Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 - Bilateral Comparison of 1 kg Stainless Steel Mass Standards between KRISS and A*STAR

Similar documents
ASIA PACIFIC METROLOGY PROGRAME

CCM short note on the dissemination process after the proposed redefinition of the kilogram

National Physical Laboratory Hampton Road Teddington Middlesex United Kingdom TW11 0LW

FINAL REPORT OF THE BILATERAL COMPARISON OF THE CALIBRATIONS OF STANDARD WEIGHTS BETWEEN CENAM-MEXICO AND INEN-ECUADOR SIM.M.M-S4 (SIM.7.

Air Density Determination Using 1 kg Buoyancy Mass Comparison(III)

Final Report on CIPM key comparison of multiples and submultiples of the kilogram (CCM.M-K2)

AFRIMETS. Supplementary Comparison Programme. Calibration of Gauge Blocks. by Mechanical Comparison Method AFRIMETS.L S3.

A bilateral comparison of a 1 kg platinum standard

Technical Protocol of the CIPM Key Comparison CCAUV.V-K5

Supplementary Comparison EURAMET.EM-S19 EURAMET Project No. 688

INTERLABORATORY MASS COMPARISON BETWEEN LABORATORIES BELONGING TO SIM SUB-REGIONS COORDINATED BY CENAM (SIM.7.31a & SIM.7.31b)

LINKING SIM MASS COMPARISONS TO THE KCRV ON 1 kg. Luis O. Becerra CENAM Querétaro, Qro., Mexico,

Force Key Comparison APMP.M.F-K2.a and APMP.M.F-K2.b (50 kn and 100 kn) Final Report 6 August Pilot: KRISS, Republic of Korea Yon-Kyu Park

DRAFT B, Final Report on CIPM key comparison of 1 kg standards in stainless steel (CCM.M-K1)

Comparison protocol EURAMET project

Report on Key Comparison COOMET.AUV.A-K5: Pressure calibration of laboratory standard microphones in the frequency range 2 Hz to 10 khz

Metrology Principles for Earth Observation: the NMI view. Emma Woolliams 17 th October 2017

Technical Protocol of the Bilateral Comparison in Primary Angular Vibration Calibration CCAUV.V-S1

National Physical Laboratory Hampton Road Teddington Middlesex United Kingdom TW11 0LW

APMP supplementary comparison of absorbed dose rate in tissue for beta radiation

PROTOCOL OF MASS AND VOLUME COMPARISONS BETWEEN SIM NMIs

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON OF PLATINUM RESISTANCE THERMOMETERS BETWEEN CHILE AND ECUADOR

Final Report EUROMET PROJECT 818 CALIBRATION FACTOR OF THERMISTOR MOUNTS. Jan P.M. de Vreede

Report on EURAMET.M.M-S9

APMP Key Comparison of DC Voltage at V and 10 V

Maintaining and disseminating the kilogram following its redefinition

FINAL REPORT Bilateral Comparison of DC Magnetic Flux Density Between NML-SIRIM and KRISS

A comparison of primary platinum-iridium kilogram mass standards among eighteen European NMIs

Final Report 06 July 2006 Frank Wilkinson, Gan Xu, and Yuanjie Liu

Final Report for the APMP.T-K4 (Draft B on October 27, 2011)

On the redefinition of the kilogram. Dr Philippe RICHARD

NPL REPORT ENG 13. Report on EUROMET key comparison of multiples and submultiples of the kilogram (EUROMET.M.M-K2) M Perkin NOT RESTRICTED

Report on APMP Supplementary Comparison High precision roundness measurement APMP.L-S4. Final report

Comparison of V and 10 V DC Voltage References

SIM SIM.M.D-K3. provide. SIM.M.M-K5 for. A set of. Institute LACOMET LATU INTI. Country Costa Rica Uruguay Argentina Chile México Canada Brazil

Force Key Comparison CCM.F-K1.a and CCM.F-K1.b 5 kn and 10 kn. Aimo Pusa MIKES Finland

ANNEXE 8. Technical protocols for the interlaboratory comparisons

EVALUATION OF ADSORPTION EFFECT BY USING SILICON SPHERE AND SILICON SURFACE ARTEFACTS

Final Report on the Torque Key Comparison CCM.T-K2 Measurand Torque: 0 kn m, 10 kn m, 20 kn m Dirk Röske 1), Koji Ogushi 2)

FINAL REPORT ON KEY COMPARISON APMP.AUV.A-K3

Ajchara Charoensook, Chaiwat Jassadajin. National Institute of Metrology Thailand. Henry Chen, Brian Ricketts and Leigh Johnson

R SANAS Page 1 of 7

Measurement & Uncertainty - Concept and its application

Force Key Comparison EUROMET.M.F-K2. (50 kn and 100 kn) EURAMET Project No 518. Final Report. 14 July Pilot: NPL, United Kingdom

Final Report on the APMP Air Speed Key Comparison (APMP.M.FF-K3)

Flowchart for the extraordinary calibrations prior to the redefinition of the kilogram. (BIPM proposal)

Calibration, traceability, uncertainty and comparing measurement results. Workshop 16 March 2015 VSL, Delft The Netherlands

Automated volume measurement for weihts using acoustic volumeter

Supplementary comparison SIM.M.FF-S12. Final Report for Volume of Liquids at 20 L

A Collaboration Between Ten National Measurement Institutes To Measure The Mass Of Two One Kilogram Mass Standards

Portuguese Institute for Quality. Contents

Report on CCM Pilot Study CCM.R-kg-P1. Comparison of future realizations of the kilogram. Final Report

OIML D 28 DOCUMENT. Edition 2004 (E) ORGANISATION INTERNATIONALE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION. Conventional value of the result of weighing in air

Document No: TR 12 Issue No: 1

CCL-K5. CMM 1D: Step Gauge and Ball Bars. Final Report

Centre for Metrology and Accreditation, MIKES

Measurement & Uncertainty - Basic concept and its application

Kilogram: new definition, selected mises-en-pratique and direct link with SMD activities

Final Report On COOMET Vickers PTB/VNIIFTRI Key Comparison (COOMET.M.H- K1.b and COOMET.M.H- K1.c)

Activity measurements of the radionuclide 153 Sm for the ANSTO, Australia in the ongoing comparison BIPM.RI(II)-K1.Sm-153

APMP.T-K3.4: Key comparison of realizations of the ITS-90 over the range C to C

Final Report on Comparison of Hydraulic Pressure Balance Effective Area Determination in the Range up to 80 MPa

Establishment of a Traceability Chain in Metrology for Materials

Schedule of Accreditation issued by United Kingdom Accreditation Service 2 Pine Trees, Chertsey Lane, Staines-upon-Thames, TW18 3HR, UK

RECENT ILC ACTIVITY IN ROMANIAN MASS MEASUREMENTS

Comparison of measurement uncertainty budgets for calibration of sound calibrators: Euromet project 576

Draft protocol of APMP.RI(I)-K8 Reference air kerma rate for HDR Ir-192 brachytherapy sources

MASS AND VOLUME COMPARISONS AT MIKES

Euramet project 1187 Comparison of Instrument Current Transformers up to 10 ka. Technical protocol (March 2012)

EUROMET Project 702 EUROMET.M.D-K4

The ITS-90 after definition of neon isotopic reference composition: extent of the isotopic effect tested on previous inter-comparison results

Euramet project 1075 Bilateral comparison

COMPARISON OF HUMIDITY MEASUREMENTS USING A DEW POINT METER AS A TRANSFER STANDARD APMP-IC-1-97 REPORT

The BIPM key comparison database (KCDB): linkage of key comparison results

Inter-laboratory Comparison of Impedance-Type Hygrometer in the Range from 10 % to 95 % at 5 C to 55 C

Implementation of MRA NMIs, BIPM,RMO-TCs Improvement of Global Measurement Standards NMIs, BIPM

BILATERAL COMPARISON REPORT LNE KIM-LIPI

International Pyrheliometer Comparison IPC-XII

Traceable Mass Determination and Uncertainty Calculation

Technical protocol for the CCL-K11 key comparison of optical frequency/wavelength standards.

APMP.T-S6 APMP SUPPLEMENTARY COMPARISON OF INDUSTRIAL PLATINUM RESISTANCE THERMOMETER. Final Report. Prepared by

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

Mise en pratique for the definition of the kilogram in the SI

Loadcell Calibration - Evaluation of Uncertainties

Final Report on the EURAMET.PR-K1.a-2009 Comparison of Spectral Irradiance 250 nm nm

BIPM/CIPM key comparison CCM.FF-K Final Report for Volume of Liquids at 20 L and 100 ml - Piloted by Centro Nacional de Metrología (CENAM)

APMP TCTF Working Group on the Mutual Recognition Agreement

TC-Chair Annual Report 2008/2009 TC-M

APPENDIX G ESTIMATION OF UNCERTAINTY OF MEASUREMENT

CCT/10-21 Extrapolation of the ITS-90 down to the boiling point of nitrogen from the triple point of argon

EMRP JRP SIB-05. NewKILO. Developing a practical means of disseminating the redefined kilogram (June 2012 May 2015) Stuart Davidson, NPL, UK

C. Michotte 1, G. Ratel 1, S. Courte 1, Y. Nedjadi 2, C. Bailat 2, L. Johansson 3, Y. Hino 4. Abstract

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON OF WATER TRIPLE POINT CELLS LEADING TO A MORE PRECISE DEFINITION OF THE KELVIN

FINAL REPORT ON THE KEY COMPARISON EUROMET.AUV.A-K3

The BIPM key comparison database, Aug /10

SIM Regional Comparison on. The Calibration of Internal and External Diameter Standards SIM.L-K FINAL REPORT July 2012

P1-APMP.EM-S9. VNIIM/KRISS Bilateral Comparison of DC Magnetic Flux Density by Means of a Transfer Standard Coil. TECHNICAL PROTOCOL

Euramet EM-S40. Bilateral Comparison KIM-LIPI / LNE. Final Report

Interamerican Metrology System (SIM) Regional Metrology Organization (RMO) Capacitance Comparison, Final Report

A61-02 CALA Guidance on Traceability Revision 1.2 October 15, 2012

Transcription:

Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 - Bilateral Comparison of 1 kg Stainless Steel Mass Standards between KRISS and A*STAR Jin Wan Chung 1, Shih Mean Lee, Sungjun Lee 1 1 Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science, Daejeon 34113, Rep. of Korea National Metrology Centre (NMC), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), 1 Science Park Drive, Singapore 1181, Singapore Abstract: This report describes a bilateral comparison of 1 kg stainless steel mass standard between the Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science (KRISS), and the National Measurement Centre, Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, which is registered in the BIPM KCDB as APMP.M.M-K4.1. This nominal value was chosen as it followed the nominal value of CCM.M-K4. This bilateral comparison was piloted by KRISS. The transfer weight was delivered to A*STAR from KRISS in April 015 and received back from A*STAR in October 015. A*STAR have the aim to improve their calibration measurement capability (CMC) for mass of 1 kg. KRISS participated in both this comparison and CCM.M-K4, providing a link between the A*STAR result and the KCRV of CCM.M-K4. The final report of this comparison is being given in this document. Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 1 of 11

1. Introduction This report describes a bilateral comparison of a 1 kg stainless steel mass standard between KRISS (Korea), and A*STAR (Singapore). The objectives of the comparison were to facilitate the demonstration of metrological equivalence between the two participating national laboratories, and to check the capability of A*STAR to improve quoted calibration measurement capability (CMC).. Transfer standards The transfer standard for this comparison comprises 1 kg stainless steel cylindrical weight with a knob (OIML R111 design []). The weight was housed in a wooden container. It was produced by Mettler-Toledo Co. of Switzerland and purchased by KRISS in 00 as shown Figure 1. The physical properties such as volume and density of the transfer standard and associated uncertainty are given by KRISS and shown in the Table 1. The magnetic susceptibility of the transfer standard was not measured. Figure 1. Travelling container and its contents for transfer standard Table 1. Physical properties of standard Identification of Standard Density (0 ), kg m -3 Volumetric Uncertainty of density (k = ), kg m -3 coefficient of Expansion, K -1 8069 8011.095 0.01 0,000 050* *Assumed Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 of 11

3. Participants and Contributors Participant 1 (Pilot laboratory) Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science (KRISS), 67 Gajeong, Yuseong, Daejeon 34113, Rep. of Korea Phone: +8-4-868-5111 Fax: +8-4-868-501 Contact person: Jin Wan Chung (Email: jwchung@kriss.re.kr) Participant National Metrology Centre (NMC), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), 1 Science Park Drive, Singapore 1181, Singapore Phone: +65 679 1960 Fax: +65 679 199 Contact person: Shih Mean Lee (Email: lee_shih_mean@nmc.a-star.edu.sg) Documentation & Supports Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science (KRISS), 67 Gajeong, Yuseong, Daejeon 34113, Rep. of Korea Phone: +8-4-868-5815 Fax: +8-4-868-501 Corresponding: Sungjun Lee (Email: lsjun@kriss.re.kr) 4. Circulation scheme and time schedule The transfer standard was hand-carried by KRISS personnel from KRISS to A*STAR and A*STAR personnel from A*STAR to KRISS respectively with ATA carnet. No special custom procedures were required between Korea and Singapore. The agreed and realized time schedule was as follows: - Measurements at KRISS, Daejeon: April 015 (marked as KRISS_1 in Result section) Transport to A*STAR, Singapore - Measurements at A*STAR, Singapore: May to June 015 (A*STAR) Transport to KRISS, Daejeon Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 3 of 11

- Measurements at KRISS, Daejeon: Nov. 015 (marked as KRISS_ in Result section) 5. Technical protocol The agreed technical protocol for APMP.M.M-K4.1 is the same as that of CCM.M-K1. 6. Results As shown in the technical protocol, a completed measurement report containing the measurement result, data of the ambient conditions, list of instrument used and a description of the traceability of the participant's reference standard was submitted to KRISS, which was acting as a collector of all result in the comparison. After all measurements were completed, the measurement reports were sent to KRISS, which provided the link to CCM.M-K4 through APMP.M.M-K4.1. 6.1 Measurement Results Table and Figure show the results of the reported mass value and their combined standard uncertainties as given by A*STAR and KRISS. The value m A (= m Areported - m 0 ) is the deviation from the nominal mass (m 0 ) value and u c is combined standard uncertainty (k=1) claimed by each laboratory. The number of significant digits has been restricted to a maximum of three for m A and two for u c [3]. As is normal practice with mass key comparisons, all mass values are true mass(and not conventional mass) Table. Measurement results for transfer standards reported from A*STAR and KRISS Labs. Date m A / mg 1 k g u c / mg KRISS _1 Apr. 015 0.004 0.017 A*STAR May 015-0.04 0.05 KRISS _ Nov. 015-0.035 0.017 Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 4 of 11

Figure. Measurement result for transfer standard The stability of the transfer standard 1 kg artifact was assessed by KRISS by measuring the mass values of the transfer standard and a check standard as against one of KRISS s reference standards before and after the measurement loop. The results are shown in Table 3. As shown Table 3, check standard of KRISS shows no drift, but the transfer standard shows drift of - 0.039 mg. This was taken into account when a KCRV for this comparison was determined. Averaged mass value between KRISS_1 and KRISS_ is used as the KCRV in this comparison and instability uncertainty of ± 0.011 mg (see equation (1)) is included. Table 3. Mass change of transfer standard and check standard as measured by KRISS during the comparison Nominal Mass Mass change of check standard between Apr. and Nov., 015 / mg Transfer standard KRISS Check Standard 1 kg -0.039-0.001 Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 5 of 11

From the measurement, instability of transfer standard was found as shown Table 3. The uncertainty (k=1) due to instability of transfer standard (u inst. ) during Apr. to Nov., 015 was calculated using equation (1) as a rectangular distribution and obtained as 0.011 mg: u inst. ( m KRISS _ m KRISS _1 ) = (1) ( 3) Where: m _KRISS1 : Mass measurement by KRISS in Apr. 015 m _KRISS : Mass measurement by KRISS in Nov. 015 The corrected measurement results for transfer standard reported from A*STAR and KRISS are shown in Table 4. Table 4. Calculated KCRV and uncertainty and the measurement results reported by A*STAR for the transfer standards Labs. KCRV (Averaged KRISS_1 and KRISS_) m A / mg 1 k g u c / mg -0.016 0.00 A*STAR -0.04 0.05 KRISS has thus provided the KCRV for APMP.M.M-K4.1 and therefore have a zero difference from this value for their averaged result. The difference between this KCRV and the result reported by A*STAR is then: (-0.016) mg - (-0.04) mg = +0.008 mg. 7. Linkage to CCM.M-K4 The analysis follows the method used in the APMP.M.M-K1 [4],[5] for linkage to the key comparison reference value (KCRV) obtained in the CCM 1 kg key comparison CCM.M-K4. Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 6 of 11

The aim is the analysis is to estimate the degree of equivalence for participating laboratory; NMC, A*STAR through the link laboratory KRISS. 7.1. Linked Results The measurement data were analyzed using the method in [4], [5]. This method links APMP.M.M-K4.1 to CCM.M-K4 and gives the degrees of equivalence required by the MRA [1] without the need for an APMP.M.M-K4.1 reference value. The result of analysis was checked doubly for each mass standard. From the final report on CIPM key comparison of 1 kg standards in stainless steel (CCM.M- K4) [6]: KRISS-KCRV = -0.01 (0.09) mg () Where: The number in the parenthesis is the expanded uncertainty with a coverage factor k=. This result is interpreted as the mass value assigned by KRISS to the mass of the 1 kg transfer standard is 0.01 mg less than the KCRV. This difference from KCRV was determined in the course of the key comparison CCM.M-K4. The KCRV for CCM.M-K4 was estimated using the generalized linear least-squares estimation (GLS) value of the results of participating laboratories for the mass of 1 kg transfer standards. The equation describing each comparison measurement for transfer standard can be written as: m A( Labi ) p m0 = i ( m0 m A) + ei, p (3) Where: m A (Lab i ) p : p th value assigned to transfer standard by laboratory i m 0 : nominal mass of transfer standard m A : Mass of transfer standard Δ i : p th value assigned to transfer standard by laboratory i m A (Lab i ) p : Bias of laboratory e i,p : random error associated with the measurement Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 7 of 11

Similarly, the equation for the result of the link laboratory is: m Lab ) K = ( K m ) + e cx ( (4) i i cx i Where: m cx (Lab i )-K: Measured deviation between the link laboratory i and the KCRV at m 0 m cx : GLS mass values of the CCM.M-K4 transfer standards m A : Mass of transfer standard K: Key comparison reference value e i : random error associated with the measurement The known values are m x (Lab i ) p - m 0 and m c (Lab i )-K. To solve these equations, a constraint is required and we choose K -m c =0; so that the value obtained for Δ i from the solution is the expected deviation of the laboratory s result from the KCRV. New correction value for national prototype kilogram (No. 7) given by BIPM is adopted to KRISS reference standard. The results are shown in Table 5 and Figure 3. Table 5 and Figure 3 give the calculated deviations from the KCRV of CCM.M-K4 for both laboratories, together with the associated uncertainties. Table 6 gives the difference in assigned mass values between KRISS and A*STAR, NMC and its uncertainty at 1 kg. Table 5. Deviation from the KCRV (Key Comparison Reference Value of CCM.M-K4) Labs. Difference from (CCM) Expanded uncertainty KCRV / mg (k=),/ mg KRISS -0.01 0.034 A*STAR -0.00 0.050 En no. 0.13* * See equation (6) Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 8 of 11

Figure 3. Mass values assigned by KRISS and A*STAR, NMC with bars representing the expanded uncertainties (Zero value corresponds to the KCRV of CCM.M-K4) Table 6 Difference in assigned mass value between KRISS and A*STAR, NMC and the expanded uncertainty for 1 kg in mg NMIs Difference in assigned mass / mg Expanded uncertainty (k=), U diff / mg A*STAR-KRISS -0.008 0.041 As shown in Table 6, the expanded uncertainty for mass difference between KRISS and A*STAR is obtained by using equation (5); U diff u = ( u = diff A* STAR + u inst. u KRISS (5) ) For check equivalence between both NMIs, En number is calculated by using equation (6) with the results given in Table 5; Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 9 of 11

E n A B = (6) U + U KRISS A* STAR Where: A is the KRISS value from this comparison, B is the A*STAR value from this comparison U KRISS is the expanded uncertainty of KRISS with coverage factor k=, U A*STAR is the expanded uncertainty of A*STAR with coverage factor k=. As a result, En number is 0.1. That means that both NMI s mass value for 1 kg has a good degree of equivalence within the given uncertainty. 8. Conclusion The results of KRISS and A*STAR/NMC are consistent at the nominal mass value of 1 kg. The A*STAR result is also consistent with the KCRV of CCM.M-K4 with k =. This can be seen in Fig. 3 where the expanded uncertainty bar for the result cross each other and the line of zero mass (i.e. the KCRV). Acknowledgments The author wishes to thank Dr. Stuart Davidson, NPL for useful discussions and comments on the manuscript and Mr. Kwang Pyo KIM, KRISS for support and preparation on measurement. Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 10 of 11

References [1] Mutual recognition of national measurement standards and of calibration and measurement certificates issued by national metrology institutes, BIPM, Paris, 14 October 1999. [] Weights of classes E 1, E, F 1, F, M 1, M, M 3, International recommendation OIML R 111, OIML, Paris 004. [3] Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 1993. [4] Veera et al.: Final report on APMP comparison of 1 kg mass standards (APMP.M.M- K1), Metrologia, Tech, Suppl., 41, 07003 (004). [5] C.M. Sutton, Analysis and linking of international measurement comparisons, Metrologia 41, 7-77 (004). [6] Luis Omar Becerra et al.: Final report on CIPM key comparison of 1 kg stainless steel mass standards (CCM.M-K4), Metrologia, Tech, Suppl., 51, 07009 (014). Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 11 of 11