Philipp Koskarti

Similar documents
ISP. ISSS Round Robin 2014 Evaluation and interpretation of the general results. ISSS Task Group. Institut für Sportstättenprüfung

Analysis of interlaboratory comparison when the measurements are not normally distributed

Scoring systems for quantitative schemes what are the different principles?

Schedule for a proficiency test

Homogeneity of EQA samples requirements according to ISO/IEC 17043

Document No: TR 12 Issue No: 1

OA03 UNCERTAINTY OF MEASUREMENT IN CHEMICAL TESTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STANDARD SIST EN ISO/IEC Table of contents

CHEK Proficiency study 642. Migration of formaldehyde from melamine kitchenware. Date 7 July 2016 Version 1 Status Final Report number CHEK

MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY PREPARED FOR ENAO ASSESSOR CALIBRATION COURSE OCTOBER/NOVEMBER Prepared by MJ Mc Nerney for ENAO Assessor Calibration

The AAFCO Proficiency Testing Program Statistics and Reporting

Analytische Qualitätssicherung Baden-Württemberg

CHEK Proficiency study 644. Solvents in adhesive. Date 15 October 2016 Version 1 Status Final Report number CHEK

Analytische Qualitätssicherung Baden-Württemberg

R SANAS Page 1 of 7

Analytische Qualitätssicherung Baden-Württemberg

Results of Proficiency Test Rubber/Compounds May 2005

Validation and Standardization of (Bio)Analytical Methods

Analytische Qualitätssicherung Baden-Württemberg

ASTM D3803 Precision and Bias for New Versus Used Activated Carbon, Revisited

Results of Proficiency Test OPP, PCP and TeCP in textile December 2016

Practical Statistics for the Analytical Scientist Table of Contents

Quality assurance of analytical measurements of CO2 parameters. Andrew G. Dickson

NVLAP Proficiency Test Round 14 Results. Rolf Bergman CORM 16 May 2016

Provläsningsexemplar / Preview INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO Second edition

ŞİŞLİ-İSTANBUL. NİŞANTAŞI-İSTANBUL

Analytische Qualitätssicherung Baden-Württemberg

European Brewery Convention

The 1 st International Round-Robin on Bi-Facial Modules

Basic Statistics. 1. Gross error analyst makes a gross mistake (misread balance or entered wrong value into calculation).

Participants in the Proficiency Test THM 02/2016

ISO/TS TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION. Water quality Guidance on analytical quality control for chemical and physicochemical water analysis

A case study on how to maintain confidence of thermal properties test: Thermal conductivity of building insulation materials

ISO INTERNATIONAL STANDARD. Statistical methods for use in proficiency testing by interlaboratory comparisons

CHEK Proficiency study 664. Solvents in adhesive. Date 3 July 2017 Version 1. Report number CHEK Final CHEK proficiency study July 2017

CHEK Proficiency study 671. CMI, MI and free formaldehyde in body lotion. Date 30 November 2017 Version 1. Report number CHEK

Proficiency testing: Aqueous ethanol. Test and measurement Workshop Marcellé Archer. 20 September 2011

Method Validation and Accreditation

Reference Materials and Proficiency Testing. CropLife International Meeting October 2015 Gina M. Clapper

Proficiency Test on Radiological Characterization of irradiated graphite

RILEM inter-laboratory test on binder rheology test methods DSR and BBR.

Biol/Chem 4900/4912. Forensic Internship Lecture 5

Review Inter-laboratory studies in analytical chemistry. Edelgard Hund, D.Luc Massart, Johanna Smeyers-Verbeke

Laboratoria De Nayer

Error Analysis. The big questions are: - What value best represents a set of measurements and how reliable is it?

J. Dairy Sci. 99:

Statistics: Error (Chpt. 5)

Results of Proficiency Test Benzene & Toluene March 2017

Measurement Uncertainty Principles and Implementation in QC

CALIBRATION CERTIFICATE # 503

Sources of variability in measuring aflatoxin and the role of sampling

Measurement uncertainty revisited Alternative approaches to uncertainty evaluation

Protocol for the design, conducts and interpretation of collaborative studies (Resolution Oeno 6/2000)

The Role of Proficiency Tests in the Estimation of Measurement Uncertainty of PCDD/PCDF and PCB Determination by Isotope Dilution Methods

Results of Proficiency Test Phthalates in Plastics May 2015

Basic Statistics. 1. Gross error analyst makes a gross mistake (misread balance or entered wrong value into calculation).

Measurement Uncertainty in Mechanical Testing

Analysis For quality control the reference material is analysed at the same time and in the same manner as other samples.

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

Use of a ISO template for quantitative schemes : the issues. Annette Thomas

Results of the 2015 national indoor radon intercomparison measurements in Serbia

A basic introduction to reference materials. POPs Strategy

Reproducibility within the Laboratory R w Control Sample Covering the Whole Analytical Process

An examination of some aspects of the use of ISO 140 Part 4 and 7 in field measurements.

THE FIFTH INTERNATIONAL RADIOCARBON INTERCOMPARISON (VIRI): AN ASSESSMENT OF LABORATORY PERFORMANCE IN STAGE 3

Laboratory ID. Laboratory Name. Address. Phone. Lab Manager/Supervisor. QA Officer. Analyst(s) Auditor. Date(s) of Audit

A critical view on ISO standard 13528

It is important that the batch numbers of the reference material and on the certificate are identical.

