Instructiuni Cantarire Ahk

For Internal Use Only
TECHNICAL & OPERATIONAL GUIDANCE 8
Weighing
AHK/TD/TOG/W/001
7 August 2020
Page 1 of 42
DOCUMENT VERIFICATION
__
Report TECHNICAL AND OPERATIONAL GUIDANCE 8
Weighing
AHK/TD/TOG/W/001
7 August 2020
Version Co-authors Reviewers
Draft 1.0 Mr Robert Dunn Dr Laurance Donnelly

AHK Technical Department AHK Technical Department
Technical Manager Head of Technical Department (Geologist)
Dr Laurance Donnelly Mr Dan Pop

AHK Technical Department AHK Technical Department
Head of Technical Department (Geologist) Group Technical Department
Mr Steve Makinson
AHK Risk Department
Head of Risk Department
Mr Jonathan Walls
AHK Technical Department
Metallurgist
Ms Caroline Quirke
AHK Risk Department
Risk Officer
Ms Sally Starr
AHK Risk Department
Risk Manager
Page 2 of 42
CONTENTS
__
DOCUMENT VERIFICATION ............................................................................................... 2
1. PREFACE ....................................................................................................................... 5
2. ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ........................................................................ 6
3. DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................ 7
4. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 9
4.1 Background ................................................................................................................... 9
4.2 Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 9
4.3 Scope.............................................................................................................................10
5. HEALTH AND SAFETY...............................................................................................10
5.1 Risk Assessment and Method Statement (RAMS)...............................................10
5.2 Personal and Protective Equipment (PPE) ...........................................................10
6. WEIGHING METHODS................................................................................................10
6.1 Platform Scale .............................................................................................................. 11
6.2 Road Weighbridge ..................................................................................................... 12
6.3 Rail Weighbridge ........................................................................................................ 12
6.4 Crane Scale .................................................................................................................. 13
6.5 Hopper Scale ............................................................................................................... 14
6.6 Conveyor Belt Scale ................................................................................................... 15
6.7 Draught Survey ........................................................................................................... 16
6.8 Container Jacks........................................................................................................... 17
7. CALIBRATION ............................................................................................................. 18
7.1 Principle ........................................................................................................................ 18
7.2 Calibration Frequency ............................................................................................... 18
7.3 Calibration Certificates ............................................................................................. 19
8. STATIC SCALE CLASSIFICATION AND ERRORS ............................................... 20
8.1 Accuracy Class ........................................................................................................... 20
8.2 Scale Intervals ............................................................................................................. 21
8.3 Maximum Permissible Error...................................................................................... 21
9. TESTING....................................................................................................................... 22
9.1 Principle ....................................................................................................................... 22
9.2 Frequency of Testing ................................................................................................ 22
9.3 Static Scale Testing ................................................................................................... 22
9.4 Interpretation of Results .......................................................................................... 28
10. DYNAMIC SCALES (BELT WEIGHERS)................................................................. 28
Page 3 of 42
10.1 Units of Measurement ............................................................................................... 28

10.2 Accuracy Classes ....................................................................................................... 29
10.3 Calibration ................................................................................................................... 29
10.4 Testing ......................................................................................................................... 29
11. CHALLENGES AND DISCREPANCIES ................................................................... 32
11.1 Different Scales for Measuring Gross and Tare................................................... 32
11.2 Driver in the Truck Cab ............................................................................................ 33
11.3 Stated Container Tare Weights .............................................................................. 33
11.4 Assumed or Provided Tare ...................................................................................... 33
11.5 Recording a Single Truck Tare ............................................................................... 34
11.6 Weight Discrepancies ............................................................................................... 34
11.7 Unavailable Equipment or Test Weights .............................................................. 35
11.8 Preferred Weighing Methods .................................................................................. 35
11.9 Lot Size ........................................................................................................................ 37
11.10 Chain-of-Custody ...................................................................................................... 37
11.11 Photographs ............................................................................................................... 37
11.12 Temperature ............................................................................................................... 38
12. REPORTING ................................................................................................................ 38
12.1 Reports ........................................................................................................................ 38
13. CAVEATS AND DISCLAIMERS ................................................................................ 39
14. FURTHER INFORMATION ........................................................................................40
15. REFERENCES..............................................................................................................40
16. APPENDIX I: QUANTIFICATION & MEASUREMENTS ........................................ 42
16.1 Quantities and Units.................................................................................................. 42
16.2 Weight and Mass ....................................................................................................... 42
Page 4 of 42
1. PREFACE
__
This guidance provides information on weighing of mineral concentrate and other commodities. It has been
written by AHK’s Technical Department and it is intended for use by AHK to assist with the global
standardisation of Weighing, Sampling and Moisture Determination (WSMD) and general sample preparation.
This guidance is considered to be authoritative and representing international best practice. This guidance
should act as a common reference, provide a framework and information to assist AHK make informative
decisions. As such, this guidance must be considered within the context it was written, to aid and assist those
involved in the weighing of commodities. This guidance should be reviewed at least annually. Users of this
guidance are encouraged to contact the AHK Technical Department or Risk Department for any parts of this
document that require amending, updating or revision.
Page 5 of 42
2. ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

__
d: (Actual) scale interval
D/S: Draught survey
e: Verification scale interval
FEL: Front-end loader
g: gram
kg: kilogram
m: metre
Max: Maximum capacity of the weighing instrument
mm: millimetre
Min: Minimum capacity of the weighing instrument
mpe; Maximum permissible error
OIML: Organisation Internationale de Métrologie Légale (International Organisation of Legal

Metrology)
SI: Système International (International System)
SOP: Standard Operating Procedure
t: metric tonne, equivalent to 1000 kg
TOG: Technical and Operational Guidance
WSMD: Weighing, sampling and moisture determination
Σmin: Minimum test load (belt weighers)
Page 6 of 42
3. DEFINITIONS
__
Calibration
The process of comparing measurements from a weighing instrument with those of a known accuracy, referred
to as a calibration standard. Calibrations shall be performed by a laboratory authorised or accredited by the
national responsible body.
Calibration Certificate
A document issued by a laboratory authorised or accredited by the national responsible body to record the
results of a calibration.
Capacity
The maximum weighing load measurable by the instrument. May also refer to the minimum capacity. The value
of the load at which the weighing result may be subject to excessive relative error.
Durability
The ability of an instrument to maintain its performance characteristics over a period of use.
Flowrate
The mass of material travelling on a conveyor belt through a fixed point per unit time.
Flowrate Indicating Device
A device that indicates the instantaneous flowrate either as the mass of the material conveyed in a unit of time
or as a percentage of the maximum flowrate.
Gross
The total weight of a weighed consignment, including all containers and packaging.
Load Cell
Force transducer that measures mass by converting the mechanical input (force) into a digital output (mass),
whilst taking into account the effects of acceleration due to gravity and air buoyancy at the location of its use.
Mass
A measure of the amount of matter in an object, which is independent of gravitational force.
Net
The weight of the cargo, or the value of the difference between measured gross weight and a tare weight values.
Scale Interval (Actual), d
The difference, expressed in units of mass, between two consecutive indicated values.
Scale Interval (Verification), e
Value, expressed in units of mass, used for the clarification and verification of an instrument.
Page 7 of 42
Tare
The weight of any containers or packaging that shall be deducted from the gross weight to calculate the net
weight.
Taring
Setting the display indication to zero when a load is on the instrument.
Totalization Indicating Device
A device that receives information from the totalization device and indicates the mass of the loads conveyed.
Trimming
The process of levelling the ship and/or the surface of the cargo in a cargo hold by shifting or loading additional
cargo into specific parts of the cargo hold.
Repeatability
Ability of an instrument to provide the same result when the same load is applied several times in an identical
manner onto the instrument.
Simulation Test
A test carried out on a complete instrument or part of an instrument in which any part of the instrument
operation is simulated.
Span Stability
Capability of an instrument to maintain the difference between the indication at maximum capacity and the
indication at zero over a period of use within specified limits.
Warm-up Time
Time between the moment that power is applied to an instrument and the moment at which the instrument is
capable of providing an accurate measurement.
Weight
The gravitational force acting upon an object.
Weighing Range
The range between the minimum and maximum capacities.
Zero or zeroing
Setting the display indication to zero when there is no load on the instrument.
Page 8 of 42
4. INTRODUCTION
__
4.1 Background
_______
The measurement of mass (referred to as weighing) is an important stage in the valuation of metal and mineral
cargoes. As typical shipments of base metal commodities can be worth millions of US dollars, an accurate weight
determination is essential to prevent significant financial discrepancy.
Following drying, and moisture determination the dry tonnes of the cargo may be determined. This, when
considered with the metal content from chemical assaying and the metal price (e.g. from the London Metal
Exchange) provides the value for the cargo. A very simplified representation of this calculation is shown in Fig.
1. Fig. 1. A diagram of a simplified cargo value calculation
Weighing is therefore usually necessary during any transaction between a buyer and a seller to complete a
commercial transaction. AHK is regularly appointed to perform, supervise or witness weighing operations to
provide clients with an independent verification of mass measurements.
Fig. 1. A diagram of a simplified cargo value calculation
Weighing is therefore usually necessary during any transaction between a buyer and a seller to complete a
commercial transaction. AHK is regularly appointed to perform, supervise or witness weighing operations to
provide clients with an independent verification of mass measurements.
4.2 Objectives
_______
The objectives of this TOG are as follows:
1. Provide information on the different types of weighing method.
Page 9 of 42
2. Draw attention to the potential limitations of each type of weighing method.
3. Provide guidance for the calibration and testing of weighing systems.
4. Explain how weight measurements should be reported.
5. Provide general guidance on reporting.
4.3 Scope
_______
This TOG provides information on the different types of weighing, the advantages and limitations of each
weighing method, scale calibration and testing, reporting, and the use of caveats and disclaimers.
5. HEALTH AND SAFETY

