The Elsmar Cove Wiki More Free Files The Elsmar Cove Forums Discussion Thread Index Post Attachments Listing Failure Modes Services and Solutions to Problems Elsmar cove Forums Main Page Elsmar Cove Home Page
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > ISO (International Organization for Standardization) Standards > ISO 17025 - General Metrology, Measurement Device, Calibration and Test Laboratories > ISO 17025 and related Metrology Topics - Measurement Devices, Calibration and Test Laboratories
Forum Username


Search the Elsmar Cove
Custom Search
Monitor the Elsmar Forum
Follow Marc & Elsmar
Elsmar Cove Forum RSS Feed  Marc Smith's Google+ Page  Marc Smith's Linked In Page   Marc Smith's Elsmar Cove YouTube Page  Marc Smith's Facebook Page  Elsmar Cove Twitter Feed
Elsmar Cove Groups
Elsmar Cove Google+ Group  Elsmar Cove LinkedIn Group  Elsmar Cove Facebook Group
Sponsor Links





Donate and $ Contributor Forum Access

Click the graphic above.
Courtesy Quick Links

Links that Elsmar Cove visitors will find useful in your quest for knowledge:

Howard's
International Quality Services
Marcelo Antunes'
SQR Consulting
Bob Doering's
Correct SPC - Precision Machining

NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook
IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors
SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers
Quality Digest Portal
IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology
ASQ - American Society for Quality
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Content Display Modes
  #1  
Old 31st January 2005, 02:19 PM
Charles Wathen Charles Wathen is offline
Involved - Posts

 
Registration Date: Feb 2002
Location: Temecula, CA
Age: 59
 
Posts: 116
Thanks Given to Others: 3
Thanked 31 Times in 21 Posts
Karma Power: 62
Karma: 142
Charles Wathen is appreciated, and has over 100 Karma points.Charles Wathen is appreciated, and has over 100 Karma points.
Question What is the least acceptable TAR value? Mettler UMX2 micro balance - Class E2 weights

Hi gang,
I've run into a pickle with performing calibrations on some precision Mettler UMX2 micro balances. I have class E2 weights that were recommended by Mettler to calibrate the balance on a regular schedule. We calibrate the balances using the differential method. If you look at the specs for the UMX2 micro balance, it's enough to make your hair stand on end:
Linearity: Ī0.004mg
Repeatability: 0.0009mg
Resolution: 0.001mg

Using class E2 weights, my cal ratio is 2.82:1 based on the uncertainties of the weight and resolution of the balance. Going to class E1 is not that much better. What are minimum TAR values that you can accept? I've read that 1.5:1 is OK if you use guardbandding, but in my case, I'm using the entire range of the balance. Thoughts?

Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 31st January 2005, 03:50 PM
Hershal's Avatar
Hershal Hershal is offline
Metrologist-Auditor

 
Registration Date: Mar 2004
Location: So Cal, California, U.S.
Age: 58
 
Posts: 2,351
Thanks Given to Others: 1
Thanked 779 Times in 553 Posts
Karma Power: 299
Karma: 10533
Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.
Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.
Actually, there is no absolute minimum for TAR, or for TUR either. ANSI/NCSL Z540-1-1994 specifies a 4:1, but less than a 4:1 will require stated uncertainties.

Hope this helps.

Hershal
Sponsored Links

  #3  
Old 31st January 2005, 06:37 PM
Charles Wathen Charles Wathen is offline
Involved - Posts

 
Registration Date: Feb 2002
Location: Temecula, CA
Age: 59
 
Posts: 116
Thanks Given to Others: 3
Thanked 31 Times in 21 Posts
Karma Power: 62
Karma: 142
Charles Wathen is appreciated, and has over 100 Karma points.Charles Wathen is appreciated, and has over 100 Karma points.
Quote:
In Reply to Parent Post by Hershal

Actually, there is no absolute minimum for TAR, or for TUR either. ANSI/NCSL Z540-1-1994 specifies a 4:1, but less than a 4:1 will require stated uncertainties.

Hope this helps.

Hershal
Hi Hershal. Thanks for your input. When you say "stated uncertainties", does this mean stating the uncertainty of the weight we use along with the TAR (TUR) also?

I'm developing a method to use in our procedures, but it looks like we will have to caclutate this on the calibration certificate, as putting it on a procedure might not be the correct way to handle this, since the uncertainty might change depending on the calibration facility.
  #4  
Old 1st February 2005, 10:07 AM
Hershal's Avatar
Hershal Hershal is offline
Metrologist-Auditor

 
Registration Date: Mar 2004
Location: So Cal, California, U.S.
Age: 58
 
Posts: 2,351
Thanks Given to Others: 1
Thanked 779 Times in 553 Posts
Karma Power: 299
Karma: 10533
Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.
Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.Hershal is appreciated, and has over 1700 Karma points.
Yes, the weight (sometimes also called a Mass standard) is a Type B uncertainty.

You need to also take into account your Type A (the readings) both for repeatability and reproducibility.

