34 views

Uploaded by blueviolet2011

- 10 soal petrofisik
- Chapter 01
- Steam tables IAPWS-IF97 formulation
- Chemical Engineering Science
- The Stages of Life Explained Perfectly
- Science Report Compilation-Sri Kant Yadav
- Particle Size
- Explosives Utilization at a Witwatersrand Gold Mine
- Julabo fluid.pdf
- Black Sand
- pile design
- Precursor Chemicals AR Form-2013
- C729-11(2016)
- Fluid-propertiesNumericals.doc
- CHAPTER-2-FLUIDS.pptx
- Chapter 1 Festo Didactic
- Forces and Pressure.pptx
- Assignment #6 - Quality control.pdf
- Annexes
- j100884a027.pdf

You are on page 1of 72

EURAMET.M.P-K13 as an Illustrative Case Study

Vishal Ramnath

R&D Metrologist: Pressure & Vacuum

vramnath@nmisa.org

1 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Table of contents I

Review of Methods for Pressure Generation/Measurement

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

Mechanism to Solve Formulation of Mathematical Equation

Solution for Roots of Multivariable Equation

Defining an EoS for the Working Fluid

Solution of the Roots (Pressure) of the Nonlinear Equation

Calculation of Generated Pressure Uncertainty

Specific Issues Encountered in Uncertainty Analysis

Methodology Used in Cross-Floating Analysis

Derivation of Basis Equation used in Cross-Floating I.

Estimation of the Straight Line Uncertainties Corresponding to u (A0 )

and u (λ)

Discussion

Specific Comments on Intercomparison Results

Recommendations Going Foward

2 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

In general there are different possible approaches in defining

pressure, of which two predominate:

3 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

In general there are different possible approaches in defining

pressure, of which two predominate:

Thermodynamic pressure:

1 ∂ ln Z ∂F

P= =− (1)

β ∂V β ∂V T

3 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

In general there are different possible approaches in defining

pressure, of which two predominate:

Thermodynamic pressure:

1 ∂ ln Z ∂F

P= =− (1)

β ∂V β ∂V T

∂T ∂P ∂S ∂P

∂V S =− ∂ S V , ∂ V T = ∂ T V

∂S ∂V ∂T ∂V (2)

∂P T =− ∂T P , ∂P S = ∂S P

3 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

In general there are different possible approaches in defining

pressure, of which two predominate:

Thermodynamic pressure:

1 ∂ ln Z ∂F

P= =− (1)

β ∂V β ∂V T

∂T ∂P ∂S ∂P

∂V S =− ∂ S V , ∂ V T = ∂ T V

∂S ∂V ∂T ∂V (2)

∂P T =− ∂T P , ∂P S = ∂S P

P

Recall: Partition function Z (T , V , N ) = r exp(−β Er ), r microstate,

1

Er energy for r microstate, temperature paramter β = kT ,k

Boltzmann fundamental constant, Helmholtz free energy

1 ∂ S (E ,V ,N )

F (T , V , N ) = −kT ln Z (T , V , N ), temperature T

= ∂E

V ,N

3 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

Mechanical pressure: The full situation is actually more complicated

since recourse to Hamiltonian theory is required to precisely define

“force” in terms of the generalized displacements and generalized

momenta:

Pn

H= α=1 pα q̇α − L, ṗα = − ∂∂qHα , q̇α = ∂H

∂ pα (3)

4 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

Mechanical pressure: The full situation is actually more complicated

since recourse to Hamiltonian theory is required to precisely define

“force” in terms of the generalized displacements and generalized

momenta:

Pn

H= α=1 pα q̇α − L, ṗα = − ∂∂qHα , q̇α = ∂H

∂ pα (3)

measurement equivalence

Pthermodynamic = Pmechanical (4)

4 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

Mechanical pressure: The full situation is actually more complicated

since recourse to Hamiltonian theory is required to precisely define

“force” in terms of the generalized displacements and generalized

momenta:

Pn

H= α=1 pα q̇α − L, ṗα = − ∂∂qHα , q̇α = ∂H

∂ pα (3)

measurement equivalence

Pthermodynamic = Pmechanical (4)

for a fluid is defined in terms of the shear stress tensor as

1 2

p̄ = − (τxx + τyy + τzz ) = p − λ+ µ ∇·V (5)

3 3

4 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

Mechanical pressure definition: Without going into the details a

working definition for pressure is to apply Stoke’s hypothesis

λ + 32 µ = 0 and couple it with a defining equation of state so that

∂F

P= ⇔ P = NkT i .e. PV = nRT (ideal gas EoS ) (6)

∂ An

5 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

Mechanical pressure definition: Without going into the details a

working definition for pressure is to apply Stoke’s hypothesis

λ + 32 µ = 0 and couple it with a defining equation of state so that

∂F

P= ⇔ P = NkT i .e. PV = nRT (ideal gas EoS ) (6)

∂ An

choice of using mechanical pressure in a NMI scale realization

In line with international best practise there is a move to define the SI

in terms of fundamental scientific constants, and although pressure is a

derived unit from the seven base SI units viz. P = FA developments such

as the Watt balance and Avogadro projects to redefine the kilogram will

logically also impact on the definition of pressure.

