Weird spec sheet - need help

#1
I am trying to produce an uncertainty budget for my pH measurements.

The spec sheet for my transmitter can be seen here: See Link 1 (see under performance, temperature and transmission signals where repeatability, accuracy and linearity is stated).

Problem is, no where does the spec sheet say anything about whether this is a standard uncertainty or some sort of expanded uncertainty.

I have tried to Google my question with the following result: See link 2

"I am performing some uncertainty calculatons on my WT300E series power analyzer. Are these uncertainty specification at the 1-sigma (68%) or 2 sigma (95%)? I would assume 2-sigma but the datasheet doesn't explicitly state this so I would like confirmation.

ANSWER: The WT300 bulletin specifices accuracy, not uncertainty. The specification of accuracy is the 100% guaranteed value under the conditions specified in the data sheet, and if the error of the measured value exceeds the range of accuracy, the product will be the subject to repair. So, there is no implied statistical / distribution in our bulletin’s accuracy specification."

This is not for the transmitter I am using but for another product - however still a Yokogawa product. So it seems as if Yokogawa don't abide by the conventional way of stating uncertainty.

My question therefore is: How the heck do I use this information (from the quoted Q&A) and include it in my uncertainty budget?

Thanks
/David
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
#2
Link1: web-material3.yokogawa.com/GS12A01F01-01EN.pdf
Link 2: tmi.yokogawa.com/us/library/resources/faqs/are-the-uncertainty-specifications-at-the-1-sigma-68-or-2-sigma-95/

Insert http:// yourself (since I am not allowed to)
 

dwperron

Trusted Information Resource
#3
Nothing weird here.
They are expressing specifications for their devices, nowhere do they claim to be stating uncertainties.
To use specifications in an uncertainty budget you need to consider them as Type B contributors, and typically you will use a rectangular distribution to normalize the specification:

1638794826574.png
 
#4
Nothing weird here.
They are expressing specifications for their devices, nowhere do they claim to be stating uncertainties.
To use specifications in an uncertainty budget you need to consider them as Type B contributors, and typically you will use a rectangular distribution to normalize the specification:

View attachment 28505
Great, thank you for your answer. That is exactly the information I initially implemented (from the M3003) before I started to question what I did. :)
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
K FDA Registration and listing weird situation Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 4
G AN316-12 nut Hexagon threads looks weird Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
T ISO 13485 and CE weird budget (Quotes) Registrars and Notified Bodies 5
C Conclusions from weird GR&R (Gage R&R) Results - 9 of 12 points have NDC of 1 Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
smryan Weird MSWord issue on Work Instruction - Table issues After Work and Weekend Discussion Topics 10
S Excel spreadsheet shows weird CPK outcome Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 10
Y Is it weird for my conducted immunity (4-6) test result? Need help. CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 1
M Weird Hunting Methods Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 8
S QMS Implementation - Weird Situation - Need Suggstions Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 2
A Unusual ('Weird') Standards -'Bouncers' get their own standard Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 5
J API Spec Q1 9th Ed. Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 4
B Evaluation of suppliers API Spec Q1 5.6.1.2c Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 2
Q API Spec Q1 9th Ed 4.4.2 Non-conformance Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 8
M Customer Specific Requirements - Packaging Spec IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 10
J Spec Limits in SPC charts Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 24
J API Spec 6D 25th edition release date? Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 22
T API SPEC Q1 Clause 5.6.1.2.C).2) First Article Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 16
C Validation of process for production and servicing 5.7.1.5 API Spec Q1, 9th Edition Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 9
lanley liao How to understand correctly the section of 5.11 MOC in API Spec Q1? Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 3
U API Spec Q1 - 5.6.1.2 C (3) - Design software Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 3
lanley liao How to correctly understand the bullet list d) of 6.3 Analysis of Data for API Spec Q1 Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 7
A API Spec Q1 Purchasing Process - Supplier Reevaluation based on Supplier Risks 5.6.1.4 Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 19
lanley liao The validity of API Spec Q1 certificate Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 2
A Design and development procedure for API Spec Q2 Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 9
Q Capability study with a minimum spec Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 8
SANTHSH API Spec.Q1 Standards Version in Purchasing Information Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 1
SANTHSH API Spec. Q1 clause 5.6.1.2 On site evaluation Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 12
SANTHSH API spec Q1 9th edition - Castings & Forgings Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 4
N API spec Q1 9th edition Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 2
lanley liao How to understand the term 3.1.21 'Servicing' and the clause 5.7.1.2 'Servicing' of API Spec Q1? Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 19
A Does anyone have a checklist of API Spec 650 13th Edition? Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 0
V Thread Plug Gage Pitch GO Diameter out of spec AQL - Acceptable Quality Level 8
M API Spec. Q1, 8th Ed. Section 7.5.2 vs. Q1, 9th Ed. Section 5.7.1.5 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 0
M Proper way to develop LCL when only given a lower spec limit Reliability Analysis - Predictions, Testing and Standards 7
N Audit non-compliance - API Spec Q1 9th Ed 5.6.1.2 b Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 25
B Set RH spec from dewpoint spec General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 2
A API Spec Q1 9th Edition # Re-audit - Disputing with API AARs Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 1
R Process control documents - Context of API Spec Q1, Clause 5.7.1.3 Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 0
G Can calibrated device values be used instead of manufacturers spec? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 2
DuncanGibbons OEM specifications such as AIPS spec from Airbus AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
S Internal Auditing for API Spec Q1 - auditor qualification requirements Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 6
S API Spec Q1 - How to define Management Representative competency for QMS Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 12
R Interesting Discussion API Spec Q1 Addendum 2 Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 0
F API Spec Q1 Scope - Limiting the scope of certification Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 3
F API Spec Q1 9th Edition Surveillance Audit - Questions about internal audits. Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 22
N When to record values if a spec for a mfg process is set Manufacturing and Related Processes 3
M AMS0320 - Electro-deposition of zinc - Anyone come across this spec? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 4
A API Spec Q1 9th Edition - 12 month Internal Audit Schedule Audit Nonconformance Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 10
D What is your Sterile Medical Device Pouch Peel Strength Spec? Other Medical Device Related Standards 3
P Any official doc/spec on different types of Yield calculation? Manufacturing and Related Processes 0

Similar threads

Top Bottom