__
5.1 Risk Assessment and Method Statement (RAMS)

_____
Before operations commence a RAMS should be written by the inspector and authorised by the sample prep lab
manager, health and safety manager, line manager or client, as appropriate on a case by case basis. This should
include any information, procedures or working instructions provided by the facility or the client.
5.2 Personal and Protective Equipment (PPE)

_____
Appropriate PPE shall be worn at all times for the specific environment where weighing is carried out. This
should include, as a minimum, the following:
 Latex or leather gloves

 Lab coat or overall
 Safety glasses
 Dust mask
 Protective footwear
6. WEIGHING METHODS
__
There are seven main weighing methods, as follows:
 Platform scale
 Road weighbridge
 Rail weighbridge
Page 10 of 42
 Crane scale
 Hopper scale
 Conveyor belt scale
 Draught survey
 Container Jacks
6.1 Platform Scale

_____
6.1.1 Overview
A platform scale comprises a steel platform, four load-cells located at each corner and a digital display. Platform
scales can be a cost effective and accurate method of weighing bagged, palletised or metal sheet/ingot cargoes.
Models and specifications vary. Typical units have a measuring capacity of up to 3000 kg with measurement
intervals of 1 kg or 2 kg, adequate for most commercial transactions (Figure 2).
Fig. 2. Platform scale with connected display (Source: Marsden Weighing, 2020).
6.1.2 Advantages
Platform scales are portable, can be battery powered and require no specialist installation. They do require a
solid and level surface to properly operate. Their relatively small size and capacity makes them easier and
efficient to calibrate and test.
6.1.3 Limitations
Despite their portability, platform scales are susceptible to impact from moving equipment, for example a
forklift truck. As such, platform scales should be regularly tested to check their performance after being moved.
Platform scales can only be used for a limited cargo packing type, such as bagged or palletised materials.
Page 11 of 42
6.2 Road Weighbridge

_____
6.2.1 Overview
Road (also known as truck) weighbridges (also known as scales) are used to weigh road vehicles and their
contents. They are fixed installations mounted on a concrete foundation or set into a pit so that the weighing
surface is level with the road. Modern devices use multiple load cells (sensors) connected to electronic totalising
equipment. Models and specifications vary, but typical units have a measuring capacity of up to 60,000 kg with
some up to 100,000 kg, and have measurement intervals of 10 kg or 20 kg in most cases (Figure 3).
Fig. 3. Raised platform truck weighbridge (left) and road level truck weighbridge (right) (Source: Wikipedia,
2019).
6.2.2 Advantages
Road weighbridges are an effective means of weighing containerised cargo and bulk cargo operations. If
maintained correctly, weighbridges are capable of providing quick and accurate measurements making them a
practical solution for many operations.
6.2.3 Limitations
Due to their relatively large capacity, testing road weighbridges can be challenging. This is due to the large
masses required to test the full operating range of the scale – something that many operating locations, such
as mines, ports and warehouses, do not maintain in-house.
6.3 Rail Weighbridge

_____
6.3.1 Overview
Rail weighbridges (also known as rail scales) are used to weigh individual rail wagons and their cargoes. They are
usually fixed installations at a mine, port, warehouse, or other receiving location. Some rail weighbridges will
weigh stationary rail wagons on a static basis (Figure 4). However, rail weighbridges may weigh rail wagons as
they travel over the weighing section of the track at low speed; this process is known as ‘in motion’ weighing
(Figure 4).
Page 12 of 42
Fig. 4. In-motion rail scale (left) and rails scale display (Source: Trakblaze, 2019 (left))
6.3.2 Advantages
Weighing ‘in motion’ can generally be performed quickly in conjunction with a loading or discharge operation,
with little impact on the rate of cargo transfer.
6.3.3 Limitations
Due to their relatively large capacity, testing rail weighbridges can be challenging. This is due to the large masses
required to test the full operating range of the scale. As such, some operating locations, such as mines, ports
and warehouses, do not maintain in-house testing facilities.
The accuracy of rail weighbridges can depend on the equipment specification, installation and usage. Factors
such as track incline and whether rail wagons are linked during weighing can have an impact. To increase the
likelihood of obtaining an accurate measurement the track should be on a level surface (zero incline) and wagons
unlinked for static weighing.
6.4 Crane Scale

_____
6.4.1 Overview
Crane scales are used to measure the mass of a suspended cargo. Various models are available to cover a range
of capacities and applications. Two applications witnessed by AHK are; (a) crane scale attached to a grab during
vessel loading or discharge operations, and (b) bag weighing during vessel, rail wagon or road truck loading or
transhipment (Fig. 5).
Page 13 of 42
Fig. 5. Crane scale with integrated display crane operation and crane scale display (Source: Scale Tec (left)),
6.4.2 Advantages
A major advantage of crane scales is the ease with which they can be integrated into an operation, including
vessel loading or discharge. Weighing can be performed in this manner with little impact on the rate of cargo
transfer.
6.4.3 Limitations
Crane scales operate on a manual basis or a semi-automated basis. In the former mode tare (empty) and gross
(full) weights are captured and a cumulative net weight is automatically calculated. Diligent operator input is
required to ensure every grab load is weighed. It is important for the operator to ensure there is no repeat
weighing during operations such as trimming. Trimming is the levelling of the ship and cargo. Prior to shipping,
cargo must be levelled to less than the angle of repose to prevent the cargo becoming unstable. Both cargo and
vessel levelling could require cargo to be handled by a crane grab and therefore both are a consideration if a
crane scale is being used. In addition, due to the remote location of the weight display, which is usually in the
crane cab, it is often difficult for AHK to witness and verify every weight recorded.
6.5 Hopper Scale

_____
6.5.1 Overview
Hopper scales are typically used for batch weighing of a continuous flow of material, such as bulk cargo during
a vessel loading or discharge operation. Many systems automate the key stages of operation; including tare
weighing, hopper filling, gross weighing and hopper emptying (Fig. 6).
Page 14 of 42
Fig. 6. Four key stages of a hopper scale operation cycle (Source: United States Department of Agriculture, 2017).
6.5.2 Advantages
Each time the hopper is emptied, a new tare weight is recorded (or the scale is zeroed). Therefore, a bias caused
by any build-up of wet, trapped or dislodged material is eliminated. The calibration and testing of hopper scales
is usually a simple operation, whereby certified masses are suspended from the hopper frame. Hopper scales
can be integrated into an operation, such as vessel loading or discharge or a conveyor belt transfer point.
Weighing can be performed in this manner with little impact on the rate of cargo transfer.
6.5.3 Limitations
Hopper scales are often large, immobile installations. There is limited access for the purpose of observing the
material inside the hopper and cleaning upon completion of an operation. The accuracy of the system relies on
the gates at the bottom of each hopper opening and closing as intended. Faulty gate closure will fail to stop the
material flow during recording, which could affect the accuracy of the final shipment weight.
6.6 Conveyor Belt Scale

_____
6.6.1 Overview
A belt scale (also known as a weightometer or weigher), is a continuous (dynamic) mass measurement device for
cargo transferred on a conveyor belt. To account for varying loads and belt speeds, the system integrates the
variable load on a suspended belt section over time. The belt scale can be calibrated by weighing a quantity of
material whose wet mass is measured with a static scale as a reference weight. Routine testing can be performed
using a certified weight chain that is trailed on the belt or with certified static weights that are suspended from
the scale’s frame (Figure 7).
Page 15 of 42
Fig. 7. Conveyor belt and belt weighing frame and idlers (Source Dini Argeo, 2020).
6.6.2 Advantages
Belt scales can be integrated into an operation, such as vessel loading or discharge. The weighing of large
quantities of cargo can be performed in this manner with little impact on the rate of cargo transfer.
6.6.3 Limitations
The precision and bias for belt scales depend on several factors, such as their installation and environment in
which they operate. The precisions quoted by manufacturers are usually based on optimum conditions that are
rarely experienced during actual applications. Scales that are retrofitted (not part of the original belt
installation) may suffer from a non-optimum installation, for example an inclined belt. Frequent calibrations are
essential to correct drift measurement that take place over time and to ensure unbiased measurements. Belt
scales give a lower precision than batch weighing with static scales such as platform scales, weighbridges and
hopper scales.
6.7 Draught Survey