5 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

In practical terms pressure is then essentially ”p = FA ” and presently

the most accurate technique of generating a pressure is in terms of

a pressure balance

1 a scalar has zero dimensions and only a magnitude e.g. quantity of matter [moles], a

vector has one dimension and a direction e.g. velocity of wind, a matrix has two dimensions

and direction and orientation e.g. strain

6 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

In practical terms pressure is then essentially ”p = FA ” and presently

the most accurate technique of generating a pressure is in terms of

a pressure balance

A pressure balance is essentially a precision manufactured piston

that is able to slide in a cylinder where the bottom of the piston is

exposed to a fluid under pressure and the top of the piston is stacked

with mass pieces which exert a downwards weight due to gravity

1 a scalar has zero dimensions and only a magnitude e.g. quantity of matter [moles], a

vector has one dimension and a direction e.g. velocity of wind, a matrix has two dimensions

and direction and orientation e.g. strain

6 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

In practical terms pressure is then essentially ”p = FA ” and presently

the most accurate technique of generating a pressure is in terms of

a pressure balance

A pressure balance is essentially a precision manufactured piston

that is able to slide in a cylinder where the bottom of the piston is

exposed to a fluid under pressure and the top of the piston is stacked

with mass pieces which exert a downwards weight due to gravity

From the full definition of “pressure” the quantity p is in fact a tensor1

but for most practical purposes we essentially consider it a scalar

e.g. in hydrostatic hydraulic pressure we assume that the pressure

is equal in all directions (true for Newtonian fluids)

1 a scalar has zero dimensions and only a magnitude e.g. quantity of matter [moles], a

vector has one dimension and a direction e.g. velocity of wind, a matrix has two dimensions

and direction and orientation e.g. strain

6 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

In practical terms pressure is then essentially ”p = FA ” and presently

the most accurate technique of generating a pressure is in terms of

a pressure balance

A pressure balance is essentially a precision manufactured piston

that is able to slide in a cylinder where the bottom of the piston is

exposed to a fluid under pressure and the top of the piston is stacked

with mass pieces which exert a downwards weight due to gravity

From the full definition of “pressure” the quantity p is in fact a tensor1

but for most practical purposes we essentially consider it a scalar

e.g. in hydrostatic hydraulic pressure we assume that the pressure

is equal in all directions (true for Newtonian fluids)

For a piston-cylinder unit (PCU) there is then a fluid exerted

pressure at the “bottom” and a mechanical loading exerted pressure

at the “top”

1 a scalar has zero dimensions and only a magnitude e.g. quantity of matter [moles], a

and direction and orientation e.g. strain

6 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

(a) Ruska model 2465A- (b) Ruska model 2485- (c) Desgranges & Huot

U-754 pneumatic PB 930D hydraulic PB model DH 5503S hydraulic

PB

Figure: Low range PB (a), medium range PB (b) and high range PB (c)

http://www.nimt.or.th/

7 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism of Pressure Generation

axis of radial

symmetry

neutral surface weight

low pressure

cylinder p2

x=L

piston

gravity

r

y

x=0

h0

high pressure p1 r0

r0*

R0

8 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

By an analysis of the physics of the problem one may derive the following

mathematical model:

nP o

n ρa

i =1 mi 1 − ρi − Vs (ρf − ρa ) + H (ρf − ρa )S g + σ C

p−Π =

S

(7)

S = A0 (1 + λP )[1 + α(t − t0 )] (8)

In the above equations the nomenclature used is:

Π = ambient pressure (00 top pressure00 ) (10)

P = p − Π = applied pressure (00 gauge pressure) (11)

In the case of the EURAMET.M.P-K13 key intercomparison Π is known since this the measured atmospheric pressure and in essence the above

equations are to be solved to determine the unknown applied pressure P (and then by implication the absolute pressure p).

9 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

mi [kg] – mass of the i th weight piece

10 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

mi [kg] – mass of the i th weight piece

ρa [kg m−3 ] – density of the ambient fluid above the PCU (air density)

10 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

mi [kg] – mass of the i th weight piece

ρa [kg m−3 ] – density of the ambient fluid above the PCU (air density)

ρi [kg m−3 ] – density of the i th weight piece

10 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

mi [kg] – mass of the i th weight piece

ρa [kg m−3 ] – density of the ambient fluid above the PCU (air density)

ρi [kg m−3 ] – density of the i th weight piece

Vs [m3 ] – volume of the part of the piston which is submerged into the fluid

which applies the pressure

10 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

mi [kg] – mass of the i th weight piece

ρa [kg m−3 ] – density of the ambient fluid above the PCU (air density)

ρi [kg m−3 ] – density of the i th weight piece

Vs [m3 ] – volume of the part of the piston which is submerged into the fluid

which applies the pressure

ρf [kg m−3 ] – density of the fluid which applies the pressure

10 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

mi [kg] – mass of the i th weight piece

ρa [kg m−3 ] – density of the ambient fluid above the PCU (air density)

ρi [kg m−3 ] – density of the i th weight piece

Vs [m3 ] – volume of the part of the piston which is submerged into the fluid

which applies the pressure

ρf [kg m−3 ] – density of the fluid which applies the pressure

H [m] – height correction term to account for possible variation of laboratory

standard (LS) and transfer standard (TS)

