APMP.M.P-K9 (Absolute pressure up to 110 kpa) 21 May, 2013 In-Mook CHOI*, Sam-Yong WOO

Transcription

1 APMP.M.P-K9 (Absolute pressure up to 110 kpa) 21 May, 2013 In-Mook CHOI*, Sam-Yong WOO

2 Contents Backgrounds Schedule & List of Participants Standards of Participants Transfer Standard(TS) & KRISS Standard Characterization of TS Comparison Results Summary

3 Backgrounds APMP.M.P-K9 (Brief summary) Objective: to determine NMIs degrees of equivalence at pressures in the range 10 kpa to 110 kpa in absolute mode Agreed at TCM meeting in Nov Circulation of questionnaire and technical protocol in 2009 Characterization of transfer standards till early 2010 Started from Mar Two times failure of Transfer Standard(TS) due to over-pressure Originally scheduled to be ended in June, 2011 Measurement completed in June, 2012 All data collected in the end of August, 2012 Participants: 17 NMIs including a pilot lab. Pilot laboratory: KRISS Transfer Standard: Precise Digital Gauge (DH Instruments, RPM4 TM ) Link laboratories: NMIA and PTB (CCM.P-K2)

4 Backgrounds APMP Key Comparison for 110 kpa Absolute Pressure - Range : 10 kpa ~ 110 kpa (step : 10 kpa/20 kpa) - Pilot laboratory : KRISS (Co-Pilot :NMIA) - Participants : 17 NMIs - TS : Precise Digital Pressure Gauge (RPM4, DH Ins.) Link NMIA PTB CCM.P-K2 - Range : 10 kpa ~ 120 kpa (step : 10 kpa) - Pilot laboratory : NPL - Participants : 9 NMIs - TS : a P/C assembly of 335 mm 2 nominal eff. Area

5 Schedule No Measurement time Comparison loop A Institute Comparison loop B 1 Till 28 Feb KRISS KRISS 2 1 March 2010 NMIA NMIJ 3 15 April 2010 NSCL NMISA 2) 4 1 June 2010 KRISS 5 15 July 2010 NPLi 1) 6 1 September October December 2010 KRISS 9 15 January 2011 PTB KRISS 10 1 March 2011 KRISS NMC A*STAR April 2011 KRISS NML-SIRIM 3) 12 1 June 2011 NIM KRISS July 2011 KRISS NIMT 14 1 September 2011 VMI SCL October 2011 CMS-ITRI KRISS 16 1 December 2012 KRISS NIS January 2012 MSL KIM-LIPI 18 1 March 2012 KRISS KRISS 1),2)The Transfer Standard had failed due to over-pressure at NPLi and NMISA. 3) NML-SIRIM had given up the measurement due to the problem of their national pressure standard.

6 List of Participants No. NMIs Contact Points TS Delivery Address 1 2 KRISS Korea Research Institute Standards and Science NML-SIRIM National Metrology Laboratory, SIRIM Berhad 3 KIM-LIPI MSL Measurement Standards Laboratory of New Zealand NIM National Institute of Metrology NIMT National Institute of Metrology NIS National Institute for Standards 8 NMC A*STAR NMIA National Measurement Institute, Australia NMISA National Metrology Institute of South Africa NSCL National Standards & Calibration Laboratory SCL Standards and Calibration Laboratory PTB Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt NPLi National Physical Laboratory India VMI Vietnam Metrology Institute NMIJ National Metrology Institute of Japan CMS/ITRI Center for Measurement Standards / ITRI Dr. Sam-Yong Woo (sywoo@kriss.re.kr) Dr. In-Mook Choi (mookin@kriss.re.kr) Dr. Wan Abd Malik Wan Mohamed (wanmalik@sirim.my) Ms. Renanta Hayu (renanta@kim.lipi.go.id) Mr. Mark Fitzgerald (m.fitzgerald@irl.cri.nz) Ms. Yue Jin (Yuej@nim.ac.cn) Mr. Tawat Changpan (tawat@nimt.or.th) Mr. Shaker Gelany shaker9595@yahoo.com Mr. Wu Jian (wu_jian@nmc.a-star.edu.sg) Dr. John Man (john.man@measurement.gov.au) Mr. Cherie Korasie (ckorasie@nmisa.org) Eng. Mohamad Aldammad (nscl@nscl.sy) Mr. Chan Tak Kin (tkchan@itc.gov.hk) Dr. Wladimir Sabuga (wladimir.sabuga@ptb.de) D. Arun Vijayakumar (arun@mail.nplindia.ernet.in) Mr. Nguyen Ngoc Con (conngocnguyen@fpt.vn) Dr. Momoko Kojima (m.kojima@aist.go.jp) Mr. Gwo-Jen Wu (gjwu@itri.org.tw) 1 Doryong, Yuseong, Daejeon, Rep. of Korea National Metrology Laboratory (SIRIM Berhad), Lot PT 4803, Bandar Baru Salak Tinggi, Sepang, Selangor, MALAYSIA Puslit KIM LIPI, Kompleks PUSPIPTEK, Cisauk Tangerang, INDONESIA 69 Gracefield Road, P O Box , Lower Hutt 5040, New Z ealand 18 Beisanhuan donglu, chaoyang district, Beijing, China 3/5 Moo 3, Klong 5, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, Thaila nd National Institute for Standards Tersa St., Elharam, Giza #02-27 NMC, 1 Science Park Drive, Singapore Bradfield Road, Lindfield 2070, NSW, Australia Building 5, CSIR Campus, Meiring Naude Drive, Brummeria, P retoria P.O.Box: 30116, Damascus, Syria 36/F, Immigration Tower, 7 Gloucester Road, Wanchai, Hong Kong Pressure Working Group Bundesallee 100, Braunschw eig Germany Dr K. S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi India 8 Hoang Quoc Viet Rd., Cau Giay Dist., Hanoi Vietnam Tsukuba Central 3, Umezono, Tsukuba, Ibaraki Japan Room 109, Bldg. 08, 321 Kuang Fu Rd, Sec. 2, Hsinchu, Taiwa n 300, R.O.C.