_____
6.7.1 Overview
A draught survey is an indirect weighing method that determines the mass of cargo loaded onto or discharged
from a vessel. This is based on Archimedes principle, which states that a floating vessel displaced in a mass of
water is equal to its own mass. The difference between the vessel’s displacement at the start and end of a
loading or discharge operation can be converted into a mass using draught tables. Other variables such as water
density and temperature and changes in ballast and supplies must be taken into account. Further information
on draught surveys can be found in, ‘TOG 5: Draught Surveys’ (Figure 8).
Page 16 of 42
Fig. 8. A typical bulk cargo carrier and the reading of a vessel’s draught marks (Source: Maxim Maritime Services,
2020)
6.7.2 Advantages
A draught survey requires limited equipment and can be utilised in the absence of other weighing methods.
6.7.3 Limitations
A draught survey is dependent on the competency of the surveyor. The precision of a draught survey is limited
by the compounding uncertainty of the various data and observations required to determine the cargo mass.
Vessels cannot be calibrated in the same manner as weighing scales. Furthermore, a draught survey relies on
the accuracy of documentation provided by the shipbuilder, which cannot be adequately evaluated in advance
of the survey. A draught survey might also be limited by external factors, such as weather conditions (wind
velocity and water swell) and stratified salinity of sea water (differences in water density around and under the
vessel). Biases may be introduced by vessel hull deformation in a partially loaded condition. A draught survey is
based on a consensus between the officer of the vessel and the marine surveyor representing the shipper and
sometimes the buyer or seller. For these reasons, a draught survey is generally regarded as an imprecise method,
suitable only for low value cargoes.
6.8 Container Jacks

_____
Container jacks are portable scales for weighing shipping containers on the ground. A portable scale is fixed to
each corner of the shipping container and elevated by a hydraulic jack to apply the load to all four scales
simultaneously. Manufacturers claim an accuracy of 1% can be achieved with the supplied calibration kit. If
calibrated with certified weights an accuracy of 0.2% is achievable. As the use of this weighing method is still
emerging, caution is advised for the purpose of commercial transactions (Figure 9).
Page 17 of 42
Fig. 9. Container jack operation (left) and connected mobile application (right) (source: Bison Jacks, 2020).
7. CALIBRATION
__
7.1 Principle
_____
The calibration of weighing scales requires a comparison of measurements from a weighing instrument with
those of a known accuracy. This involves applying certified masses to a weighing scale and recording the
measurements returned by the instrument. If a difference less than the maximum permissible error is observed,
no action is required. However, if a difference greater than the maximum permissible error is observed an
adjustment to the weighing scale may be required (please refer to 'Maximum Permissible Error' for more
information).
Calibration and any subsequent adjustments to the instrument should be performed by an authorised laboratory
or accredited national responsible body. A calibration certificate should be issued to record the results and date
of the calibration. Certified masses used for calibration should be accompanied by a certificate of conformity
provided by the national responsible body. Certified masses may also be known as standard masses or standard
weights. Recommendations for calibration of weighing instruments and masses are provided by the
Organisation Internationale de Métrologie Légale (OIML, International Organisation of Legal Metrology) (OIML
R 111-1: 2004, R76-1: 2006, R50-1: 2014).
7.2 Calibration Frequency

_____
The scale manufacturer specifies the time interval between calibrations for each scale. However, manufacturer
guidance may be superseded by national legislation or metrological controls requiring, for example, periodic
verifications or service inspections. In the absence of guidance from the scale manufacturer or national
Page 18 of 42
regulatory body, AHK recommends that scales are calibrated at least every 12 months. However, the scales
should be tested at regular intervals to check their performance in between official calibrations.
7.3 Calibration Certificates

_____
If clients ask AHK for an interpretation or to comment on calibration certificates, AHK could provide the
following:
 Details of the manufacturer, model and serial number should match the physical markings or labels on the
scale.
 The certificate date and note if the last calibration was performed over 12 months ago.
 The validity period, since weighing operations should be performed and completed within the period of
validity.
 The calibration engineer and issuing organisation. This should be undertaken by an accredited laboratory
or metrological body. If this is not possible to verify AHK should notify the client. The client should also be
notified if the calibration was performed by a third party that is not independent and impartial. This might
include for example, the scale owner or operator (a mine, warehouse, port authority or receiver who have
a commercial interest in the outcome of any calibration).
 The scale accuracy classification should be medium (III) or high (II) (Table 1).
 The allowable error or maximum permissible error (mpe) and applicable mass ranges should be stated.
 Different tests may be performed, as part of the calibration process (see section ‘Testing’). As a minimum,
a linearity test up to the scale maximum should be performed and the difference between the indicated
value (displayed measurement) and load applied (of known mass) shall be less than the stated mpe.
If a calibration has not been performed or a calibration certificate is not available, AHK shall inform the client
and recommend testing be performed with certified masses.
An ‘end-middle-end’ (EME) test is a variation of an eccentricity test. This is performed with a single un-certified
load such as a vehicle. This test can indicate the presence of damaged components such as load cells, however
this does not constitute a calibration and does not give an indication of the scale accuracy.
Any comments provided by AHK regarding scale calibration or testing procedures shall be accompanied by a
disclaimer that guidance from an independent metrological specialist body should be sought.
Page 19 of 42
8. STATIC SCALE CLASSIFICATION AND

ERRORS
__
8.1 Accuracy Class

_____
The scale classification or ‘accuracy class’ denotes the accuracy of the scale as; Ordinary (IIII), Medium (III), High
(II) or Special (I). The accuracy class is usually marked on the device label and calibration certificate, but can be
determined from the number of verification scale intervals and the maximum capacity (Table 1).
Table 1. Instrument Classification (adapted from OIML R76-1: 2006)
Number of verification scale

Verification scale intervals, n = Max/e Minimum capacity (lower
Accuracy Class
interval, e limit)
Minimum Maximum
Special (I) 0.001 g ≤ e 50,000 - 100 e
0.001 g ≤ e ≤ 0.05 g 100 100,000 20 e

High (II)
0.1 g ≤ e 5,000 100,000 50 e
0.1 g ≤ e ≤ 2 g 100 10,000 20 e

Medium (III)
5g≤e 500 10,000 20 e
Ordinary (IIII) 5g≤e 100 1,000 10 e
OIML do not specify which accuracy classification shall be used for trade or commercial transaction but typically
Medium (III) is used. In special cases, such as weighing high value cargo like precious metals, the High (II) accuracy
class may be used. Generally, AHK should advise clients to pursue a minimum of accuracy class III (Medium).
As an example, a conventional truck scale with a maximum capacity of 60,000 kg and verification interval of 20
kg, will have 3,000 intervals.
𝑀𝑎𝑥 60,000 𝑘𝑔
𝑛 = = = 3,000 (1)
𝑒 20 𝑘𝑔
Where:
𝑛: Number of verification scale intervals
𝑒: Verification interval
𝑀𝑎𝑥: the maximum capacity of the scale.
Page 20 of 42
As the scale has 3,000 intervals and e is greater than 5 g, this result corresponds to an assumed scale accuracy
class of Medium (III).
8.2 Scale Intervals

_____
There are two types of scale interval: the ‘actual scale interval (d)’, which corresponds to the difference between
two consecutive indicated values (i.e. the displayed value), and the ‘verification scale interval (e)’ which is used
for the classification and verification of an instrument. Often, d = e, but in cases where d < e, reading the actual
scale interval by observing the display can give a misleading impression of the scale precision. For the purpose
of calibration and testing, e is the scale interval of interest. The e value can usually be found on a label affixed
to the instrument and in manufacturer documentation.
8.3 Maximum Permissible Error