10 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

mi [kg] – mass of the i th weight piece

ρa [kg m−3 ] – density of the ambient fluid above the PCU (air density)

ρi [kg m−3 ] – density of the i th weight piece

Vs [m3 ] – volume of the part of the piston which is submerged into the fluid

which applies the pressure

ρf [kg m−3 ] – density of the fluid which applies the pressure

H [m] – height correction term to account for possible variation of laboratory

standard (LS) and transfer standard (TS)

g [m s−2 ] – local gravitational acceleration

10 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

mi [kg] – mass of the i th weight piece

ρa [kg m−3 ] – density of the ambient fluid above the PCU (air density)

ρi [kg m−3 ] – density of the i th weight piece

Vs [m3 ] – volume of the part of the piston which is submerged into the fluid

which applies the pressure

ρf [kg m−3 ] – density of the fluid which applies the pressure

H [m] – height correction term to account for possible variation of laboratory

standard (LS) and transfer standard (TS)

g [m s−2 ] – local gravitational acceleration

σ [N m−1 ] – surface tension term to account for surface tension effects

between liquid (oil) and gas (air) interface

10 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

mi [kg] – mass of the i th weight piece

ρa [kg m−3 ] – density of the ambient fluid above the PCU (air density)

ρi [kg m−3 ] – density of the i th weight piece

Vs [m3 ] – volume of the part of the piston which is submerged into the fluid

which applies the pressure

ρf [kg m−3 ] – density of the fluid which applies the pressure

H [m] – height correction term to account for possible variation of laboratory

standard (LS) and transfer standard (TS)

g [m s−2 ] – local gravitational acceleration

σ [N m−1 ] – surface tension term to account for surface tension effects

between liquid (oil) and gas (air) interface

S [m2 ] – ”effective area” of piston-cylinder

10 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

mi [kg] – mass of the i th weight piece

ρa [kg m−3 ] – density of the ambient fluid above the PCU (air density)

ρi [kg m−3 ] – density of the i th weight piece

Vs [m3 ] – volume of the part of the piston which is submerged into the fluid

which applies the pressure

ρf [kg m−3 ] – density of the fluid which applies the pressure

H [m] – height correction term to account for possible variation of laboratory

standard (LS) and transfer standard (TS)

g [m s−2 ] – local gravitational acceleration

σ [N m−1 ] – surface tension term to account for surface tension effects

between liquid (oil) and gas (air) interface

S [m2 ] – ”effective area” of piston-cylinder

A0 [m2 ] – zero-pressure area of PCU LS

10 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

mi [kg] – mass of the i th weight piece

ρa [kg m−3 ] – density of the ambient fluid above the PCU (air density)

ρi [kg m−3 ] – density of the i th weight piece

Vs [m3 ] – volume of the part of the piston which is submerged into the fluid

which applies the pressure

ρf [kg m−3 ] – density of the fluid which applies the pressure

H [m] – height correction term to account for possible variation of laboratory

standard (LS) and transfer standard (TS)

g [m s−2 ] – local gravitational acceleration

σ [N m−1 ] – surface tension term to account for surface tension effects

between liquid (oil) and gas (air) interface

S [m2 ] – ”effective area” of piston-cylinder

A0 [m2 ] – zero-pressure area of PCU LS

λ [Pa−1 ] – distortion coefficient of PCU (typically measured in ppm/MPa)

10 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

mi [kg] – mass of the i th weight piece

ρa [kg m−3 ] – density of the ambient fluid above the PCU (air density)

ρi [kg m−3 ] – density of the i th weight piece

Vs [m3 ] – volume of the part of the piston which is submerged into the fluid

which applies the pressure

ρf [kg m−3 ] – density of the fluid which applies the pressure

H [m] – height correction term to account for possible variation of laboratory

standard (LS) and transfer standard (TS)

g [m s−2 ] – local gravitational acceleration

σ [N m−1 ] – surface tension term to account for surface tension effects

between liquid (oil) and gas (air) interface

S [m2 ] – ”effective area” of piston-cylinder

A0 [m2 ] – zero-pressure area of PCU LS

λ [Pa−1 ] – distortion coefficient of PCU (typically measured in ppm/MPa)

α [K−1 ] – thermal expansion coefficient term (α = αp + αc )

10 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mathematical Model of Pressure Balance

mi [kg] – mass of the i th weight piece

ρa [kg m−3 ] – density of the ambient fluid above the PCU (air density)

ρi [kg m−3 ] – density of the i th weight piece

Vs [m3 ] – volume of the part of the piston which is submerged into the fluid

which applies the pressure

ρf [kg m−3 ] – density of the fluid which applies the pressure

H [m] – height correction term to account for possible variation of laboratory

standard (LS) and transfer standard (TS)

g [m s−2 ] – local gravitational acceleration

σ [N m−1 ] – surface tension term to account for surface tension effects

between liquid (oil) and gas (air) interface

S [m2 ] – ”effective area” of piston-cylinder

A0 [m2 ] – zero-pressure area of PCU LS

λ [Pa−1 ] – distortion coefficient of PCU (typically measured in ppm/MPa)

α [K−1 ] – thermal expansion coefficient term (α = αp + αc )

C [m]p– circumference of piston exposed to oil-air interface (typically set as

C ≈ 4π A?0 ) 10 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism to Solve Formulation of Mathematical Equation

Search I.

