Linking the results of key comparison CCEM-K4 with the 10 pF results of EUROMET.EM-K4

Delahaye, F.; Witt, Thomas J.

doi:10.1088/0026-1394/39/1a/5

Cited by 24 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An example of linking of EUROMET.EM-K4, APMP.EM-K4.1, and COOMET.-EM-K4 results to the CCEM-K4 results for nominal capacitance of 10 pF at frequency 1592 Hz [18,23,24] is shown in Figure 7. When linking results of those comparisons, the presented linking procedure was used.…”

Section: Linking Procedures For International Comparisonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metrological Traceability at Different Measurement Levels

Velychko¹,

Gordiyenko²

2019

Standards, Methods and Solutions of Metrology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The international agreements are the basis for establishing the global metrological traceability at different measurement levels. The concepts and concept relations around metrological traceability are presented. An important element of providing the metrological traceability is the evaluation of measurement uncertainty. The procedure of linking of key and supplementary comparison results is described. Linking of key and supplementary comparison results of the Regional Metrology Organization for some quantities according to the described procedure was presented. Results for all participants of presented key and supplementary comparisons are satisfactory for chi-square test and E n number. The procedure of linking of key or supplementary comparison and national inter-laboratory comparison results is described. This procedure can be used for practical evaluation of specific interlaboratory comparison results on a national level in different countries by means of laboratory results of the National Metrology Institute and Designated Institute. This procedure can contribute the mutual recognition of measurement and testing results by different countries. Linking of key comparison and inter-laboratory comparison results for some quantities according to the described procedure was presented. Results for all participants of presented key comparison and interlaboratory comparison are satisfactory for chi-square test, E n number, z scores and ζ scores.

show abstract

Section: Linking Procedures For International Comparisonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metrological Traceability at Different Measurement Levels

Velychko¹,

Gordiyenko²

2019

Standards, Methods and Solutions of Metrology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 2003-2013, the specified comparisons became the basis for similar comparisons within the framework of different RMO. Within the framework of RMO of European countries, comparisons for the capacitance of 10 pF [14], RMO of American countries -for the capacitance of 10 pF [15] and 100 pF [16] took place. Within the framework of COOMET, the Ukrainian NMI participated in comparisons: for the capacitance of 10 pF on frequencies of 1 kHz and 1.592 kHz [17], for the capacitance of 100 pF on frequencies of 1 kHz and 1.592 kHz [18], and for the capacitances of 10 pF and 100 pF on a frequency of 1 kHz [19].…”

Section: Literature Review and Problem Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Within the framework of COOMET, the Ukrainian NMI participated in comparisons: for the capacitance of 10 pF on frequencies of 1 kHz and 1.592 kHz [17], for the capacitance of 100 pF on frequencies of 1 kHz and 1.592 kHz [18], and for the capacitances of 10 pF and 100 pF on a frequency of 1 kHz [19]. The evaluation of the comparisons results of all RMO was carried out under the procedures described in [14], which allows estimating the achievements of NMIs participants of RMO comparisons.…”

Section: Literature Review and Problem Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Support of metrological traceability of capacitance measurements in Ukraine

Velychko¹,

Shevkun²

2017

EEJET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…remain with LCIE, SP and IEN, from which the difference between the degrees of equivalence of the two comparisons and the related uncertainty can be evaluated. Similarly to the model proposed in [3], the following symbols will be used: D e ' : difference between the result of a laboratory that has participated in EUROMET.EM-K8 and the corresponding CRV; D e : estimate of the difference between the result of a laboratory that has participated in EUROMET.EM-K8 and the KCRV, had the laboratory actually participated in CCEM-K8.…”

Section: Verification Of the Reproducibility Of The Degrees Of Equivamentioning

confidence: 99%

Linking the results of Key Comparisons CCEM-K8 and EUROMET.EM-K8

Reedtz¹,

Cerri²

2004

Metrologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key comparisons CCEM-K8 and EUROMET.EM-K8 on DC voltage ratio were carried out in parallel, both having the Istituto Elettrotecnico Nazionale G Ferraris (IEN) as the pilot laboratory. Two Datron 4902S voltage dividers were used as travelling standards, each divider being dedicated to one comparison. On these dividers the measurements of the ratios 1000 V/10 V and 100 V/10 V were mandatory and were used to evaluate the degrees of equivalence of the participants with respect to the reference value of their own comparison.The reference value of a key comparison carried out by a Consultative Committee of the CIPM, like CCEM-K8, is called the Key Comparison Reference Value (KCRV), and the degrees of equivalence of a regional comparison, like EUROMET.EM-K8, must be translated in terms of the KCRV. The two comparisons under study concern the measurement of voltage ratios, hence no national standard is involved. Then any participant in both comparisons can be considered equally able, in principle, to perform an unbiased measurement of the travelling standard. Since the number of participants in each comparison is significant and different methods of measurement were used, it is unlikely that the corresponding comparison reference value is affected by systematic errors. The degrees of equivalence with respect to the KCRV of the participants in EUROMET.EM-K8 are then the same as those with respect to the reference value of EUROMET.EM-K8.The extended linking document reports a verification of such an assumption, based on the results of the common laboratories of the two comparisons.Main text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Linkage Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.The linkage report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCEM, according to the provisions of the Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA).

show abstract

Linking the results of key comparison CCEM-K4 with the 10 pF results of EUROMET.EM-K4

Cited by 24 publications

References 1 publication

Metrological Traceability at Different Measurement Levels

Metrological Traceability at Different Measurement Levels

Support of metrological traceability of capacitance measurements in Ukraine

Linking the results of Key Comparisons CCEM-K8 and EUROMET.EM-K8

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About