_____
The maximum permissible error (mpe) is the maximum difference, positive or negative, allowed by regulation
between the instrument measurement and the corresponding true value as determined by reference standard
masses or standard weights. The mpe forms part of the ‘pass’ or ‘fail’ criteria used by metrological bodies during
a calibration process, however it can also be applied during regular testing. The mpe varies depending on the
scale accuracy classification and the load applied, m (Table 2).
Table 2. Values of maximum permissible errors (adapted from OIML R76-1: 2006)
Maximum Maximum For loads, m, expressed in verification scale intervals, e

permissible permissible
errors on errors in
initial service Class I Class II Class III Class IIII
verification
± 0.5 e ± 1.0 e 0 ≤ m ≤ 50,000 0 ≤ m ≤ 5,000 0 ≤ m ≤ 500 0 ≤ m ≤ 50
± 1.0 e ± 2.0 e 50,000  m ≤ 200,000 5,000  m ≤ 20,000 500  m ≤ 2,000 50  m ≤ 200
± 1.5 e ± 3.0 e 200,000  m 20,000  m ≤ 100,000 2,000  m ≤ 10,000 200  m ≤ 1,000
For example, a conventional truck scale with a capacity of 60,000 kg, e = 20 kg, 3,000 scale intervals, and an
accuracy class III, would have ‘in service’ maximum permissible errors according to Table 3.
Table 3. Maximum permissible errors for a truck scale (max = 60 000 kg, e = 20 kg)
Measurement Maximum
Maximum Permissible
Class III range Range Measurement Range Permissible Error
Error (mpe) calculation
Calculation (mpe)
0 ≤ m ≤ 500 500 x 20 kg 0 ≤ m ≤ 10,000 kg 20 kg x ± 1.0 e ± 20 kg
500  m ≤ 2,000 2,000 x 20 kg 10,000 kg  m ≤ 40,000 kg 20 kg x ± 2.0 e ± 40 kg
2,000  m ≤ 10,000 3,000 x 20 kg 40,000 kg  m ≤ 60,000 kg 20 kg x ± 3.0 e ± 60 kg
Page 21 of 42
9. TESTING
__
9.1 Principle
_____
It is important that scales are tested on a regular basis to check their performance and calibration status. The
process of testing weighing scales should be almost identical to the process of calibration, with a few notable
differences. Firstly, the process does not have to be performed by an approved or accredited laboratory or
qualified expert. Secondly, a certificate does not have to be issued, although documenting the test results is
good practice and may be a requirement of an in-house quality management system. Thirdly, test
weights/masses do not have to be certified or accompanied by a certificate of conformity. However, any in-
house standard weights must be traceable to a verified and certified mass.
9.2 Frequency of Testing

_____
Although OIML does not specify a testing frequency, the frequency of testing should be decided by an
agreement between the parties concerned, based on the risk and reliability of the scales (ISO TR 15855: 2001).
Therefore, to provide assurance to our clients, AHK should request the scales are tested before and after each
weighing operation.
9.3 Static Scale Testing

_____
It is necessary to check the performance of a scale, and the validity of the scale calibration, on a regular basis.
Guideline methodologies for a variety of tests are provided herein but may be superseded by the requirements
of the national metrological body. Variations of the repeatability and linearity test are documented by ISO
(12745: 2008). Although, ISO (12745: 2008) refers to copper, lead and zinc ores and concentrates, the static scale
testing principles are applicable to other commodities. Static scales include platform scales, road weighbridges,
rail weighbridges (except in-motion scales), crane scales and hopper scales. The three main OIML compliant tests
are as follows:
 Linearity
 Repeatability
 Eccentricity
9.3.1 Linearity
The linearity test involves the sequential application of at least five individual test loads, of known mass, up to
the scale maximum and their sequential removal back to zero. The difference between the indicated value
(displayed measurement) and the applied load shall be less than the maximum permissible error. The following
is a basic methodology for performing the test with five test loads.
Page 22 of 42
 Stage 1: Ensure the scale is clean and level before commencing the test.
 Stage 2: Zero the scale using the controls and wait until the indicated value is zero.
 Stage 3: Apply the first test load and record the indicated value and applied load.
 Stage 4: Repeat stage 3 for the second, third, fourth and fifth test loads, recording the cumulative applied
load and indicated values after applying each load.
 Stage 5: Remove the fifth test load and record the indicated value and applied load.
 Stage 6: Continue to remove test loads in reverse sequence (fourth, third, second and first) and record the
cumulative applied load and indicated values after removing each load.
 Stage 7: Upon removal of all test loads, record the indicated value.
 Stage 8: Subtract the applied load (known mass) from the indicated value for each mass addition and
removal.
 Stage 9: Compare the calculated difference against the mpe. The difference should be less than or equal
to the mpe.
 Stage 10: Report the findings in a table such as the example below (Table 4).
Table 4. Example of a linearity test results table for a truck scale (max = 60 000 kg, e = 20 kg)
Applied load Indicated value Difference Maximum Permissible

