Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Search
Collections
Journals
About
Contact us
My IOPscience
This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.
2007 Metrologia 44 266
(http://iopscience.iop.org/0026-1394/44/5/002)
View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more
Download details:
IP Address: 163.247.43.71
This content was downloaded on 31/08/2015 at 16:36
IOP PUBLISHING
METROLOGIA
doi:10.1088/0026-1394/44/5/002
Printed in the UK
266
T Madec et al
1 mg
7960
1
1
1 mg
7960
1
1
500 g
2700
0.5
1
1
1
1
500 g
2700
0.5
1
1
1
1
200 g
2700
0.2
200 g
2700
0.2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
100 g
2700
0.1
100 g
2700
0.1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Identification
Shape
SU 100 g 1
SU 500 g 2
SU 100 g 2
SU 600 g 1
SU 200 g 1
SU 600 g 2
SU 200 g 2
SU 700 g 1
SU 300 g 1
SU 700 g 2
SU 300 g 2
SU 800 g 1
SU 400 g 1
SU 800 g 2
SU 400 g 2
SU 900 g 1
SU 500 g 1
SU 900 g 2
Identification
Shape
T Madec et al
Table 4. Quadratic means of the standard deviations and of the difference of adjusted and measured values in the five successive and
identical calibrations weighing designs.
Quadratic mean/g
W.D. No.1
W.D. No.2
W.D. No.3
W.D. No.4
W.D. No. 5
Mean
Standard deviation
Residue
0.075
0.027
0.075
0.028
0.092
0.024
0.091
0.041
0.073
0.017
0.081
0.028
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
0.065
0.065
0.075
0.085
0.090
0.11
0.13
0.14
0.16
Standard deviation
of sensitivity/g
Nominal values of
micro-standard
Nominal value/g
0.07
0.05
0.07
0.09
0.04
0.02
0.09
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.01
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.08
0.00
0.05
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.08
0.03
0.01
0.03
0.03
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.07
0.06
0.04
0.03
0.10
0.04
0.03
0.11
0.07
0.06
0.12
0.18
0.15
0.08
0.04
0.13
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
(standard uncertainty)
0.0
0
4.2. Procedure
1.3
1.1
0.9
0.2 g
0.7
(standard uncertainty)
0.5
0
T Madec et al
1.0
1 mg
0.5
Sensitivity error/g
10 mg
100 mg
1g
5g
0.0
0
10
-0.5
-1.0
Nominal value of micro standard/g x10-2
Table 7. Chronological list of the comparisons performed in weighing designs to determine the sensitivity errors of the M-one comparator
from 100 g to 900 g.
Identification of the station
Cycle
Weighing
designs
WD
S1
S2
S3
S4
Identification of tare (+ micro-standard) on each station
A
A
A
A
A/B
B
B
B
B/C
C
C
C
C/D
D
D
D
D
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
M1
M1
M1
M1
M1
M1
M1
M1
M1
M1
M1
M1
M1
M1
M1
M1
M1
M2
M2 + 100 g
M2 + 400 g
M2 + 700 g
M2
M2 + 100 g
M2 + 400 g
M2 + 700 g
M2
M2 + 100 g
M2 + 400 g
M2 + 700 g
M2
M2 + 100 g
M2 + 400 g
M2 + 700 g
M2
M4
M4 + 300 g
M4 + 600 g
M4 + 900 g
M4
M4 + 300 g
M4 + 600 g
M4 + 900 g
M4
M4 + 300 g
M4 + 600 g
M4 + 900 g
M4
M4 + 300 g
M4 + 600 g
M4 + 900 g
M4
3.0
2.0
Sensitivity error/g
M3
M3 + 200 g
M3 + 500 g
M3 + 800 g
M3
M3 + 200 g
M3 + 500 g
M3 + 800 g
M3
M3 + 200 g
M3 + 500 g
M3 + 800 g
M3
M3 + 200 g
M3 + 500 g
M3 + 800 g
M3
1.0
0.0
-1.0
-2.0
(standard uncertainty)
-3.0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Nominal value of micro-standard/g
800
900
The sensitivity error at the nominal value of the microstandard j is calculated by the relationship
sj = Cj Cj (0),
where Cj is the result of equation (1) and Cj (0) is
the conventional mass of the micro-standard j calibrated
previously (see section 3.4).
(1)
T Madec et al
Sensitivity
error/g
Standard
uncertainty/g
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Mean
Residue1
0.12
0.14
0.02
0.13
0.06
0.12
0.32
0.05
0.18
0.02
0.15
0.38
0.43
0.48
0.38
0.34
0.41
0.46
0.33
0.32
1
Typical absolute difference between
observed and adjusted values.
6. Conclusion
The production and calibration of micro-standards turns out
to be a realistic venture provided that suitable precautions are
taken for their handling and preservation. Recourse to an A5
type automatic comparator proves to be one way of achieving
this, by limiting human intervention, which is the main threat
to the survival of the micro-standards even if the speed of
274
u-type/g
Micro-standard
Resolution (four times)
Reproducibility
Repeatability
Least square error
Combined standard uncertainty
0.06
0.16
0.27
0.14
0.14
0.38
References
[1] Bich W 1990 Variances, covariances and restraints in mass
metrology Metrologia 27 1116
[2] Bich W and Cox M G 1993 Uncertainty modelling in mass
comparisons Metrologia 30 495502
[3] Glaser M and Firlus M 1993 Erweiterung der Masseskala fur
den Bereich unter 1 mg PTB-Mitteilungen 103 1315
[4] Reichmuth A 2001 A new mass comparator generation for the
automatic calibration of weight sets Proc. 17th Int. Conf.
Force, Mass, Torque and Pressure Measurement: IMEKO
TC3 (Istanbul, Turkey, 1721 September 2001) pp 31019
[5] Reichmuth A and Richard P 2003 Density determination using
the MettlerToledo M one Mass Comparator Weighing 2003,
South Yorkshire Int. Weighing Conf. (1718 June 2003,
Barnsley, UK) pp 15-115-13