Substituting the above terms we have

n

A?0

X ρa

(p − Π)[1 + λ(p − Π)][1 + α(t − 20)] = mi 1 − − Vs (ρf − ρa )

g ρi

i =1

+ H (ρf − ρa )A?0 [1 + λ(p − Π)]

× [1 + α(t − 20)]

σ −1

+ (4π A?0 [1 + α(t − 20)]) 2

g

(12)

the roots (unknown pressure p) must be solved for.

11 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism to Solve Formulation of Mathematical Equation

Search II.

The form of f (X ) is then:

Pn

ρa

f (X ) = i =1 mi 1 − − Vs (ρf − ρa )

ρi

?

+ H (ρf − ρa )A0 [1 + λ(p − Π)][1 + α(t − 20)]

−1 (13)

+ σg (4π A?0 [1 + α(t − 20)]) 2

A?

− g

0

(p − Π)[1 + λ(p − Π)][1 + α(t − 20)]

where the input state variable X is

X = [ m1 , m2 , . . . , mn , (14)

ρ1 , ρ2 , . . . , ρn , (15)

? T

A0 , λ, αp , αc , t , Vs , H , Π, σ, g , tair , RHair ] (16)

12 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism to Solve Formulation of Mathematical Equation

Search III.

The density of the air may be calculated using the CIPM-2007 formula3

which expresses the air density in terms of

ta – atmospheric temperature (measured with in-house thermometer

traceable to water triple point (WTP) cell)

pa – atmospheric pressure (measured with in-house barometer

traceable to absolute medium gas pressures with Ruska LS)

ha – atmospheric relative humidity expressed as a pure number

such that 0 6 ha 6 1 (traceable to in-house hybrid humidity

generator: validated in humidity regional inter-comparison)

3 Metrologia 45 2008 149–155 ”Revised Formula for the Density of Moist Air

(CIPM-2007)”, Picard A et al

13 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism to Solve Formulation of Mathematical Equation

Briefly the underlying formula is of form

pMa Mv

ρa = 1 − xv 1− (17)

ZRT Ma

where

ρa [kg m−3 ] – air density

p [Pa] – atmospheric pressure (total pressure with implicit assumption of Dalton’s partial pressure law)

t [◦ C] – air temperature

R [J mol−1 K−1 ] – universal gas constant (using CODATA 2006 values4 cited in: Reviews of Modern Physics, Vol 80, April–June

2008, Mohr P J et al)

4 http://www.nist.gov/pml/div684/fcdc/upload/rmp2006-2.pdf

14 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism to Solve Formulation of Mathematical Equation

15 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism to Solve Formulation of Mathematical Equation

This choice is incorporated by assigning the mass values to

correspond to a weight set of N weights used (where n > N) and

then appending the piston mass mpiston and bell mass mbell viz.

(18)

15 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Mechanism to Solve Formulation of Mathematical Equation

On the Differences Between True Mass, Conventional Mass and Apparent

Mass

Conventional mass: air density of 1.2 kg m−3 and mass density of 8000 kg m−3

Detailsa Objective is to determine the true mass of a weight piece from calibration

data:

ρa

1− ρs

true mass : m = ms ρa (19)

1− ρm

! !

(c ) (s )

(c ) ρa ρa

calibration cert data : ms 1− (c )

= ms 1− (20)

ρs ρs

(c )

ρa

1− (c ) 1− ρa

(c ) ρs ρs

⇔m = ms (s)

× ρ(21)

1− ρa 1− ρm

a

ρs

a The Pressure Balance: Theory and Practice, Dadson R S et al, 1982, National Physical

Laboratory / HMSO 16 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Solution for Roots of Multivariable Equation

Solution of Roots of f (X ) = 0

In the mathematical model of the EURAMET.M.P-K13 key

comparison there will in general be a variable number of inputs since

a varying number of mass pieces n are used to generate a

sequence of (applied) pressures for P ∈ [50, . . . , 500] MPa

It can be shown that for n mass pieces used in

X = [m1 , . . . , mn , ρ1 , . . . , ρn , A?0 , λ, αp , αc , t , Vs , H , pa , ta , ha , σ, g ]T

there will be a total of (2n + 12) state variables incorporated into the

measurand model to solve for the unknown generated applied

pressure

Consider the terms in f (X ) which are known and unknown

Pn

ρa

f (X ) = i =1 mi 1 − − Vs (ρf − ρa )

ρi

?

+ H (ρf − ρa )A0 [1 + λ(p − Π)][1 + α(t − 20)]

−1 (22)

+ σg (4π A?0 [1 + α(t − 20)]) 2

?