Pass/Fail
(kg) (kg) (kg) Error (mpe) (kg)
10,000 10,020 + 20 ± 20 Pass
20,000 20,000 0 ± 40 Pass
30,000 29,980 - 20 ± 40 Pass
40,000 39,960 - 40 ± 40 Pass
50,000 49,960 - 40 ± 60 Pass
60,000 59,920 - 80 ± 60 Fail
50,000 49,960 - 40 ± 60 Pass
40,000 39,960 - 40 ± 40 Pass
30,000 29,980 - 20 ± 40 Pass
20,000 20,000 0 ± 40 Pass
10,000 10,020 + 20 ± 20 Pass
9.3.2 Linearity With a Single Certified Test Weight
In accordance with ISO (12745: 2008), the variation of this linearity test applies where only one certified test
weight covering only a small part of the scale range is available. Individual calibration points are created by
placing an unknown load on the scale, applying the certified test weight and comparing the indicated increase
with the known mass of the test weight. This process is repeated to obtain a minimum of three determinations
at different loads, as follows:
 Zero
 Approximately half the scale capacity
 Approximately full scale capacity (max) less the certified weight
Page 23 of 42
The certified test weight should be of suitable mass for the scale being tested, for example, 1 t or 2 t for a truck
weighbridge.
The following methodology is for performing the test with one certified weight (test load).
 Stage 2: Zero the scale using the controls and wait until the indicated value is zero (W1 pair 1).
 Stage 3: Apply the test load and record the indicated value (W2 pair 1).
 Stage 4: Remove the test load, add a quantity of material approximately equal to half of the scale capacity,
and record the indicated weight (W1 pair 2).
 Stage 6: Remove the test load, add a quantity of material approximately equal to the scale capacity (less
the test load) and record the indicated weight (W1 pair 3).
 Stage 8: Calculate the difference between W1 and W2 for each pair (1, 2 and 3).
 Stage 9: Subtract the weight of the certified weight from the difference calculated in the previous step for
each pair. The calculated value shall be less than the maximum permissible error for the load applied.
 Stage 10: Report the findings in a table such as the example below (Table 5).
Table 5. Example of a linearity test results for a truck scale (max = 60 000 kg, e = 20 kg) using one test load
Certified Difference
Applied Weight less
Maximum
Material Test Load Indicated Difference Certified
Permissible
Indicated Applied value (W2) (W2 - W1) Weight Test Pass/Fail
Error (mpe)
Value (W1) (Wcert) (kg) (kg) Load (W2 -
(kg)
(kg) (kg) W1 – Wcert)
(kg)
0 1,000 1,020 1,020 + 20 ± 20 Pass
29,000 1,000 30,000 1,000 0 ± 40 Pass
59,000 1,000 59 960 960 - 40 ± 60 Pass
9.3.3 Repeatability
Repeatability is the ability of an instrument to provide the same result when the same load is applied to the
instrument and removed several times in an identical manner. The difference between the results of several
weigh tests of the same load shall not be greater than the maximum permissible error of the instrument for that
load.
In line with OIML recommendation, for routine testing (verification) of accuracy class III and IIII, three weigh tests
are necessary and for accuracy class I and II, six weigh tests are necessary. In all cases, the test load shall be
approximately 80% of the maximum capacity. The following is a methodology for performing a repeatability
test on a scale of accuracy class III.
 Stage 3: Apply the first test load (of approximately 80% of the maximum scale capacity) and record the
indicated value.
Page 24 of 42
 Stage 4: Remove the test load and wait until the indicated value is zero. If the scale does not return to
zero, reset to zero manually.
 Stage 5: Reapply the test load and record the indicated value.
 Stage 6: Remove the test load and wait until the indicated value is zero. If the scale does not return to
zero, reset to zero manually.
 Stage 7: Reapply the test load and record the indicated value.
 Stage 8: Calculate the difference between the minimum and maximum indicated values (range). Compare
the calculated value against the mpe. The value should be less than or equal to the mpe (absolute).
For example on a truck weighbridge (max = 60 000 kg, e = 20 kg), three indicated values were obtained; 50,000
kg, 49,960 kg and 50, 040 kg. Performing the calculation in stage 8 gives a result of 80 kg, which is greater than
the absolute mpe for this applied load (60 kg). In this example, the scale does not meet the OIML requirements:
Max − Min = 50,040 kg − 49,960 kg = 80 kg (2)
In accordance with ISO (12745: 2008), a variation of the OIML repeatability is recommended using a smaller
weight. The procedure outlined above should be followed. However, the test load of 80% shall be replaced with
a test load equivalent to 5 to 10 times the scale verification interval (e). For example, to perform this
repeatability test on truck scale with a scale verification interval of 20 kg, a test load of 100 kg to 200 kg should
be used. A minimum of 6 measurements shall be made by applying and removing the test load 6 times. The
difference between the minimum and maximum indicated values (range) shall be compared against the mpe for
the test load. The value should be less than or equal to the mpe (absolute). As this test is performed at the lower
end of the scale’s capacity, the mpe is likely to be 1e.
9.3.4 Eccentricity
An eccentricity test identifies whether a consistent weight is indicated when the same test load is applied at
different positions on the scale. The indications for different positions of a load shall meet the maximum
permissible errors (OIML R76-1: 2006). This test can be performed without a test weight of known mass, as
follows: The following is a simplified methodology.
 Stage 3: Apply a test load, of approximately 1/3 of the maximum capacity, in the centre of the scale and
record the indicated value.
 Stage 4: Apply the test load to each numbered section and record the indicated value for each location.
The number of test locations should be one and the number of points of support e.g. a scale with four
points of support shall be tested at five locations (Fig. 10).
Page 25 of 42
Fig. 10. The locations for applying test loads during an eccentricity test on a scale with four points of support
(left), and a scale with six points of support (right), 1 is the indicated value (see below) (Source: Government of
Canada, 2017).
 Stage 5: The indicated value at the centre shall be subtracted from the indicated value at each subsequent
location (Fig. 10, location ‘1’).
 Stage 6: Each difference calculated in stage 5 shall be less than or equal to the maximum permissible error.
 Stage 7: Report the findings in a table such as the example (Table 1) and prepare a diagram (e.g. Figure 10)
to show each test location.
Table 6. An illustrative example of an eccentricity test results table for a truck scale (max = 60 000 kg, e = 20 kg)
Difference
Indicated value Maximum Permissible
Location (relative to ‘1’), Pass/Fail
(kg) Error (mpe) (kg)
(kg)
1 (centre) 20,000 N/A N/A NA
2 20,020 + 20 ± 40 Pass
3 20,000 0 ± 40 Pass
4 19,940 - 60 ± 40 Fail
5 19,960 - 40 ± 40 Pass
6 19,980 - 20 ± 40 Pass
7 20,020 + 20 ± 40 Pass
In the case of hopper scales or if it is not possible to apply a load to the centre of the weighing area, a test weight
of known mass is recommended. Hoppers are typically subject to minimal off-centre loading and as such require
a test load of approximately 1/10 (10%) of the maximum scale capacity. The difference between the indicated
value at each load location and the known mass shall be less than or equal to the maximum permissible error
(Figure 11).
Page 26 of 42
Fig. 11. The locations for applying test loads during an eccentricity test on a hopper scale (Source: Government
of Canada, 2017).
9.3.5 End-Middle-End (EME) Test
An ‘End-Middle-End’ (EME) test is a simplistic version of an eccentricity test that could be performed on a
weighbridge with a single un-certified load such as a vehicle. This test can give an indication of potential
eccentricity and indicate the presence of damaged scale components, such as load cells. However, this test does
not give an indication of the scale accuracy. The test could be performed as follows:
 Stage 1: Ensure the weighbridge is clean and level before commencing the test.
 Stage 2: Zero the weighbridge using the controls and wait until the indicated value is zero.
 Stage 3: Drive a loaded vehicle onto the end of the weighbridge and record the indicated value.
 Stage 4: Move the vehicle forward, placing the heaviest set of axles directly over the centre of the
weighbridge and record the value (Figure 12).
Fig. 12. The locations for a vehicle test load during an End-Middle-End test on a weighbridge (Source:
Government of Canada, 2017)
Page 27 of 42
 Stage 5: Move the vehicle forward to the end of the scale and record the value at the centre.
 Stage 6: Subtract the value obtained at the centre of the scale from the value for each end location.
 Stage 7: Each difference shall be less than or equal to the maximum permissible error for the test load.
 Stage 8: Move the vehicle onto the weighbridge in the opposite direction and repeat the procedure in
stages 3 to 7.
 Stage 9: Report the findings in a table (Table 7).
Table 7. An end-middle-end test results table for a truck scale (max = 60 000 kg, e = 20 kg)
Indicated Maximum
Difference (relative
Direction Location value Permissible Error Pass/Fail
to ‘middle’) (kg)
(kg) (mpe) (kg)
Left 1 (end) 30,560 + 40 ± 40 Pass
Left 2 (middle) 30,520 N/A N/A N/A
Left 3 (end) 30,500 - 20 ± 40 Pass
Right 3 (end) 30,480 - 60 ± 40 Fail
Right 2 (middle) 30,540 N/A N/A N/A
Right 1 (end) 30,540 0 ± 40 Pass
9.4 Interpretation of Results

_____
AHK shall provide a factual account of testing procedures and test results. The interpretation of the test results
shall be limited to a comparison of indicated values against the inferred maximum permissible error (mpe). AHK
shall not definitively conclude whether a scale achieves a ‘pass’ or ‘fail’ or comment on the suitability of a scale
for commercial transaction. Any comments provided by AHK regarding test procedures or results shall be
accompanied by a disclaimer that guidance from an independent specialist metrological body should be sought.
10. DYNAMIC SCALES (BELT WEIGHERS)

__
Dynamic scales such as belt scales or ‘weighers’ are mechanically different to static scales. They are referred to
as, ‘continuous totalising automatic weighing instruments’ by OIML and subject to different recommendations
with regard to their classification, calibration and testing.
10.1 Units of Measurement

_____
The units of measurement for belt weighers are those that concern mass, mass flowrate and belt speed, as
follows:
 Mass: kilogram (kg) and tonne (t)
Page 28 of 42
 Mass flowrate: kilogram per hour (kg/h) and tonne per hour (t/h)
 Belt speed: metres per second (m/s)
10.2 Accuracy Classes

_____
Belt weighers are divided into four accuracy classes; 0.2, 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0. These values refer to the in-service
maximum permissible error as a percentage of the totalised load. For example, a 0.5 class weigher should weigh
a cargo of 10,000 t as 10,000 ± 50 t. This classification is particularly useful to consider when comparing weights
from belt weighers against weights from another weighing system.
10.3 Calibration
_____
There are several factors that can influence the accuracy of a belt weigher over time. Regular calibration and
testing is therefore essential to ensure accurate and consistent weight measurements. As provided by OIML
(R50-1: 2014), there are a number of tests that can be performed on a belt weigher. However, for the purpose
of installation or a periodic calibration these may include a ‘zero load test’ or a ‘live load test’.
10.4 Testing
_____
It is important that belt weighers are tested on a regular basis to check their performance and calibration status.
The testing process is usually performed by the owner or operator of the belt weigher. A certificate does not
have to be produced. However, it is good practice to ensure all results are recorded for traceability and future
reference. Test weights do not have to be certified or accompanied by a certificate of conformity. However, any
such in-house standard weights must be traceable to a certified mass. To provide assurance to our clients AHK
should request a ‘zero load test’ and a ‘span load test’ be performed before each weighing operation.
10.4.1 Warm-Up Period
A warm-up period is essential to ensure effective testing and cargo weighing is performed. The necessary warm-
up period should be advised by the manufacturer.
10.4.2 Zero Load Test
This test establishes the ‘zero’ point for weighing cargo. It ensures that the mass of the belt and idlers are not
included in the indicated cargo weight. The exact procedure will vary depending on the equipment being used,
and the operator will usually be guided by the control panel instructions. This test could be performed as
follows:
 Stage 1: Ensure the belt, idlers, drive drum and tachometer are clean.
 Stage 2: Ensure there is no load on the belt.
 Stage 3: Run the belt empty for a period to warm-up the belt. The required warm-up time should be
specified by the manufacturer.
Page 29 of 42
 Stage 4: Zero the belt weigher using the control panel.

 Stage 5: Allow the belt to operate for three minutes and record the indicated value.
 Stage 7: Allow the belt to operate for three minutes and record the second indicated value.
 Stage 9: Allow the belt to operate for three minutes and record the third indicated value.
 Stage 10: The percentage error shall be calculated for each of the three indicated values as follows.
𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 (𝑡)

𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 3 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑠 × 100 (3)
×𝑀𝑎𝑥 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 (𝑡/ℎ)
60 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑠
 Stage 11: The errors calculated in step shall be less than or equal to the following percentages for the
associated scale classification.
 Class 0.2: 0.02 %

 Class 0.5: 0.05 %
 Class 1: 0.1 %
 Class 2: 0.2 %
10.4.3 Live Load Test
A test load should be weighed using a suitable control instrument. For example, a calibrated and tested truck
weighbridge and considered as the ‘true’ quantity for the purpose of the live load test. The minimum test load
(Σmin) as specified by OIML (R50-1: 2014) shall be the greatest of the following:
 2% of the load in one hour at maximum flow rate.