7 Standards of Participants No. NMIs STD Model Traceability Relative Uncertainty of A 0 in 10-6 (k=1) Room Temp. during measurement 1 KRISS Korea Research Institute Standards and Science Pressure Balance DHI PG7601 Independent 6.0 ( ) C ( ) C 2 NML-SIRIM National Metrology Laboratory, SIRIM Berhad KIM-LIPI Pressure Balance DHI PG7601 PTB 7.0 ( ) C 4 MSL Measurement Standards Laboratory of New Zealand Pressure Balance DHI PC-7100/ TC Independent 4.6 ( ) C NIM National Institute of Metrology NIMT National Institute of Metrology NIS National Institute for Standards Pressure Balance DHI PG7607 Independent 4.5 ( ) C Pressure Balance DHI PG7601 Independent 8.1 ( ) C Pressure Balance DHI PG7601 Independent 10 ( ) C 8 NMC A*STAR Pressure Balance Ruska 2465 PTB 12.5 ( ) C NMIA National Measurement Institute, Australia NMISA National Metrology Institute of South Africa NSCL National Standards & Calibration Laboratory SCL Standards and Calibration Laboratory Liquid Manometer Mercury(Laser) Independent 31) ( ) C Pressure Balance Futaba AV-02 PTB 25 ( ) C Pressure Balance Ruska 2465A-754A NPL 24 ( ) C 13 PTB Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt Liquid Manometer Mercury(Laser & Capacitance bridge) Independent 5.72) ( ) C NPLi National Physical Laboratory India VMI Vietnam Metrology Institute NMIJ National Metrology Institute of Japan Pressure Balance DHI PG7607 NIMT 25.5 ( ) C Pressure Balance DHI PG7607 Independent 6.5 ( ) C 17 CMS/ITRI Center for Measurement Standards / ITRI Pressure Balance DHI PG7607 PTB 9.2 ( ) C 1),2) National Standard is laser interferometer mercury manometer. The value indicates the standard uncertainty at 100 kpa

8 Transfer Standard Absolute Precise Digital Pressure Gauge DH Instruments, RPM4 TM Two Q-RPTs Range : 110 kpa Resolution : kpa Monitoring gauge - Range 250 kpa/resolution 0.01 kpa - Warning alarm over 112 kpa Original transfer standard Modified transfer standard with a monitor gauge

9 KRISS pressure standard for KC 110 kpa KRISS Pressure Standard Optimized for APMP.M.P-K9 Platform : PG7601 Range : 10 kpa ~ 130 kpa in absolute mode (variable range) P/C assembly : DHI, 35 mm diameter (10 kpa/kg) KRISS absolute pressure standard Automatic mass handler Deadweight tester base Twelve 1 kg deadweight Piston gauge terminal Transfer standard Volume controller Pressure controller Vacuum gauge Vacuum pump