A0

− g

(p − Π)[1 + λ(p − Π)][1 + α(t − 20)]

17 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Defining an EoS for the Working Fluid

During the intercomparison both the transfer standard and the NMISA

Ruska high pressure PCU used di(2-ethylhexgl) sebecate i.e. ‘DHS’ as the

working fluid formulated as

ρf /[kg m−3 ] = [912.7 + 0.752(10−6 p) − 1.65 × 10−3 (10−6 p)2

+ 1.5 × 10−6 (10−6 p)3 ] × [1 − 7.8 × 10−4 (tf − 20)]

(23)

Alternative forms that may be considered are linear extrapolations from a

known reference state ρ f0

1+β(tf −tf 0 )

ρf = p −p

(24)

1 − E f0

f

where tf 0 is the reference oil temperature at which the oil’s properties are

known (say 20 ◦ C), Ef is the bulk modulas fluid elasticity, pf 0 is the referance

oil fluid density pressure, tf is the current oil temperature and p is the current

oil pressure

For pure ideal gases the EoS is

ρRT

p= (25)

M 18 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Defining an EoS for the Working Fluid

The is a natural distinction between the absolute pressure p and the

applied pressure P and equations-of-state are fundamentally defined in

terms of the absolute pressure in order to be unambigous. Consider the

following hypothetical cases:

• case (i) {P (i ) = 200 kPa} ∪ {Π(i ) = 100 kPa} ⇒ p(i ) = 300 kPa

• case (ii) {P (ii ) = 200 kPa} ∪ {Π(ii ) = 80 kPa} ⇒ p(ii ) = 280 kPa

As a result even if the applied pressure is the same this does not neces-

sary imply that the fluid density will be the same

19 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Solution of the Roots (Pressure) of the Nonlinear Equation

From the defining equation f (X ) with X = [x1 , . . . , x2n+12 ]T

Pn

ρa

f (X ) = i =1 mi 1 − − Vs (ρf − ρa )

ρi

?

+ H (ρf − ρa )A0 [1 + λ(p − Π)][1 + α(t − 20)]

−1 (26)

+ σg (4π A?0 [1 + α(t − 20)]) 2

A?

− g

0

(p − Π)[1 + λ(p − Π)][1 + α(t − 20)]

20 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Solution of the Roots (Pressure) of the Nonlinear Equation

From the defining equation f (X ) with X = [x1 , . . . , x2n+12 ]T

Pn

ρa

f (X ) = i =1 mi 1 − − Vs (ρf − ρa )

ρi

?

+ H (ρf − ρa )A0 [1 + λ(p − Π)][1 + α(t − 20)]

−1 (26)

+ σg (4π A?0 [1 + α(t − 20)]) 2

A?

− g

0

(p − Π)[1 + λ(p − Π)][1 + α(t − 20)]

in a single unknown Y by setting all the all components such that

20 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Solution of the Roots (Pressure) of the Nonlinear Equation

From the defining equation f (X ) with X = [x1 , . . . , x2n+12 ]T

Pn

ρa

f (X ) = i =1 mi 1 − − Vs (ρf − ρa )

ρi

?

+ H (ρf − ρa )A0 [1 + λ(p − Π)][1 + α(t − 20)]

−1 (26)

+ σg (4π A?0 [1 + α(t − 20)]) 2

A?

− g

0

(p − Π)[1 + λ(p − Π)][1 + α(t − 20)]

in a single unknown Y by setting all the all components such that

xi 6= p∀i ∈ [1, . . . , 2n + 12] as parameters i.e. by solving

20 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Solution of the Roots (Pressure) of the Nonlinear Equation

From the defining equation f (X ) with X = [x1 , . . . , x2n+12 ]T

Pn

ρa

f (X ) = i =1 mi 1 − − Vs (ρf − ρa )

ρi

?

+ H (ρf − ρa )A0 [1 + λ(p − Π)][1 + α(t − 20)]

−1 (26)

+ σg (4π A?0 [1 + α(t − 20)]) 2

A?

− g

0

(p − Π)[1 + λ(p − Π)][1 + α(t − 20)]

in a single unknown Y by setting all the all components such that

xi 6= p∀i ∈ [1, . . . , 2n + 12] as parameters i.e. by solving

f (Y ; X ? ) = 0 (27)

20 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

uncertainty analysis by the research metrologist was performed

within the framework of the GUM

5 Cox M G and Harris P M, Software Support for Metrology Best Practice Guide No. 6 –

2004

21 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

uncertainty analysis by the research metrologist was performed

within the framework of the GUM

The underlying matrix based equation for the multi-variable input X

was 2

∂f

u 2 (y ) = (∇x f )V x (∇x )T (28)

∂y

following the methodology5 of Cox and Harris.

In our initial approach I assumed no correlation effects in the

components of the input variable X for simplicity

5 Cox M G and Harris P M, Software Support for Metrology Best Practice Guide No. 6 –

2004

21 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Specific Issues Encountered in Uncertainty Analysis

Cov(xi , xj ) = 0∀i 6= j : 1 6 i , j 6 2n + 12

In general the only possible significant non-zero correlation effect

that may occur is for the case Cov(A0 , λ)

6 consultation of the statistical literature such as Metrologia journal articles and IMEKO

conferences states that it is poor practice to simply assume unity correlation in the absence

of information: the recommended option is to assume zero correlation

22 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Specific Issues Encountered in Uncertainty Analysis

Cov(xi , xj ) = 0∀i 6= j : 1 6 i , j 6 2n + 12

In general the only possible significant non-zero correlation effect

that may occur is for the case Cov(A0 , λ)

Correlation effects do occur in the case of the weights mass/density

but in general this has a very minor impact on final uncertainties as

u (A0 ) and particularly u (λ) will dominate uncertainty contributions at

elevated pressures

6 consultation of the statistical literature such as Metrologia journal articles and IMEKO

conferences states that it is poor practice to simply assume unity correlation in the absence

of information: the recommended option is to assume zero correlation

22 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Specific Issues Encountered in Uncertainty Analysis

Cov(xi , xj ) = 0∀i 6= j : 1 6 i , j 6 2n + 12

In general the only possible significant non-zero correlation effect

that may occur is for the case Cov(A0 , λ)

Correlation effects do occur in the case of the weights mass/density

but in general this has a very minor impact on final uncertainties as

u (A0 ) and particularly u (λ) will dominate uncertainty contributions at

elevated pressures

(LS )

Correlation is certain to occur in the present instance as A0 and

λ(LS ) are in fact obtained from an experimental cross-floating

againsts another precision piston-cylinder standard however in the

present instance no accessible information on Cov(A0 , λ) is

available as these data values are sourced from an external

certificate that does not provide any information from which one may

reasonably infer a magnnitude of correlation6

6 consultation of the statistical literature such as Metrologia journal articles and IMEKO

conferences states that it is poor practice to simply assume unity correlation in the absence

of information: the recommended option is to assume zero correlation

22 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Derivation of Basis Equation used in Cross-Floating I.

Make the assumption of linear elasticity theory in the PDE’s formulation

of the strain/stress constituent behaviour:

Assume a piston-cylinder A with known characteristics i.e.

(A)

DA = {A0 , λ(A) } is cross-floated with another piston-cylinder B with

(B )

unknown characteristics i.e. DB = {A0 , λ(B ) } which are to be

determined

23 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Derivation of Basis Equation used in Cross-Floating I.

Make the assumption of linear elasticity theory in the PDE’s formulation

of the strain/stress constituent behaviour:

Assume a piston-cylinder A with known characteristics i.e.

(A)

DA = {A0 , λ(A) } is cross-floated with another piston-cylinder B with

(B )

unknown characteristics i.e. DB = {A0 , λ(B ) } which are to be

determined

It follows that

X m

1 ρa

PB = × g mB j 1 − − Vs B (ρf − ρa )g

SB ρB j

j =1

q

(B )

+ σB 4π A0 + (HB (ρf − ρa )g ) SB (29)

23 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Derivation of Basis Equation used in Cross-Floating I.

Make the assumption of linear elasticity theory in the PDE’s formulation

of the strain/stress constituent behaviour:

Assume a piston-cylinder A with known characteristics i.e.

(A)

DA = {A0 , λ(A) } is cross-floated with another piston-cylinder B with

(B )

unknown characteristics i.e. DB = {A0 , λ(B ) } which are to be

determined

It follows that

X m

1 ρa

PB = × g mB j 1 − − Vs B (ρf − ρa )g

SB ρB j

j =1

q

(B )

+ σB 4π A0 + (HB (ρf − ρa )g ) SB (29)

23 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Derivation of Basis Equation used in Cross-Floating I.

Noting that HB = 0 since the height correction was already

accounted for in PCU A when working out the applied pressure

24 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Derivation of Basis Equation used in Cross-Floating I.

Noting that HB = 0 since the height correction was already

accounted for in PCU A when working out the applied pressure

m

!

ρa

q

1 X (B )

⇒ SB = × g mB j 1− − VB (ρf − ρa )g + σB 4π A0

PA ρm B j

j =1

(30)

24 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Derivation of Basis Equation used in Cross-Floating I.

Noting that HB = 0 since the height correction was already

accounted for in PCU A when working out the applied pressure

m

!

ρa

q

1 X (B )

⇒ SB = × g mB j 1− − VB (ρf − ρa )g + σB 4π A0

PA ρm B j

j =1

(30)

(B )

SB = A0 (1 + λ(B ) P ) (31)

24 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Derivation of Basis Equation used in Cross-Floating I.

Noting that HB = 0 since the height correction was already

accounted for in PCU A when working out the applied pressure

m

!

ρa

q

1 X (B )

⇒ SB = × g mB j 1− − VB (ρf − ρa )g + σB 4π A0

PA ρm B j

j =1

(30)

(B )

SB = A0 (1 + λ(B ) P ) (31)

from which a straight line may be plotted in an analogous form to

24 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Derivation of Basis Equation used in Cross-Floating I.

Noting that HB = 0 since the height correction was already

accounted for in PCU A when working out the applied pressure

m

!

ρa

q

1 X (B )

⇒ SB = × g mB j 1− − VB (ρf − ρa )g + σB 4π A0

PA ρm B j

j =1

(30)

(B )

SB = A0 (1 + λ(B ) P ) (31)

from which a straight line may be plotted in an analogous form to

24 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Estimation of the Straight Line Uncertainties Corresponding to u (A0 ) and u (λ)

Uncertainties I.

are not suitable for the provision of adequate parameter

uncertainties

25 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Estimation of the Straight Line Uncertainties Corresponding to u (A0 ) and u (λ)

Uncertainties I.

are not suitable for the provision of adequate parameter

uncertainties

In general optimization routines are necessary for a χ2 merit

function determination and recently a practical implementation has

been proposed in the scientific literature by scientists at the PTB

(Germany): A Least Squares Algorithm for Fitting Data Points with

Mutually Correlated Coordinates to a Straight Line, Meas. Sci.

