-2
\$\begingroup\$

How can I measure a resistance very accurately more than a multimeter (ohmmeter)?

For our measurement we are using resistances with values such as 300.8974083. But the instrumentation is very old from many years ago. I am asked to measure the resistance again but the multimeter is measuring very roughly (not accurately with enough digits). Is there a method to measure a resistance accurately?

\$\endgroup\$
12
  • 14
    \$\begingroup\$ What application needs 0.000001% accuracy? \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 5, 2013 at 10:42
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ Let me put it another way: if your nominal 300.8974083 ohm resistor had an actual resistance of only 300.8973001 ohms, exactly what bad consequences would occur? Can you describe the problem that would arise? \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 5, 2013 at 11:31
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ Every resistor I'm familiar with has a temperature coefficient - measuring to this degree of accuracy would only be valid at one temperature. The moment you pass any current through the resistor it would change its value. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 5, 2013 at 12:00
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ @user16307 - if the requirement is 0.4%, then the value 300.8974083 is deep into false precision. Everything to the right of the leftmost 8 is nonsense. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 5, 2013 at 13:39
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ -1 for leading everyone on a wild goose chase. Go look up something called "significant digits". Several people wasted time replying to your absurd accuracy requirement because you couldn't be bothered to write a number properly. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 6, 2013 at 13:32

4 Answers 4

17
\$\begingroup\$

You can't.

Very few people, if any, regardless of how much was spent on equipment, will be able to measure resistance to 10 significant digits. If such equipment does actually exist somewhere, then those allowed to be in the same room with it don't have to ask here how to make such a measurement. Anyone that does ask here isn't going to be allowed in that lab, hence there is no way for you to make this measurement.

Stop and actually think about what you are asking for. You are looking for about 1 part in 330 x 1012. That's so tiny that even parts per million (PPM) is not a useful measure. Your accuracy requirement is 1/3 of part per billion (1/3 x 109).

Consider that if your resistor changes by only .1 PPM / °C (even "good" resistors are in the 10s of PPM/°C) that you still have to hold the temperature at a known constant level to within 1/300 of a °C. That alone would require substantial sophisticated equipment. Then there will be many other sources of error that we can happily ignore at .1% but that become overwhelming sources of error at .3 PPB. To put this in perspective, that's measuring the circumference of the earth to within a 1/2 inch.

It's simply not going to happen. Forget about it.

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ at least please let me know should I use a a Wheatstone bridge or just divide an applied constant voltage to a current reading? because ohmmeter is just 1 digit after comma. if i use the same multimeter and measure voltage and current readings and find the resistance myself do u think it is more accurate than the ohmmeter's reading? \$\endgroup\$
    – user16307
    Commented Nov 5, 2013 at 14:28
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @user16307 - Will you please go and learn more basic theory? If you use a Wheatstone bridge, the result will be no more accurate than the resistors used in the bridge. What are the most accurate resistors you can find? And a multimeter can be capable of extremely high accuracy - all it takes is money. A Keithley 2002 tek.com/sites/tek.com/files/media/media/resources/2001-2002.pdf for instance, will measure resistance in your range to about 35 ppm. And it's only about USD 6400. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jan 12, 2016 at 18:52
5
\$\begingroup\$

A straightforward way of improving the accuracy of a resistance measurement is to use a "4-wire" measurement.

Resistance measurements are done by applying a stimulus current, and measuring the voltage across the resistor. The 4-wire measurement uses separate leads for the stimulus and measurment:

schematic

simulate this circuit – Schematic created using CircuitLab

This prevents the parasitic lead resistances (Rpar1 and Rpar2 in the schematic) from being measured as part of the resistor you're trying to measure.

As an example, the Agilent 34401A benchtop multimeter can measure a 1 kOhm resistor with 0.0025% accuracy in 4-wire mode (+/- .025 Ohms), but only with +/- 0.2 Ohms in 2-wire mode.

At 300 Ohms a .025 Ohm error is .008% which seems to be within your actual requirements, even if it doesn't give the number of digits of precision you first stated.

Of course the Wheatstone bridge that you and other answers have mentioned is another option that might be more affordable if you are measuring a limited range of resistor values, or if you are only interested in binning resistors for equal values rather than knowing the actual exact values.

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ is that a current source in the schematics? \$\endgroup\$
    – user16307
    Commented Nov 6, 2013 at 14:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ Yes, it's the current source that a resistance meter uses to probe the resistor. It wouldn't be 1 A except in unusual circumstances. Let me change that... \$\endgroup\$
    – The Photon
    Commented Nov 6, 2013 at 18:18
2
\$\begingroup\$

How can I measure a resistance very accurately more than a multimeter(onmmeter)?

We need to be careful not to confuse precision with accuracy.

1. Buy a better meter.

A typical inexpensive hand-held multimeter has 3½ digits (accuracy 0.5% ∓2 digits).
A better hand-held multimeter may have 4½ digits (accuracy 0.1% ∓1 digits).
A good bench multimeter may have 8½ digits (accuracy 2.2 ppm).

I ... can buy some resistances

2. Use a better measurement technique

See Wheatstone bridge.

\$\endgroup\$
3
  • \$\begingroup\$ 0.0000001/300.8974083 = 0.3 ppb (mind the 'b' for billion). \$\endgroup\$
    – jippie
    Commented Nov 5, 2013 at 11:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ @jippie: Yes. I'm no expert but I suspect it would be pretty hard to find a commercial product with the accuracy suggested by the question. I'd guess you'd need a physics lab and some fairly smart staff. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 5, 2013 at 11:39
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ "Don't breathe, or the accuracy will reduce!" \$\endgroup\$ Commented Nov 5, 2013 at 11:59
0
\$\begingroup\$

Here is how they do it at the National Institute of Standards.. The lowest uncertainty for resistance is the Quantum Hall standard.

http://www.nist.gov/calibrations/upload/circ470.pdf

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Welcome to EE.SE! You've provided an answer that strongly depends on a single link. Can you summarize the content of your link such that your answer can stand alone if the link were to die? \$\endgroup\$ Commented Aug 17, 2016 at 1:04

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.