10 Characterization of TS Characterization of Transfer Standards Temperature effect at 20 ºC and 23 ºC Slightly different one of the most critical effects Measured at both conditions in the pilot lab. before and after the participants measurement If the measurement room is controlled within 0.5 ºC, then no problem Medium effect N 2 and Dry air No effect, Negligible Electrical Power effect 220 V(60 Hz) and 110 V(50 Hz) No effect Tilt effect (attitude) If the TS is positioned with a level, then negligible Long-term time dependency Long-term stability including travelling effect Leak effect included in the TS uncertainty

11 Characterization of TS Temperature Effect & Short Term Stability New TS-A & TS-B monitored at 20 ºC and 23 ºC before the circulation Different temperature effect according to the TS Distinguishable only for short time within one month Maximum 0.93 Pa at TS-A & 0.65 Pa at TS-B Measured at both conditions in the pilot lab. before and after the participants measurement No need of compensation Short Term Stability within one month at same temperature better than 0.2 Pa ~ 0.5 Pa Correction (kpa) o C Nov o C Dec o C Dec o C Dec Correction (kpa) o C Nov o C Nov o C Nov o C Dec o C Jan o C Feb Nominal Pressure (kpa) Nominal Pressure (kpa)

12 Characterization of TS Temperature Effect & Short Term Stability - Rectangular distribution - Divided by Maximum deviation according to the temperature change between 20 C and 23 C. Uncertainty due to temperature change of 0.5 C Nominal Pressure (kpa) Max. Deviation of <C H > Max. Deviation of <C L > Nominal Pressure (kpa) Uncertainty due to temperature effect

13 Characterization of TS-C Long-term time dependency (only in time) TS-C monitored in the laboratory for 1 year No tendency according to time (random) Maximum difference between two consecutive correction data 0.84 Pa <C L > 1 Mar <C L > 2 Jul <C L > 3 Aug <C L > 4 Mar <C L > 2 -<C L > 1 <C L > 3 -<C L > 2 <C L > 4 -<C L > 3 Correction (kpa) Correction (kpa) Nominal Pressure (kpa) Nominal Pressure (kpa)

14 Characterization of TS-C Long-term time dependency (only in time) - Rectangular distribution - Divided by 2 3 Maximum deviation according to long-term time dependency of TS-C Nominal Pressure (kpa) Max. Deviation of <C H > Max. Deviation of <C L > Uncertainty due to long-term time dependency Nominal Pressure (kpa) Uncertainty due to long-term time dependency

15 Characterization of TS Long-Term Stability Includes time dependency, temperature & travelling(vibration) effects at 20 ºC No time dependency Reproducible within maximum 1.4 Pa Correction (kpa) Feb Jun Nov Jun Nominal Pressure(kPa)

16 Characterization of TS Long-Term Stability - Rectangular distribution - Divided by 2 3 Maximum deviation according to long-term stability of TS-A2 and TS-B2 Nominal Pressure (kpa) Max. Deviation of <C H > Max. Deviation of <C L > Uncertainty due to long-term stability Nominal Pressure (kpa) Uncertainty due to long-term stability

17 Characterization of TS-C Leak effect in absolute pressure calibration Leak free system? Pressure balance Pressure Regulating function Leak Pressure gradient Pressure calibration difference P diff = P DUT -P STD Leak amount Piston fall rate Analysis of leak parameters Leak rate control Applied pressure Length of tube Pressure medium Pressure Balance Terminal Quick connector Leak control valve Precise digital pressure gauge Volume controller Vacuum pump Automatic loading mass Pressure controller

18 Characterization of TS Leak effect analysis cf. Metrologia 49 (2012) Pressure difference due to leak 0.17 Pa kpa 50 kpa 100 kpa P Diff parts in 10 6 P Diff parts in kpa 50 kpa 100 kpa Fall rate (mm/min) Leakrates (Pa.m 3 /s) Pressure (kpa) P diff per fall rate (Pa/(mm/min)) Pressure (kpa) P diff per leak rate (kpa/(pa m 3 /s))

19 Uncertainty of TS Total uncertainty, u TS Uncertainty due to temperature (TS-A2, TS-B2), u temp Uncertainty due to long-term time dependency (TS-C), u time Uncertainty due to long-term stability (TS-A2, TS-B2), u stability Uncertainty due to leak (TS-C), u leak u TS = 2 2 u temp + u time + u 2 2 ls + u leak Nominal Pressure (kpa) Uncertainty due to temperature effect Uncertainty due to longterm time dependency Uncertainty due to longterm stability Uncertainty due to leak effect Total uncertainty of TS Total relative uncertainty of TS ( 10-6 )