 The load obtained at maximum flow rate in one revolution of the belt.
 The load corresponding to the number of scale intervals multiplied by the load increment.
The minimum test load depends on the characteristics of the belt weigher. Although designs vary, the minimum
test load for a base metal concentrate belt weighers would typically be less than 100 t, which is equivalent to a
few trucks full of cargo. Belt weigher manufacturers often specify a minimum test load of several hundred
tonnes of cargo. However, this is not required according to the above criteria. Large test loads shall be avoided
for the following reasons:
 Multiple weighings and the resulting cumulative error increase the uncertainty of the reference weight.
 Handling, storing and weighing large quantities is a logistical challenge.
 The likelihood of moisture gain or loss is increased.
It is good practice to perform the live load test with multiple test loads to test the scale repeatability. For
example, 3 x 100 t. Even with small test loads, sampling before and after the test may be required for the
purpose of moisture determination. If the moisture content of the cargo is liable to change in the time between
control weighing and belt weighing.
The difference between the control instrument indication and belt weigher indication shall be expressed as a
percentage of the ‘true’ quantity. The calculated percentage (relative error, Er) shall be less than the maximum
Page 30 of 42
permissible error percentage for the accuracy classification. For example, 0.5, of the scale being tested, as
follows.
(Belt weigher indication−Control instrument indication)

𝐸𝑟 (%) = × 100 (4)
Control instrument indication
10.4.4 Span Load Test
A span load test involves the application of a known mass to the belt weigher. During a span test the load is only
applied to the weigh length rather than the entire belt (as in a live load test). This can be achieved by applying a
tethered ‘chain’ of known mass onto the belt during operation or by placing weights of known mass directly
onto the weighing frame underneath the belt (Figure 13).
Fig. 13. A chain weight (left) and single grey test weight applied to a red belt weigher frame (right, source:
Siemens, 2011)
A chain provides a single calibration point. However, incremental application of a selection of standard test
weights provides multiple calibration points and enables an assessment of linearity and hysteresis. It should be
noted that chains are prone to material build up during use and therefore require maintenance and cleaning
before each use. For these reasons, test weights that can be applied to the weighing frame are generally
preferable to chain weights.
The exact procedure will vary depending on the equipment being used. The following is a general methodology
for a span test. The test duration shall be sufficient to indicate at least five times the minimum test load (Σmin)
and will therefore vary depending on the test weight being used:
 Stage 1: Ensure the belt, idlers, drive drum and tachometer are clean.
 Stage 2: Ensure there is no load on the belt.
 Stage 3: Run the belt empty for a period to warm-up the belt. The required warm-up time should be
specified by the manufacturer.
 Stage 5: Apply the test load and run the belt for the specified test duration.
 Stage 6: Record the value.
 Stage 7: Calculate the weight based on the test mass, belt speed and test duration.
 Stage 8: Repeat steps 4 to 7 for each available test weight.
The difference between the displayed totalised weight and the calculated totalised weight shall be expressed
as a percentage of the calculated totalised weight. The calculated percentage (relative error, Er) shall be less
Page 31 of 42
than the maximum permissible error percentage for the accuracy classification. For example, 0.5 of the scale
being tested.
(Totalized weight displayed−Totalized weight calculated)

𝐸𝑟 (%) = (5)
Totalized weight calculated
It is desirable to perform the span test at a belt speed equivalent to that of normal operation. However, it is
good practice to repeat the span test at different belt speeds to provide a thorough test of the weighing system.
For example, 25%, 50% and 75% of the maximum belt speed.
10.4.5 Electronic Simulation Test
Some belt weigher systems have an electronic simulation test feature, which simulates a digital signal from the
load cells. While this can check the functionality of electrical components it does not simulate the effects of an
operational belt conveyor and does not allow for comparison against a known mass.
11. CHALLENGES AND DISCREPANCIES

__
If there are any concerns associated with weighing these should be addressed on a case-by-case basis, as follows:
 Inform the client in writing of the type and context of the concern.
 Maintain relevant data and information, including photographs where possible.
 Provide advice and guidance if formally instructed and contracted by the client.
Some of the more common concerns and challenges include the following:
 Different scales for measuring gross and tare

 Driver in the truck cab
 Stated container tare weights
 Assumed or provided tare
 Recording a single truck tare
 Weight discrepancies
 Unavailable equipment or test weights
 Preferred weighing methods
 Lot size
 Chain-of-custody
11.1 Different Scales for Measuring Gross and Tare

_____
The use of different scales for gross and tare weights may be encountered at some mines, warehouses, ports or
refineries. This is particularly relevant to trucks or containers weighed using a road weighbridge. Gross and tare
weights should be obtained using the same scale to ensure that any instrument bias is applied to both the gross
and tare weights. Therefore, the effect on the resulting net (cargo) weight is mitigated. If unequal biases exist
Page 32 of 42
on two scales, one measuring gross and one measuring tare, then a systematic bias will be applied to each net
weight obtained. It should be noted, unscrupulous parties with a detailed knowledge of their weighing systems
may use a known bias to their commercial advantage.
11.2 Driver in the Truck Cab

_____
Although the weight of a driver may be relatively small compared to the weight of a cargo, the effect of the
driver being in the cab during gross weighing and then out of the cab during tare weighing (or visa-versa), can
have a significant cumulative effect. For this reason, AHK recommends the driver stands out of the cab during
all weighing operations, including gross and tare.
11.3 Stated Container Tare Weights

_____
At the time of manufacture, shipping line containers are marked with a tare weight (Fig. 14). Any subsequent,
damage, repair and general deterioration of the container may result in the tare not being accurate. For this
reason, AHK recommends measuring the actual tare rather than simply recording the stated tare on the
container (Figure 14).
Fig. 14. Shipping line container markings (Source: Bureau International des Containers, 2019)
11.4 Assumed or Provided Tare

_____
When weighing cargo in containers such as drums or bags or with any type of packaging (plastic wrap, metal
straps, pallets, dunnage), it is important to physically determine the tare weight to ensure an accurate net
weight is obtained. Accepting unverified stated or advised tare weights from third parties such as warehouses,
suppliers or receivers, is not advisable.
Page 33 of 42
11.5 Recording a Single Truck Tare

_____
To save time during an operation, some facilities may weigh empty trucks at the beginning of a shift to obtain a
tare weight, which is then applied to every gross weighing for each truck. This is not advisable because the empty
condition after each load may not be the same as the initial empty state. Factors such as material residue or fuel
consumption may cause the tare weight to fluctuate or change over time.
11.6 Weight Discrepancies

_____
Weight discrepancies should be investigated on an individual basis. There will be numerous factors to be
considered. Principally, an investigation will consider three values on a lot-by-lot and shipment weighted
average basis, as follows:
 The measured wet weight

 The moisture content of samples obtained
 The calculated dry weight
Differences in wet weight that are caused by a change in moisture content, possibly as a result of evaporation
or absorption, should coincide with an equivalent change in the moisture determination result. When the
apparent change in wet weight and moisture content are not proportional, an apparent change in dry weight is
observed. Discrepancies in dry weight are often a cause for concern for clients. This is because, in conjunction
with laboratory analysis results, the dry weight is key component of the cargo valuation in their commercial
contracts. In cases of dry weight discrepancies, the following should be considered:
1. Measured wet weight (at all locations being compared)

a. What was the weighing method?
b. What was the scale accuracy class, verification interval and capacity?
c. Was the scale adequately calibrated?
d. Was the scale adequately tested?
e. Number of weighings recorded (include gross and tare measurements)
f. Were individual weights relatively consistent or do they exhibit high variability and are these
consistent with the operations performed?
g. Was weighing performed before or after sampling?
2. Moisture determination
a. Is the sampling likely to have provided a representative sample and consider the following:
i. Particle top size
ii. Sampling method
iii. Sampling tool used
iv. Increment frequency
v. Increment mass
vi. Access to the material
b. Was sampling performed in the general vicinity of the weighing point (ISO 12743: 2018)?
c. Are the sample processing stages adequate for obtaining representative test portions for moisture
determination and consider the following:
Page 34 of 42
i. Sample handling prior to sample reduction (e.g. degradation following atmospheric exposure)
ii. Sample screening prior to sample reduction
iii. Sample reduction method (e.g. manual increment division)
iv. Sample equipment tools used
d. Is the drying oven fit for purpose (e.g. 105 ± 5 C) and has this been verified with a calibrated
thermometer?
e. Is the drying time sufficient?
f. Has constant mass been achieved?
g. Are A and B replicate determinations within acceptable tolerances?
3. Dry weight calculations
a. Are all the calculations correct?
b. Have the weighed averages been calculated correctly?
If a direct wet weight comparison is required, it is recommended to incorporate the measurement uncertainty
from each method into the comparison. As a general ‘rule-of-thumb’ the measurement uncertainty of a scale is
½ (50%) of the verification scale interval (e), which can be multiplied by the number of weighings made to give
a ‘rule-of-thumb’ uncertainty for the total cargo weight. For the purpose of this calculation gross and tare
weighings count as individual weighings. For example, 500 truckloads of copper concentrate are weighed
individually for gross and tare on a truck weighbridge with a verification scale interval (e) of 20 kg. The total net
weight is 10,000.000 kg, as follows:
20 𝑘𝑔
(500 𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠 + 500 𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠) × = 10,000 𝑘𝑔 (6)
2
Therefore, for the purpose of an internal comparison, the weight would be 10,000,000 ± 10,000 kg, or 1,000 ±
10 t. This indicative calculation should be performed for both weights being compared and the two uncertainties
added together. If the combined uncertainty is less than the reported weight discrepancy, further investigation
is required. However, if the combined uncertainty is greater than the reported weight discrepancy there is a
possibility that the difference falls within an acceptable measurement tolerance.
11.7 Unavailable Equipment or Test Weights

