Interlaboratory Comparisons
Hosted by Kevin Righter and Kurt Leinenweber 

We have assembled comparisons between multi-anvil calibration curves from different labs, based on information provided to us in San Francisco at the Fall 1997 and Fall 2000 AGU meetings, and published calibration curves. A few things are apparent from the initial comparisons: a) There are systematic differences in the magnitude and direction of the temperaure effect on calibration curves (compare Lamont 14/8 and 18/12 with Bayreuth 18/11). b) Pressure efficiency of the castable vs. pre-cast octahedra (castable assemblies can attain high pressures at relatively low tonnages). but c) Stability of the pre-cast octahedra to higher pressures (Bayreuth, Alberta and CHiPr all enjoy greater pressures, albeit at higher tonnages, with pre-cast octahedra than does Lamont) d) spread in the high T Walker module curves compared to room T (e.g., 14/8 assemblies ­ 100 ton separation at 7 Gpa, room T compared to 250 ton at 7 Gpa, high T) We plan to present all calibration curves together with the assemblies and descriptions of materials used therein. We also plan to inlcude lists of suppliers for materials important to multi-anvil work. Please let us know if there is any other information that people would be interested in seeing on the website


Kevin Righter	
Lunar and Planetary Laboratory 
University of Arizona	
Tucson AZ  85721


Kurt Leinenweber
Dept. of Chemistry
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ 84704

 Multi-anvil calibration curve summaries 

18/11 (Bayreuth, 
Geophysical Lab, UT Dallas, U. Alberta)

18/12 (ASU, 
Manchester, Lamont)

14/8 (Lamont, U. 
Alberta, Bayreuth, CHiPR)

14/8 Walker modules 
(ASU, Arizona, Lamont, Harvard/JSC, MIT)

10/5 (CHiPR, 
Geophysical Lab, Bayreuth, Bristol)
Lab procedures MIT U. Alberta (Edmonton) Arizona
Individual calibration curves