Technol. 22 (2011) doi: 10.1088/0957-0233/22/3/035101, Krystek M

and Anton M

25 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Estimation of the Straight Line Uncertainties Corresponding to u (A0 ) and u (λ)

Uncertainties I.

are not suitable for the provision of adequate parameter

uncertainties

In general optimization routines are necessary for a χ2 merit

function determination and recently a practical implementation has

been proposed in the scientific literature by scientists at the PTB

(Germany): A Least Squares Algorithm for Fitting Data Points with

Mutually Correlated Coordinates to a Straight Line, Meas. Sci.

Technol. 22 (2011) doi: 10.1088/0957-0233/22/3/035101, Krystek M

and Anton M

25 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Estimation of the Straight Line Uncertainties Corresponding to u (A0 ) and u (λ)

Uncertainties II.

The method fits y = ax + b and provides estimates for u (a) and

u (b) noting that for a pressure balance the defining basis equation is

A(P ) = A0 (1 + λP ) (33)

26 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Estimation of the Straight Line Uncertainties Corresponding to u (A0 ) and u (λ)

Uncertainties II.

The method fits y = ax + b and provides estimates for u (a) and

u (b) noting that for a pressure balance the defining basis equation is

A(P ) = A0 (1 + λP ) (33)

measurement that

2 2 2

u (b ) = λ u (A0 ) + A20 u 2 (λ) (35)

1 2

⇒ u 2 (λ) u (b) − λ2 u 2 (a)

= 2

(36)

A0

26 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Discussion

Specific Comments on Intercomparison Results

The participation of the technical metrologists in

EURAMET.M.P-K13 can be considered a learning experience as

there is a significant difference is the level and complexity of key

comparisons when compared to industrial level measurements

27 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Discussion

Specific Comments on Intercomparison Results

The participation of the technical metrologists in

EURAMET.M.P-K13 can be considered a learning experience as

there is a significant difference is the level and complexity of key

comparisons when compared to industrial level measurements

It is recognized that in terms of data processing, analysis, and

post-processing of results as a NMI there is always room for

improvement and that there are certain inherent fundamental

limitations in spreadsheet utilization, both in terms of what can be

mathematically/statistically achieved and also in terms of validation

and verification

27 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Discussion

Specific Comments on Intercomparison Results

The participation of the technical metrologists in

EURAMET.M.P-K13 can be considered a learning experience as

there is a significant difference is the level and complexity of key

comparisons when compared to industrial level measurements

It is recognized that in terms of data processing, analysis, and

post-processing of results as a NMI there is always room for

improvement and that there are certain inherent fundamental

limitations in spreadsheet utilization, both in terms of what can be

mathematically/statistically achieved and also in terms of validation

and verification

In terms of internal comparison of processed results there is good

general agreement in generated pressures and fair/moderate

agreement in computed effective area and distortion coefficient of

applicable transfer standard

27 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Discussion

Recommendations Going Foward

fully examine the ratio method of analysis in cross-floating as this

may present a more numerically stable implementation than a more

direct P vs. A(P ) regression analysis however this must be weighed

up against the implication of directly introducing the LS’s distortion

coefficient into the uncertainty analysis

28 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Discussion

Recommendations Going Foward

fully examine the ratio method of analysis in cross-floating as this

may present a more numerically stable implementation than a more

direct P vs. A(P ) regression analysis however this must be weighed

up against the implication of directly introducing the LS’s distortion

coefficient into the uncertainty analysis

There is a need to more fully investigate the actual correlation

between the parameter estimates for A0 and λ as opposed to a

simplistic unity correlation that merely provides an upper bound

28 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Discussion

Recommendations Going Foward

FEM numerical simulations should be performed to benchmark the

existing experimental/statistical distortion coefficient however the

challenge posed is not actually in terms of the FEM analysis but

rather in terms of the materials properties of the piston-cylinder:

tungsten-carbide is prone to some variation in the Young’s modulas

of elasticty and Poisson’s ratio – a possibility is to submit a research

proposal for an electrical capacitance / materials characterization

experimental study of the distortion coefficent on the low and

medium pressure Ruska piston-cylinder laboratory standards

29 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Discussion

Recommendations Going Foward

FEM numerical simulations should be performed to benchmark the

existing experimental/statistical distortion coefficient however the

challenge posed is not actually in terms of the FEM analysis but

rather in terms of the materials properties of the piston-cylinder:

tungsten-carbide is prone to some variation in the Young’s modulas

of elasticty and Poisson’s ratio – a possibility is to submit a research

proposal for an electrical capacitance / materials characterization

experimental study of the distortion coefficent on the low and

medium pressure Ruska piston-cylinder laboratory standards

It may be beneficial to consider alternative statistical formulations to

bootstrapping such as Jackknifing

29 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Discussion

Recommendations Going Foward

FEM numerical simulations should be performed to benchmark the

existing experimental/statistical distortion coefficient however the

challenge posed is not actually in terms of the FEM analysis but

rather in terms of the materials properties of the piston-cylinder:

tungsten-carbide is prone to some variation in the Young’s modulas

of elasticty and Poisson’s ratio – a possibility is to submit a research

proposal for an electrical capacitance / materials characterization

experimental study of the distortion coefficent on the low and

medium pressure Ruska piston-cylinder laboratory standards

It may be beneficial to consider alternative statistical formulations to

bootstrapping such as Jackknifing

Certain aspects of the Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory R&D on the

