This key comparison aims to assess the core capabilities of the participants in gas analysis. Such competences include, among others, the capability of preparing Primary Standard gas Mixtures (PSMs), performing the necessary purity analysis on the materials used in the gas mixture preparation, the verification of the composition of newly prepared PSMs against existing ones, and the capability of calibrating the composition of a gas mixture. According to the Strategy for Key Comparisons of the Gas Analysis Working Group, this subsequent key comparison is classified as a track B key comparison, which means that the results of this key comparison can be used to underpin calibration and measurement capabilities for propane under the default scheme. The artefact was a binary mixture of propane in nitrogen at a nominal amount-of-substance fraction level of 1000 μmol/mol. The values and uncertainties from the gravimetric gas mixture preparation were used as key comparison reference values (KCRVs). Each transfer standard had its own KCRV. The result of the participating laboratory is consistent with the key comparison reference value within the respective expanded uncertainties and deviates less than 0.1 %. Main text To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/. The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).

We used NDIR for this measurement (Siemens, Ultramat 6E). Configuration of analysis system: gas cylinder-> regulator-> MFC-> NDIR-> response comparison-> results Sample cell flow: 800 mL/min, Reference cell flow: 800 mL/min Cell pressure: 1.94 Kg/cm 3 Calibration Standards: The calibration standards for CCQM-K52 were prepared by gravimetric method including 0.93 %mol/mol of Ar in KRISS. Therefore, the matrix is different from that of coordinating Lab., which does not contain Ar. All source gases were analyzed impurities for purity analysis. The primary standards with 0.014% overall uncertainty (k=2) are used.

Natural gas is an important energy vector. The determination of its composition is often used as the basis for the calculation of the calorific value. The calorific value in turn is one of the two key parameters used in natural gas trade. In the first series of key comparisons (CCQM-K1e-g), natural gas was already included with three different compositions. These mixtures contained carbon dioxide, nitrogen, ethane, propane and n-butane in methane (matrix) and were only to a limited extent representative of real natural gas. In the past years, national metrology institutes have broadened the range of components by including, e.g., i-butane, neo-pentane, n-pentane, i-pentane and n-hexane. Based on this extended components list, two new mixtures have been defined, one characteristic for a low calorific mixture (type IV) and the other for a high calorific mixture (type V). In the low calorific mixture, helium was also present. Due to presence of the butane and pentane isomers, the mixtures of type IV and V are more demanding with respect to the separation technique than the mixtures used in CCQM-K1e-g.The measurements in this key comparison took place in 2001. There were eight participants and two coordinating laboratories. The key comparison reference value (KCRV) was based on the gravimetric preparation for all components. Even for the heavier hydrocarbons (pentanes and n-hexane) the effects of, e.g., adsorption can be controlled to such an extent that this approach is still valid. The uncertainty evaluation of the KCRVs reflected also the extent to which the preparation data could be demonstrated to be valid. The validity of the preparation data was demonstrated by comparing the composition of the mixtures prepared for this comparison with measurement standards maintained by the coordinating laboratories.The key comparisons demonstrated that the results of the laboratories agreed within 1% relative to the reference value for most components. Even better agreement was obtained for nitrogen in the low calorific mixture (0.5%), carbon dioxide (0.5%), ethane (0,5%), propane (0.5%) and methane (0.1%). In some cases, larger differences were observed, which then also exceeded the associated expanded uncertaintyMain text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA).

No abstract

At the highest metrological level, natural gas standards are commonly prepared gravimetrically as PSMs (primary standard mixtures). This international key comparison is a repeat of CCQM-K1e-g. The mixtures concerned contain nitrogen, carbon dioxide and the alkanes up to butane. The only difference with CCQM-K1e-g is the addition of iso-butane to the list. The results usually agree within 1% (or better) with the key comparison reference value. For ethane, nitrogen and carbon dioxide, the agreement is within 0.5% (or better), and for methane within 0.1% (or better) of the KCRV.Main text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA).

At the highest metrological level, natural gas standards are commonly prepared gravimetrically as PSMs (Primary Standard Mixtures). This international key comparison is a repeat of CCQM-K1e-g. The mixtures concerned contain nitrogen, carbon dioxide and the alkanes up to butane. The only difference from CCQM-K1e-g is the addition of iso-butane to the list. The agreement of the results in this key comparison is very good. For all parameters, with a few exceptions, the results agree within 0.5% (or better) with the key comparison reference value. For methane, the results are generally within 0.1% (or better) of the KCRV.Main text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA).

Refinery gas is a complex mixture of hydrocarbons and non-combustible gases (e.g., carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen, helium). It is obtained as part of the refining and conversion of crude oil. This key comparison aims to evaluate the measurement capabilities for these types of mixtures. The results of the key comparison indicate that the analysis of a refinery-type gas mixture is for some laboratories a challenge. Overall, four laboratories (VSL, NIM, NPL and VNIIM) have satisfactory results. The results of some participants highlight some non-trivial issues, such as appropriate separation between saturated and unsaturated hydrocarbons, and issues with the measurement of nitrogen, hydrogen and helium.Main text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA).

The key comparison CCQM-K65 was intended to compare the capabilities for the preparation and value assignment of gas standards for methyl and ethyl mercaptans in methane, maintained at the participating national metrological institutes: VNIIM (Russia), KRISS (Korea), VSL (Netherlands) and NPL (United Kingdom). The range of the nominal amount of substance fractions of the comparison gas mixtures was 20 µmol/mol to 30 µmol/mol, which is close to regulatory level (in several countries including Russia) for mercaptans in odorated natural gas. This comparison was proposed at the 12th GAWG meeting in October 2004 and was conducted in 2008.Conclusions are as follows: The results of all laboratories are consistent with the reference values. The observed differences between the reference and reported values are within ±0.9% for methyl mercaptan and ±0.75% for ethyl mercaptan relative to the gravimetric values, and do not exceed the appropriate assigned expanded uncertainties. The prepared mixtures were found to be stable during about a year within the uncertainty of the measurements. The gravimetric values were successfully validated with a dynamic method. Main text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCQM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA).