On a measure of consistency in comparison measurements

Beissner, K.

doi:10.1088/0026-1394/39/1/8

Cited by 30 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…) , (27) where the parameter of the triangular distribution denote the left interval boundary, the mode, and the right interval boundary respectively. This model again assumes that the value of the instability is always smaller than Y 3 − Y 1 .…”

Section: Time-dependent Tp Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On modelling of artefact instability in interlaboratory comparisons

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key comparisons are at the core of metrology and support the international equivalence of measurementstandards. Typical key comparison setups involve travelling artefacts which are transferred between theparticipants of a study. After each participating laboratory performs its measurements of the artefacts, asubsequent analysis reveals the degree of equivalence between the participants. For this analysis stage, thestability of the artefacts plays a crucial role, and violations of the stability need to be taken into account toallow for a meaningful comparison. In this work, we present several mathematical models for a treatment ofnon-negligible artefact instability effects in bilateral comparisons. We highlight the underlying model assumptionsand derive analytical formulae for the estimate and standard uncertainty of the instability effect. Moreover, wederive the bilateral degree of equivalence by applying the models in a treatment essentially based on the GUM(JCGM-100). Our considerations conclude with numerical experiments using data from a bilateral comparisonon illuminance and from a recent CCM key comparison of kilogram realisations.

show abstract

Section: Time-dependent Tp Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For another discussion on such issues, see also [26]. Figure 3 shows the resulting bilateral DoE in terms of standard uncertainties (left) and of the E n values [1,27] (right). In our bilateral comparison scenario, this value reads…”

Section: Bilateral Comparison On Illuminancementioning

confidence: 99%

On modelling of artefact instability in interlaboratory comparisons

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The equivalence of the results of each laboratory with respect to the reference value (REF) can be quantified in the form of the normalised equivalence value En value (En) [6][7][8][9].…”

Section: Normalised Equivalence Value (En) Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

First comparison of inline measurements of dynamic viscosity

Bissig¹,

Büker²,

Stolt³

et al. 2023

Proceedings of the 19th International Flow Measurement Conference 2022 on Flow Measurement - FLOMEKO 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microfluidic devices are gaining importance in various fields of pharmacy, flow chemistry and healthcare. In the embedded microchannel, the flow rates, the dynamic viscosity of the transported fluids and the fluid dynamic properties play an important role. Various auxiliary functional components of microfluidic devices such as flow restrictors, valves and flow meters need to be characterised with liquids used in several microfluidic applications. However, calibration with water does not always reflect the behaviour of the fluids used in the different applications. Therefore, several National Metrology Institutes (NMI) have developed micro pipe viscometers for traceable in-line measurement of the dynamic viscosity of liquids used in flow applications as part of the EMPIR 18HLT08 MeDDII project. These micro pipe viscometers allow the calibration of any flow device at different flow rates and the calibration of the dynamic viscosity of the liquid or liquid mixture used under actual flow conditions. The traceability of the micro pipe viscometer, the validation of the stated measurement uncertainty with eight liquids as well as dynamic viscosity measurements with in-line sensors are presented in this paper.

show abstract

“…The E N criterion is used to evaluate the degree of equivalence (DoE) of multiple measurements of the same artefact, e.g. [65,66]. To this end, at each sampling point i, j ∈ [1, .…”

Section: Degree Of Equivalence (Doe)mentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of traceable spatial angle autocollimator calibrations performed by PTB and VTT MIKES

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Autocollimators are versatile devices for angle metrology used in a wide range of applications in engineering and manufacturing. A modern electronic autocollimator generally features two measuring axes and can thus fully determine the surface normal of an optical surface relative to it in space. Until recently, however, the calibration capabilities of the national metrology institutes were limited to plane angles. Although it was possible to calibrate both measuring axes independently of each other, it was not feasible to determine their crosstalk if angular deflections were present in both axes simultaneously. To expand autocollimator calibrations from plane angles to spatial angles, PTB and VTT MIKES have created dedicated calibration devices which are based on different measurement principles and accomplish the task of measurand traceability in different ways. Comparing calibrations of a transfer standard makes it possible to detect systematic measurement errors of the two devices and to evaluate the validity of their uncertainty budgets. The importance of measurand traceability via calibration for a broad spectrum of autocollimator applications is one of the motivating factors behind the creation of both devices and for this comparison of the calibration capabilities of the two national metrology institutes. The latter is the focus of the work presented here.

show abstract

On a measure of consistency in comparison measurements

Cited by 30 publications

References 7 publications

On modelling of artefact instability in interlaboratory comparisons

On modelling of artefact instability in interlaboratory comparisons

First comparison of inline measurements of dynamic viscosity

A comparison of traceable spatial angle autocollimator calibrations performed by PTB and VTT MIKES

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About