_____
If crucial equipment such as weighing scales or certified test weights are not available or their authenticity
cannot be verified, the client shall be informed prior to operations commencing so that mitigating actions can
be taken. If operations proceed after the client has been informed, all limitations must be clearly described in
the AHK report.
11.8 Preferred Weighing Methods

_____
AHK may be asked for an opinion on weighing systems or to comment on a particular weighing system in
comparison to another. Providing an opinion should be avoided. However, to be helpful to a client the following
guidance could be considered.
Page 35 of 42
11.8.1 General Guidance
The following general guidance may be appropriate:
 A calibrated scale is preferable to an uncalibrated scale.

 A tested scale is preferable to an untested scale.
 Certified test weights are preferable to in-house or un-certified test weights.
11.8.2 Draught Surveys
Draught surveys are generally regarded as the least reliable weighing method for the following reasons.
 Draught surveys have a large coefficient of variation, which can range from a low of 0.5% up to a high of
2.5% (ISO 12745: 2008).
 If the surveyor at discharge has knowledge of the vessel’s bill of lading (B/L), the draft survey is no longer
independent.
 If the surveyor has knowledge of a weight determined by a different weighing system at the same time
(e.g. belt scale or truck weighbridge), the draft survey is no longer independent.
11.8.3 Belt Scales (Weighers)
Belt scales are generally less precise than static scales, although there are exceptions. A correctly installed belt
scale operating under optimum conditions might achieve a coefficient of variation of 0.4%. However, under
adverse conditions may exceed 3.5%. For this reason, installation, calibration, testing, local conditions,
interruptions, load distribution, flow regulation and historical performance should be considered on an
individual basis.
11.8.4 Truck Weighbridges
Weighbridges are generally reliable if calibrated and tested correctly, with a typical coefficient of variation from
0.1% up to 0.5%.
11.8.5 Platform Scales
Platform scales (e.g. with a capacity of 3,000 kg) are generally reliable if calibrated and tested correctly. The
benefit of their low capacity means smaller test masses are required for calibration and testing compared to an
alternative method such as a truck weighbridge. Platform scales have a typical coefficient of variation from a
low of 0.05% up to a high of 0.2%, making them preferable to truck weighbridges for bundles or ingots of metal
cargoes and cargo in bulk bags.
11.8.6 Hopper Scales
Hopper scales are generally the preferred weighing method for solid bulk cargoes for the following reasons.
 They have an ‘auto-zero’ feature after each discharge, which eliminates a bias caused by build-up of wet
material and dislodged material.
 They are centrally loaded which minimizes eccentricity effects.
 They can be calibrated and tested relatively easily by suspending weights on the weighing frame.
Page 36 of 42
 Hopper scales typically have a small coefficient of variation, ranging from 0.1% up to 0.25%.
11.9 Lot Size

_____
Lot sizes are usually at the discretion of the client and their contractual parties. During bulk shipments, such as
loading to vessel or vessel discharge, a sensible judgement may be required by AHK regarding the quantity of
the last two lots. For example, if the client has advised a lot size of 500 t, and the last lot contains 100 t, it may
be sensible to combine sample to form a final lot of 600 t. This can be achieved by combining bulk or reduced
sample on a proportional basis.
From a technical perspective, it is preferable to have smaller lot sizes as this provides useful information about
the material. However, to be helpful to our clients, AHK should also consider the economic impact of additional
assays. Therefore as a guide, unless the client specified otherwise, new lots should be formed for quantities
greater than 20% of the agreed lot size.
11.10 Chain-of-Custody
_____
AHK has a responsibility to communicate accurate and factual data and information in a timely manner. AHK do
not take custody of cargo and are not responsible for discrepancies. However, AHK should, at the earliest
opportunity, communicate any concerns regarding the suitability of a weighing method for determining an
accurate cargo weight.
Interruptions to AHK’s supervision or attendance should be communicated to the client where relevant. For
example, cargo is weighed and sampled with AHK attendance on day 1 and AHK return to operations on day 2
to witness container loading. It should be made clear in the report that weighing, sampling and container loading
were not a continuous operation (see 13. Caveats and disclaimers).
11.11 Photographs
_____
Photographs can act as evidence to support a weight determination and demonstrate AHK’s attendance and
supervision of a weighing operation. Photographs should therefore be obtained during all weighing operations.
Although not all photographs will need to be sent to the client, retaining a photograph of the following events
may be sufficient.
 Each gross weighing operation (wide angle of weighing platform and close up of scale display)
 Each tare weighing operation (wide angle of weighing platform and close up of scale display)
 Each weighed unit (e.g. truck, bag or container) with visible identification marking (e.g. container number)
 Scale identification labels
 Supporting documentation (e.g. calibration certificates and testing records)
 Any characteristic or event that could impact the weighing outcome (e.g. scale damage or adverse weather)
Page 37 of 42
Photographs should be clear, in focus and well lit as far as is practicable. Photographs that contain letters or
numbers (e.g. scale display) should be legible.
11.12 Temperature
_____
Changes in ambient temperature can affect load cell output and therefore affect the weighing measurements
obtained by the instrument. Seasonal variations, such as those between summer and winter, can be mitigated
by performing regular calibrations. However, a weighing instrument subject to large variations during a single
weighing operation, such as the temperature change between cold nights and hot sunny days, may be
particularly affected. It is advisable to keep a record of ambient temperatures at regular intervals during a
weighing operation and also at key moments such as scale testing.
12. REPORTING
__
12.1 Reports
_______
An AHK report shall be issued for each appointment where cargo has been weighted. For multiple cargoes or
consignments, a report for each cargo type shall be issued. The content of each report should be specific to the
operation performed. However, in general, the report may include the following:
 Title, date of issue and reference

 Principal client name and address
 Principal client unique job reference
 Relevant information, depending on report type and if required (document verification, summary,
contents, introduction, aim, objectives, scope, conclusions, recommendations, references, appendices,
caveats and disclaimers)
 Advised material description
 Location and country of operations
 Date of operations
 Name of AHK personnel
 Vessel name or transport method and details (where applicable)
 Measuring instrument used
 Procedure or methodology of weighing (e.g. SOP)
 Scale details (manufacturer, model, serial number, capacity, interval, cleanliness, etc.)
 Scale calibration details
 Scale testing and test weight details
 Weighing measurements presented in a table (lot number, gross, tare and net)
 Seal numbers (where applicable)
 Packaging
 Summary of any restrictions or constraints presented during the operation
Page 38 of 42
13. CAVEATS AND DISCLAIMERS