Other Type B influences include temp (variation from 20C), eccentricity (where the weight sits on the balance), bouyancy, local acceration of gravity, altitude (this should be minimal effect in Temecula), resolution of the balance, and if the weights are picked up with hands (EVEN WITH THE FINGER COTS OR WHITE GLOVES) there is the thermal coefficient of expansion for the weights.

All these go into developing the stated uncertainties for the calibration of the balance.

Hope this helps.

Hershal
  #5  
Old 2nd February 2005, 10:32 AM
Charles Wathen Charles Wathen is offline
Involved - Posts

 
Registration Date: Feb 2002
Location: Temecula, CA
Age: 59
 
Posts: 116
Thanks Given to Others: 3
Thanked 31 Times in 21 Posts
Karma Power: 62
Karma: 142
Charles Wathen is appreciated, and has over 100 Karma points.Charles Wathen is appreciated, and has over 100 Karma points.
In case anyone is intrested, I received a reply from Robert Brown:
http://www.blogger.com/profile/6367980

Here is his answer:
========================================================
QUESTION: "I'm in the process of developing some type of minimum TAR for Micro Balances. Since the best weight will not guarantee a 4:1 or even a 3:1 ratio, I need to come up with an acceptable level TUR value for these balances."

ANSWER:
TUR is an issue when testing to see if the measured value complies with specifications (a failure could result in an "Out of Tolerance" report).

CASE 1: No Specification Compliance:

If there are no specs for the weights and/or...
1) The weights are only used within your quality system
2) Correction factors are on the calibration report and applied when the wieghts are used.
3) No one depends upon the weights being within a secification of nominal.
Then Out of Tolerance issues do NOT apply. Be sure that the UNCERTAINTY of the Balance measurement (is calculated by squaring the repeatability of the balance, and squaring the uncertainty of the weight we use to check the balance) is DECLARED, and USED when the weight is used to make measurements with declared uncertainties.

CASE 2: Specification of Compliance:

If on the other hand you are verifying that a weight has not drifted too far from a nominal value, and that would result in an out of tolerance condition, then TUR applies. The key problem is that the user of your weight will not be applying correction factors and will be depending upon your assurance and the width of the specification.

In this case,
ISO-17025 p5.10.4.2 "The calibration certificate shall relate only to quantities and the results of functional tests. If a statement of compliance with a specification is made, this shall identify which clauses of the specification are met or not met."

This requirement of ISO-17025 is often interpreted as "guard-banding". In a recent (Aug 17, 2003) paper by David Deaver, "Good, Bad or Indeterminate" there is the only statement that I have seen that refers to least acceptable TUR = 1.5, BE CAREFUL! If you allow a TUR of 1.5 then guard banding will KILL you!! Many false failures will be the result. Dave's recommendation is part of a larger guardbanding strategy (that I support)
1) No guardband if TUR > 4
2) Guard band of 20% for all 1.5 < TUR < 4
3) Calibration NOT ACCEPTABLE if TUR < 1.5

Definition: Guardband
A test limit that is tighter than the actual specification, in order to avoid false pass errors.
========================================================
I also had a good conversation with Robert on the phone (he called me) to get a better clarification of the subject matter. Nice to see people like Robert helping out others in the field of Metrology. Robert L. Brown was presented at the NCSL International 2003 Symposium GUM Uncertainty Analysis With No Greek Letters
http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/uncalc.shtml
In there is a link to his PDF file.
Reply

Lower Navigation Bar
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > ISO (International Organization for Standardization) Standards > ISO 17025 - General Metrology, Measurement Device, Calibration and Test Laboratories > ISO 17025 and related Metrology Topics - Measurement Devices, Calibration and Test Laboratories

Do you find this discussion thread helpful and informational?


Bookmarks


Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors (Members) and 1 Unregistered Guest Visitors)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Forum Search
Display Modes Rate Thread Content
Rate Thread Content:

Forum Posting Settings
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Discussion Threads
Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote
Mettler Toledo Scale Calibration Training SGCalLab ISO 17025 and related Metrology Topics - Measurement Devices, Calibration and Test Laboratories 7 28th April 2014 09:42 AM
Count (Bolts and Nuts) Scale - Class of Calibration Weights Smontes Calibration and Metrology Software and Hardware 3 5th October 2011 08:54 AM
Uncertainty calculation - Estimation for a Mettler Toledo XP 56 balance at 20 grams BradM Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 11 17th February 2011 08:56 AM
"Micro Combined-Heat-and-Power" System (micro-CHP) - The future of home energy? Jennifer Kirley National and International News 10 28th November 2006 08:39 PM
Are Brass weights obsolete? Should they be replaced by Steel weights? Bubba ISO 17025 and related Metrology Topics - Measurement Devices, Calibration and Test Laboratories 7 14th January 2003 06:44 PM



The time now is 07:09 AM. All times are GMT -4.
Your time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.


   


Marc Timothy Smith - Elsmar.com
8466 LeSourdsville-West Chester Road, Olde West Chester, Ohio 45069-1929
513 341-6272