia|iill

:;a!jiiiiii;:::iH^!i!fil!|liP

^lilllii;^

f'i-M^ Mil

:
' ,'.f;t.;:,'i:!tv:
i . . 1 i ,

Hi

'^^i'