Whether AHK is performing or witnessing weighing operations, it has an obligation to convey accurate
information to the client that could be of importance (i.e. scale conditions, availability of test weights, etc.). It
may be necessary to issue a statement to the client prior to the commencement of operations in the form of a
caveat, or after operations in the form of a reporting disclaimer, to highlight any potential or actual issues.
Section 13.1.2 below outlines the disclaimers that must be included on all weighing reports. However, in the
event that a bespoke caveat or disclaimer is needed, please contact your line manager for further guidance.
Both the risk and legal departments will be on hand to offer any advice or wording or content.
13.1.1 During Operations
AHK shall request test weighing is performed prior to the commencement of weighing operations. However,
sometimes test weighing is not performed, in which case AHK must inform the client straight away and add the
following disclaimer to any weight reports that are issued:
"Due to circumstances beyond the reasonable control of AHK, test weighing of the relevant scales was not
conducted prior to the commencement of weighing operations. AHK may therefore have had to rely on
information provided by third parties or those responsible for the maintenance and accuracy of the scales in use
at the time of weighing operations in relation to the function and accuracy of the provided scales. AHK shall not
be responsible to anyone for the use of, or reliance upon the accuracy, of the scales by anyone. AHK shall not
incur any liability for damages, including consequential damages, arising out of or in connection with the use of,
or accuracy of, the relevant scales."
In some cases, AHK may be required or requested to provide comments or make a professional judgement
regarding aspects such as scale calibration (see 7.3), certification, verification or chosen weighing method. Any
comments or concerns provided by AHK shall be accompanied by a disclaimer, such as the following, and with a
recommendation that the client, or other recipient, seek guidance from an independent metrological specialist
body.
“Comments raised by AHK on request shall be made to the best of AHK's knowledge and experience and based
on the information and circumstances prevailing at that time. However, AHK shall not be responsible for the
use, or reliance upon, of the subject of AHK's comments/concerns. AHK shall not incur any liability for damages,
including consequential damages, arising out of or in connection with the use of, or accuracy of, or reliance upon
the subject of AHK's comments/concerns. Clients should, wherever practicable, obtain guidance from an
independent metrological specialist body.”
13.1.2 Reports
The following caveats and disclaimers shall be included on every AHK weighing report:
 This report relates only to measurements witnessed as described above and at the time and place where
the measurements were witnessed. This report is subject to the Company’s Standard Terms and
Conditions.
 All inspections are performed within the limits of the instructions received.
 Reference to material in this report is the material advised within the instructions received. We cannot be
held responsible for the integrity of the material or the material security.
Page 39 of 42
14. FURTHER INFORMATION

__
For any technical guidance on weighing, please contact the AHK Technical Department
(technical.dept@ahkgroup.com)
15. REFERENCES
__
Bison, J. (2020). Bison C-Jacks. https://www.bison-jacks.com/products/c-jacks/
Bureau International des Containers (BIC) et du Transport Intermodal (2019). Marking of Containers.
https://www.bic-code.org/marking-of-containers/
Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM) (2006). Le Système international d’unités (SI). BIPM, France.
March 2006, eighth edition, https://www.bipm.org/utils/common/pdf/si_brochure_8.pdf
Dini Argeo (2020). Rice Lake Master ™ Line Belt Weighing Solutions. http://www.diniargeo.com/news/master-
line-en.aspx
Government of Canada (2017). Field Inspection Manual. Non-Automatic Weighing Devices. Published online
2017. Accessed 16 March 2020, https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/mc-mc.nsf/eng/lm04325.html
International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) Technical Report 1585 (2001). Step-by-step procedure for
the testing of static scales. ISO 2001, Switzerland, First Edition
International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) 12745 (2008). Copper, lead and zinc ores and concentrates.
Precision and bias of mass measurement techniques. ISO 2008, Switzerland, Second Edition.
Marsden Weighing (2020). Marsden P-JIK-5T Heavy Duty Platform Scale. https://www.marsden-
weighing.co.uk/index.php/p-jik-5t-heavy-duty-scale.html
Maxim Maritime Services (2020). http://www.maximmaritime.com/about.html
Organisation Internationale de Métrologie Légale (OIML) (2005). R111-1, Part 1: Metrological and Technical
Requirements. OIML 2004, Paris, France. https://www.oiml.org/en/files/pdf_r/r111-p-e04.pdf
Organisation Internationale de Métrologie Légale (OIML) (2007). R76-1, Part 1: Non-automatic Weighing
Instruments. OIML 2006, Paris, France. https://www.oiml.org/en/files/pdf_r/r076-p-e06.pdf
Organisation Internationale de Métrologie Légale (OIML) (2014) R50-1, Continuous totalizing automatic
weighing instruments (belt weighers). OIML 2014, Paris, France. https://www.oiml.org/en/files/pdf_r/r050-p-
e14.pdf
Scale Tec (2019). Industrial Hanging Scale (IHS). https://www.scaletec.co.za/ihs-crane-scales
Page 40 of 42
Siemens (2011). Performing a Zero and Span calibration on the Belt Scale system.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9ASIkZ-oR4
Trak Blaze (2019). Infinity High Speed Rail Weigh In Motion Train Weighbridge. https://trakblaze.com/infinity-
high-speed-train-weigh-motion/
United States Department of Agriculture (2017). Operation of a Bulk Weighing Scale.

https://www.gipsa.usda.gov/fgis/educout/grainelev/opScale.aspx
Wikipedia, 2019. Truck Scale. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truck_scale
Page 41 of 42
16. APPENDIX I: QUANTIFICATION &

MEASUREMENTS
__
16.1 Quantities and Units

_______
‘Quantity’ is something being measured such as distance, temperature, mass or time. ‘Unit’ is how the quantity
is being described. Often, different units can be used to describe the same quantity. In the example of distance
this could be in kilometres, metres or millimetres or other units. For instance, if point A and point B are 20
kilometres apart, then the quantity is distance and the unit is kilometres. An international system of units (SI),
abbreviated from the French système international (d'unités) is the most widely used system of measurement
and is based on the metric system.
The SI unit of mass is the kilogram (kg) and is the preferred unit for AHK reporting. The metric tonne (t), a non-
SI unit equivalent to 1,000 kg is in common usage. Abbreviations of the metric tonne such as, ‘mt’ or ‘MT’, despite
common usage, do not comply with the SI unit rules and should not be used in AHK reports.
16.2 Weight and Mass

_______
In scientific usage, weight and mass are fundamentally different quantities. Mass is the amount of matter in an
object (an intrinsic property), whereas weight is a force that results from the action of gravity upon matter. Mass
may be reported in units of grams (g), kilograms (kg) or tonnes (1000 kg). Weight, according to scientific
definition, is a force and may be reported in units of Newtons (N). In most practical everyday situations, the word
‘weight’ is used to mean ‘mass’ and this distinction is unimportant for most applications because the strength of
gravity does not vary much on the surface of the earth.
Page 42 of 42

Instructiuni Cantarire Ahk

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Instructiuni Cantarire Ahk

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

For Internal Use Only

TECHNICAL & OPERATIONAL GUIDANCE 8

Version Co-authors Reviewers

Draft 1.0 Mr Robert Dunn Dr Laurance Donnelly

Dr Laurance Donnelly Mr Dan Pop

10.1 Units of Measurement ............................................................................................... 28

2. ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

D/S: Draught survey

e: Verification scale interval

FEL: Front-end loader

Max: Maximum capacity of the weighing instrument

Min: Minimum capacity of the weighing instrument

mpe; Maximum permissible error

OIML: Organisation Internationale de Métrologie Légale (International Organisation of Legal

SI: Système International (International System)

SOP: Standard Operating Procedure

t: metric tonne, equivalent to 1000 kg

TOG: Technical and Operational Guidance

WSMD: Weighing, sampling and moisture determination

Σmin: Minimum test load (belt weighers)

Flowrate Indicating Device

A measure of the amount of matter in an object, which is independent of gravitational force.

Scale Interval (Actual), d

Scale Interval (Verification), e

Setting the display indication to zero when a load is on the instrument.

Totalization Indicating Device

The gravitational force acting upon an object.

The range between the minimum and maximum capacities.

Fig. 1. A diagram of a simplified cargo value calculation

The objectives of this TOG are as follows:

1. Provide information on the different types of weighing method.

2. Draw attention to the potential limitations of each type of weighing method.

3. Provide guidance for the calibration and testing of weighing systems.

4. Explain how weight measurements should be reported.

5. Provide general guidance on reporting.

5. HEALTH AND SAFETY

5.1 Risk Assessment and Method Statement (RAMS)

5.2 Personal and Protective Equipment (PPE)

 Latex or leather gloves

6.1 Platform Scale

6.2 Road Weighbridge

6.3 Rail Weighbridge

6.4 Crane Scale

6.5 Hopper Scale

6.6 Conveyor Belt Scale

6.7 Draught Survey

6.8 Container Jacks

7.2 Calibration Frequency

7.3 Calibration Certificates

8. STATIC SCALE CLASSIFICATION AND

8.1 Accuracy Class

Table 1. Instrument Classification (adapted from OIML R76-1: 2006)

Number of verification scale

Special (I) 0.001 g ≤ e 50,000 - 100 e

0.001 g ≤ e ≤ 0.05 g 100 100,000 20 e

0.1 g ≤ e ≤ 2 g 100 10,000 20 e

Ordinary (IIII) 5g≤e 100 1,000 10 e

𝑛: Number of verification scale intervals

𝑀𝑎𝑥: the maximum capacity of the scale.

8.2 Scale Intervals

8.3 Maximum Permissible Error

Maximum Maximum For loads, m, expressed in verification scale intervals, e

± 0.5 e ± 1.0 e 0 ≤ m ≤ 50,000 0 ≤ m ≤ 5,000 0 ≤ m ≤ 500 0 ≤ m ≤ 50

± 1.0 e ± 2.0 e 50,000  m ≤ 200,000 5,000  m ≤ 20,000 500  m ≤ 2,000 50  m ≤ 200