|
Instruments \ Gravity \ Gravity Meters \
Name: |
LaCoste-Romberg Gravity Meter No. 70 |
Date: |
Circa 1955 |
Item Number: |
87.05.01 |
Donor: |
LaCoste-Romberg, Inc. |
Type: |
Old-style (25-lb) Land Meter, Metal Zero-Length Spring type |
|
Manufacturer:
|
|
|
|
LaCoste-Romberg, Austin Texas |
|
Description:
Gravity meter model No. 70 is one of the last of the old-style (25-lb)
LaCoste & Romberg meters built. The 25-lb instrument was manufactured
by LaCoste & Romberg between 1941 and 1957. It had a range of 200 mGals
and about 80 were sold. A few of these are still in service today. This
model was superceded by the Model G meters (Item No 87.05.02).
How does it work?
Gravity was measured using a lever-arm system that balanced a mass at the
end of a zero-length spring. An optical system (the eyepiece is the tube
at the top of the box) was used to observe the position of the mass relative
to a reading line. The mass (beam) was moved to the reading line by means
of a screw connected to the big dial at the top. Gravity was read directly
from the dial by using a dual-dial and vernier system. The three black
knobs at the top are used to level the instrument. A light inside the case
illuminated the beam. In addition, the sensor was heated to a constant
temperature. This required a large lead-acid automotive battery to provide
the power during field operations.
One advantage of the 25-lb gravity meter was that it was relatively
light compared with other gravity meters available at the time and only
required a two man crew to operate it in the field. Smaller crews moved
faster and could collect more gravity data. At 0.01 mGal accuracy, the
25-lb LaCoste & Romberg gravity meter was the most accurate gravity
meter of its era.
The 25-lb meter was used extensively in the Gulf coast for oil exploration.
This type of meter was noted for finding a number of salt domes in Mississippi
and Alabama, many of which had large petroleum reservoirs associated with
them.
For more information, see the article: Gravity instruments: Past, present,
future, The Leading Edge, January 1998, p. 100-112.
|