20 Correction value comparison Difference of the correction values d j,l,m,n,i =< C l > j,m,i < C l > KRISS,m,n,i - Pilot lab. = 0 - Simply deviation from pilot lab. l = High, Low m = up, down n = before, after j = participants Deviation from pilot laboratory (d j,i ) Pressure (kpa) #1 u d j,i #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 D j,i = d j,i = u 2 (< C > j,i ) + u 2 2 (< C > KRISS,i ) + u TS,i i=10 kpa, 30 kpa,, 110 kpa, j= 1, 2,, 14

21 APMP mathematical RV Mathematical reference value of APMP (meaningless) Median value for the expected mean correction values Uncertainty according to the method of Muller MAD= the median of absolute deviations from the median of the results u p KCRV, i = MAD n Reference value shift of d j,i Mean Median Weighted mean Nominal Pressure (kpa)

22 Link to KCRV Link regional results to key comparison reference value Deviation from CC results (KCRV) Deviation from CC results (KCRV) cc 60 APMP Deviation from KCRV (x10-6 ) at 100 kpa BIPM MetasLNE-INM PTB NIST NMIA NPL INRIM NRC Participants Deviation from pilot lab.(x10-6 ) at 100 kpa Participants

23 Link to KCRV Deviation of link laboratories from KCRV Deviation cc,i = d cc,nmia,i u 2 (d cc,nmia,i ) + d cc,ptb,i u 2 (d cc,ptb,i ) 1 u 2 (d cc,nmia,i ) + 1 u 2 (d cc,ptb,i ) Uncertainty 1 u 2 ( cc,i ) = 1 u 2 (d cc,nmia,i ) + 1 u 2 (d cc,ptb,i ) 15 Deviation from KCRV (x10-6 ) NMIA PTB Weighted Mean Nominal Pressure (kpa)

24 Link to KCRV Deviation of link laboratories from the pilot lab. Deviation APMP,i = d APMP,NMIA,i u 2 (d APMP,NMIA,i ) + d APMP,PTB,i u 2 (d APMP,PTB,i ) 1 u 2 (d APMP,NMIA,i ) + 1 u 2 (d APMP,PTB,i ) Uncertainty 1 u 2 ( APMP,i ) = 1 u 2 (d APMP,NMIA,i ) + 1 u 2 (d APMP,PTB,i ) Deviation from KCRV (x10-6 ) NMIA PTB Weighted Mean Nominal Pressure (kpa)

25 Link to KCRV Correction value to link APMP to KCRV D j,i = ( cc,i APMP,i ) + d j,i Nominal Pressure (kpa) Difference of weighted mean values cc,i APMP,i Standard uncertainty Relative standard uncertainty ( 10-6 ) D j,l,m,n = 7 i=1 2 D j,l,m,n,i i=10 kpa, 30 kpa,, 110 kpa, j = 1, 2,,

26 Link to KCRV Selection of measurement results of each participant - Normally, mean of each participant s correction value - To give the best results closest to KCRV D j,l,m,n = 7 i=1 2 D j,l,m,n,i 6 i=10 kpa, 30 kpa,, 110 kpa, j = 1, 2,, Deviation from pilot laboratory (d j,i ) Pressure (kpa) #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 Deviation from KCRV (D j,i ) Pressure (kpa) #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14

27 Uncertainty Uncertainty of the deviations (D j,i ) from KCRV - u TS, uncertainty due to TS stability - u dj,i, uncertainty of each participant s deviation from the pilot laboratory - u, uncertainty of the correction value from two link laboratories weighted mean values The uncertainty of the correction value already includes the uncertainty due to TS stability The combined standard uncertainty can be calculated only with u dj,i and u D j,i = ( cc,i APMP,i ) + d j,i u Dj,i = u u dj,i

28 Results Deviations (D j,i ) from KCRV with uncertainty Deviation from KCRV (D ij ) Deviation from KCRV (D ij ) Deviation from KCRV (D ij ) NMI index NMI index NMI index 10 kpa 50 kpa 100 kpa Relative deviation from KCRV (D ij ) (x10-6 ) Relative deviation from KCRV (D ij ) (x10-6 ) Relative deviation from KCRV (D ij ) (x10-6 ) NMI index NMI index NMI index

29 Summary The majority of the participants measurements are in good agreement with KCRV within the associated uncertainties except 10 kpa. The TS used in this key comparison was not suitable for the comparison in the low range of full scale. The resolution of the transfer standard used in this key comparison is 1 part in 10 5 at 10 kpa which means that the uncertainty due the TS stability was too big to compare the measurement results of the each participant with each other or to link them to KCRV.

30 표준이올라가면생활이즐거워집니다! Thank you 감사합니다