Ruska high pressure characterization may be able to (in partnership

with another NMI e.g. PTB / CMI) make a modest contribution on

the Avogadro project that requires precision pressure

measurements at 7 MPa

29 / 30

Pressure & Vacuum Laboratory TAF 2011 Navigate to Table of Contents

Discussion

Recommendations Going Foward

Acknowledgements

This work was performed with financial support of the South African

Department of Trade and Industry

30 / 30

- 10 soal petrofisikUploaded byAlfianurRizalmi
- Chapter 01Uploaded byAllysa
- Steam tables IAPWS-IF97 formulationUploaded bypetrita
- Chemical Engineering ScienceUploaded byLucas Fiorindo
- The Stages of Life Explained PerfectlyUploaded byEllango Arasar
- Science Report Compilation-Sri Kant YadavUploaded byPraveen Kumar Thota
- Particle SizeUploaded bytsacrl9415
- Explosives Utilization at a Witwatersrand Gold MineUploaded byErick Caballero
- Julabo fluid.pdfUploaded byaltaykabus
- Black SandUploaded byWaDikun
- pile designUploaded byIndraHoedaya
- Precursor Chemicals AR Form-2013Uploaded byTeetje Belitz
- C729-11(2016)Uploaded bywerrte
- Fluid-propertiesNumericals.docUploaded byMishell Rubio
- CHAPTER-2-FLUIDS.pptxUploaded byRafaella Manalo
- Chapter 1 Festo DidacticUploaded byjesustarin557105
- Forces and Pressure.pptxUploaded byShahrul Anas
- Assignment #6 - Quality control.pdfUploaded byAhmedGhallab
- AnnexesUploaded bySamant Khanna
- j100884a027.pdfUploaded byIván Salinas González
- Pragati MaidanUploaded byJanhavi Sankhe
- Basic ElectromagnetismUploaded byVarshLok
- Zhang 2017Uploaded byPankaj Munjal
- 7ME2600-2KJ14-7AD7-ZUploaded byCarlos Fiorillo
- LV-4206 & LV-5206Uploaded byrameshkarthik810
- Paper Test for General Physics.docxUploaded byJerrySemuel
- Lab WS and metrics.docxUploaded byArchie Genevieve Albasin Ugbamen
- Module Force and Pressure 2019Uploaded byCart Kartika
- fluids-for websiteUploaded byapi-205419744
- reverse osmosis problemUploaded bygcch81

- Jee KinematicsUploaded bySankar Kumarasamy
- Xii Chemistry Patna RegionUploaded byPrashant Jain
- IES Calculation MethodsUploaded byInventor Solidworks
- Engineering MaterialsUploaded bySudharshan Mc
- Materials Ch3Uploaded bySabry S. Youssef
- 93-7absUploaded bykhanh11h
- semi final.docxUploaded byDaiseree Salvador
- Chlorogenic Acid- SpringerUploaded byStefix Stef
- K. ShakesheffUploaded bykunalprabhu148
- Aluminium Alsi10mgUploaded byinam758388
- 1204.5505v1_Clarkson_CPUploaded bycarlabernal
- Hydrostatic Forces on a Curved SurfaceUploaded byaadhan
- 2012_Goebel Et Al._guiding Principles for the Implementation of Non-Animal Safety Assessment Approaches for Cosmetics Skin SensitisationUploaded byymiyazy
- purepro_water_ionizer.pdfUploaded byprospero1
- san_pedroUploaded bydllss
- [IJET-V1I4P16] Authors : Mr. Pankaj Shende , Syed Tanveer , A. NageshUploaded byInternational Journal of Engineering and Techniques
- Physics HomeworkUploaded bytom_soden
- Modelo Matematico de La Reduccion de Particula en Molinos de BolasUploaded bywuinder subero
- 1701.08777Uploaded byvuk119
- Fabrication of in Situ Foamed Chitosan TCP Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering Application 2012 Materials LettersUploaded byalchemik1515
- Gravimetric Determination of Moisture and Phosphorus in Fertilizer SampleUploaded byGelo Buligan
- co2 emissions graph wkstUploaded byapi-290419496
- preparation characterization and antiinflammatory-activity of swietenia macrophylla nanoemulgel-.pdfUploaded bykakak zea
- Week 6 Heat Transfer LectureUploaded bySarindran Ramayes
- Static ElectricityUploaded byMandar Baviskar
- RPT Kimia Tingkatan 4 2013Uploaded byAhmad Saiful Azim Muhammad
- _165520_ti_sc_gbr_4_Uploaded bysalamrefigh
- 9701_s02_qp_1.pdfUploaded byMazlin
- 1 Introduction(1 11)Uploaded bymithun_nm
- soalan paper 1 fizik elasticity - pressureUploaded byimposter131