The Elsmar Cove Forum and Site Map 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 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories > Measurement Uncertainty (MU)


The Elsmar Cove Forum SideBar!
Monitor the Forum
Monitor New Forum Posts
New Threads Feeds
RSS FeedRSS Feed
Sponsor Link










$ Contributor Forum Access
Courtesy Quick Links

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


Howard's International Quality Services

Atul's Symphony Technologies

Dave Scott's Scott Quality Solutions

Praxiom Research Group


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


All the Important Standards and Related Web Sites in the World
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Content Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12th June 2001, 05:20 PM
Debbie
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Screw Weight Calibration Uncertainty

Our calibration lab has initiated uncertainty measurements of weight standards.
They are responsible for calibrating around 60 different weight sets (around 25 weights per weight set) and around 200 individual weights.

They just showed me what they were doing to calculate uncertainty -- it looked close and might be OK -- but I thought I'd check to see what more experienced people thought.

They calculated uncertainty based on the uncertainty of the lab standard weight and the standard deviation of three reps of ABBA sequences (A= standard ; B= unknown). THey calculated a standard deviation based on six differences (A's - the adjacent B's).

Is this OK -- or would it be better to pool the standard deviation from like weight calibrations? THey have no historical data.
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 13th June 2001, 09:19 AM
DICKIE
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Debbie,
How did they "calculate" the uncertainty? How are the measurements being performed? What is the resolution of any instruments? Are instruments analog or digital? What are the uncertainties of all of the components of the measuring system?
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

  #3  
Old 13th June 2001, 09:57 AM
Debbie
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Thank you very much for your response. The balance that is used is digital. It is considered to be the "Standard" balance for weight calibrations. For a given weight calibration, the same balance is always used, i.e., for all 1 gram weights, a particular Mettler or Sartorius balance is used.

Calculations at this point are based on three repeats of six comparisons of working standard to lab standard. Here's an example of the data


1g
A 0.99997
B 1.00015
B 1.00021
A 0.99998
A 0.99995
B 1.00020
B 1.00019
A 0.99987
A 0.99993
B 1.00019
B 1.00014
A 0.99991
A&B DIFF 0.00024


MEAN A 0.99994
MEAN B 1.00018

Uncertainty was calculated by determining the standard deviation of the lab standard's weight (not the uncertainty of the differences between the lab standard and the reference) and combining that with the standard deviation of the reference.

I see referenced in EA-4/02 that the difference within each ABBA grouping should be considered a single observation. If I directed the lab in that direction, there would only be three observations. Since they calibrate many similar sets of weights to the same reference, can I pool the standard deviations from similar comparisons (e.g., all similar 1 gram weight references)?

Sorry this is so long, I really appreciate comments and responses that I have gotten.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 14th June 2001, 11:27 AM
DICKIE
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Debbie,
I'll give you some of the details of a 1 gram analysis I just did.

Subject unit is a class F 1 gram mass.

Measurement parameter is 1 gram reference mass calibrated with a stated uncertainty of 0.01832 mg from the calibration source.

five readings on the class F mass yield standard deviation of .005 mg at 95.0 confidence level.

next I use uncertainty=(xmass*(1-(air density/ref mass density)))/(1-(air density/mass density\))-.001

combining these values gives uncertainty of .018mg with infinite degrees of freedom.

root sum square of the component uncertainties give combined uncertainty of .0259mg at 95% confidience level and 348 degrees of freedom.

Hope this helps

Greg
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 14th June 2001, 12:26 PM
tomvehoski tomvehoski is offline
Courtesy Access

Registration Date: May 2001
Location: Warren, MI
 
Posts: 548
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
Karma Power: 67
Karma: 1119
tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.
Try downloading the freeware proficiency calculator from http://www.proficiency.org. It is in the downloads section. There are examples for mass and scale calibration, along with many others. It was very useful on a recent 17025 audit for a scale calibration company I consulted for.

Hope this helps,

Tom

Last edited by howste; 1st November 2009 at 03:09 AM. Reason: fixed URL
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 14th June 2001, 04:09 PM
Debbie
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Tom,

I downloaded the software -- looks real good.
I have a few things to figure out -- (I'm referring to the UC mass 10 kg nominal.unc file. For example 'comparator linearity'.

This example and the replay from Greg have helped me a lot. We were initially going to ignore boyancy -- but I can see that I need to take that into account.

I'm sure we will be using this software. I like that examples are included.

Debbie
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 14th June 2001, 04:13 PM
Debbie
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Greg,

Thanks for your help. I've looked up a lot of information on boyancy -- I see that I can't ignore it. I'll have to go down to the lab and check out conditions to figure out the air density. I already know temperature and humidity.

I really appreciate you taking the time to review the information in my post and reply.

Thanks again.

Debbie
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 14th June 2001, 04:58 PM
tomvehoski tomvehoski is offline
Courtesy Access

Registration Date: May 2001
Location: Warren, MI
 
Posts: 548
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
Karma Power: 67
Karma: 1119
tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.tomvehoski is appreciated, and has over 1100 Karma points.
You might be able to get more help from your state department of weights and measures. In Michigan, the Dept. of Agriculture certifies most of the calibration standards in use by scale companies. They might be more willing to help than a commercial lab. I found a link to all of the different state departments here:

*** Dead Link Removed ***

You can try http://consumeraction.gov/
Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation Bar
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > ISO (International Organization for Standardization) Standards > ISO 17025 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories > Measurement Uncertainty (MU)

Bookmarks


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

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

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

Forum Jump

Similar Discussion Threads
Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote
A little weight on my mind for New Year's - Measurement Uncertainty ScottBP Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 3 12th January 2009 01:47 PM
Verification vs. Calibration of Dial Weight Dynamometer clara ISO 17025 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories 4 7th December 2007 01:22 PM
Weight Measurement Uncertainty - F1 10 Kg weight comparison with 10 Kg E2 weight ahmadfy2003 Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 4 5th January 2007 03:30 PM
Weight class required for scale calibration beekun ISO 17025 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories 2 8th February 2006 12:24 PM
Dead Weight Tester Calibration Spaceman Spiff ISO 17025 - Calibration, Measurement Gages and Test Laboratories 2 4th February 2002 09:57 AM



The time now is 11:22 AM. All times are GMT -4.
The time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.



   

All Y'All Come Back Now, Y' Hear?

Made With A Mac! FreeBSD OS Powered by Apache!
Using php4 Forums provided and maintained by Marc Smith Database by MySQL

FAIR USE and CORRECTNESS NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe herein constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. In addition, I do not guarantee the correctness of the content. The risk of using content from the Elsmar Cove web site and forums remains with the user/visitor.

Responsibility Statement: Each person is responsible for anything they post in the Elsmar Cove forum. Neither I, Marc Timothy Smith, nor any of the forum Moderators, are responsible for the content of posts people make. Liability for post content resides with the poster as does interpretation and/or acceptance and/or use of advice by the reader.

Complaints: If you have a complaint with a post in a forum discussion thread, including Content in general, fighting, flaming, copyright infringement, defamation and/or 'slander', please use the 'Report This Post Report This Post Button button which appears at the top of every post in every thread.

Site courtesy of:
Marc Timothy Smith - Cayman Business Systems, 8466 Lesourdsville-West Chester Road, West Chester, Ohio 45069-1929 - USA
(513) 341-6272

To contact me, click the Google Voice link below, enter Your Name and Your Phone Number and Google will ring your phone and connect you for free!

The Elsmar Cove Web Site is *CopyFree*
no new posts