SWGDRUG GLOSSARY. Independent science-based organization that has the authority to grant

Dust and Gas Stack Emission Proficiency Tests

Inter-laboratory study for tetracyclines in poultry muscle

1.11 Measurement Uncertainty

TRACEABILITY STRATEGIES FOR THE CALIBRATION OF GEAR AND SPLINE ARTEFACTS

1 Introduction. 2 Materials and methods. A. Rachidi 1,,N.Oualit 2,A.Touti 2, G. Duflos 3,L.Noël 4, and P. Caillaud 5

Ivo Leito University of Tartu

Towards a fully LED-based solar simulator - spectral mismatch considerations

Uncertainty of Measurement (Analytical) Maré Linsky 14 October 2015

A laser metroscope for the calibration of setting rings

Measurement And Uncertainty

It is important that the batch numbers of the reference material and on the certificate are identical.

Method Verification. The How M.L. Jane Weitzel ALACC Chair

APPENDIX G EVALUATION OF MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY

Introduction to the evaluation of uncertainty

TEST-LOCATION SPECIFICATION BY MEANS OF HARDNESS MAPPING ON VICKERS BLOCK SURFACE

Precision estimated by series of analysis ISO and Approach Duplicate Approach

Worldwide Open Proficiency Test for X Ray Fluorescence Laboratories PTXRFIAEA13. Determination of Major, Minor and Trace Elements in a Clay Sample

03.1 Experimental Error

Waste Oil 2010 Round Robin

Analysis For quality control the reference material is analysed at the same time and in the same manner as other samples.

Laboratório Nacional de Engenharia Civil

Statistical Reports in the Magruder Program

Method Validation. Role of Validation. Two levels. Flow of method validation. Method selection

Sample Homogeneity Testing

EN-TRAP. The European Network of Testing Facilities for the Quality Checking of Radioactive Waste Packages

Practical Experiences in Climatic Testing

Development of a harmonised method for specific migration into the new simulant for dry foods established in Regulation 10/2011

APPENDIX G ESTIMATION OF UNCERTAINTY OF MEASUREMENT

Validation Scheme for Qualitative Analytical Methods

Harris: Quantitative Chemical Analysis, Eight Edition CHAPTER 03: EXPERIMENTAL ERROR

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

Results of the inter-laboratory comparison exercise for TC and EC measurements (ref.: OCEC ) SUMMARY 2 1 ORGANIZATION 3

Transcription:

Österreichisches Forschungsinstitut für Chemie und Technik Austrian Research Institute for Chemistry and Technology ISSS round robin 2010 BIOENERGIE Philipp Koskarti 21.10.2010

content Introduction Details of the RR Determination of vertical ball behaviour (EN 12235:2004) Determination of vertical deformation (EN 14809:2005) Determination of shock absorption (EN 14808:2005) Results / Evaluation Conclusions Source: ACT Global Sports

Why round robin tests? Ring tests, Round robin tests (one and the same sample), interlaboratory comparison tests, proficiency test Evaluation of the performance of the participating laboratories (ISO/IEC-Guide 43-1) Evaluation of the precision of the test methods (ISO 5725) Estimation of measurement uncertainty Identification of troubles Support for accredited laboratories (audits)

Work flow of the round robin (part 1) single determination 1, 2,... single determination 1, 2,... single determination 1, 2,... Repeatablility conditions Reproducibility conditions Mean value = result Test No. 1 Mean value x i and Std.-dev. s i z-score Mean value = result Test No. 2 Test result Lab. Code-No. a Test result Lab. Code-No. b Test result Lab. Code-No. c Mean value = result Test No. 3 x * and s * robust statistics

z - score "z-score" x i... Test result of the laboratory i x*... robust mean value z ( x i s * x*) s*... robust standard deviation z 1 the performance of the laboratory is very good 1 < z 2 the performance of the laboratory is satisfactory 2 < z 3 the performance of the laboratory is questionable z > 3 the performance of the laboratory is unsatisfactory

Work flow of the round robin (part 2) All mean values x i and Std.-Dev. s i Mean values x x and s x outlayertests for x i and s i Poss. outlayers (z >2) excluded Gaussian (normal) distribution? 'general mean' m Repeatability variance s r 2 Variance between the laboratories s L 2 Reproducibility variance s R 2

precision of the test method precision of the test method calculation of - Repeatability standard deviation s r and repeatability limit r (same laboratory) - Reproducibility standard deviation s R and reproducibility limit R (between different laboratories, s r is included in this calculation) from test results of - plenty of laboratories - by the use of a standardized test method

repeatability repeatability for calcualtion of the repeatability the tests have to be repeated within the same laboratory (under repeatability conditions) the smaller the ratio of s r /s*, the fewer replications are necessary to achieve a reliable robust mean value

reproducibility reproducibility can only be calculated by participating in a round robin test is high - if all laboratories achieve a comparable repeatability and - the variance of the general mean m is low is the crucial factor to provide confidence in test results is appropriate to calculate the expanded measurement uncertainty

accuracy precision High accuracy, low precision low accuracy, high precision

expanded measurement uncertainty expanded measurement uncertainty on basis of the reproducibility (a round robin is the only way to obtain this value) acc. ISO/TS 21748:2004 the calculation of the expanded measurement uncertainty U is simple and uncomplex: (U = k s R ) coverage factor k usually k = 2 level of confidence for U is 95

Results (part 1) Determination of vertical ball behaviour - SS1 - hockeyball - R EN 12235 Results submitted by participants and Results of robust statistics i.e., individual results x ik (bottom part of the table) + number of the test repetitions made by each lab (n i ) + within laboratory means (x i ) and standard deviations (s i ) Number of reporting laboratories p *: 16 + results of tests for outliers Number of reported test results n i : 32 Lab Test results in Statistical evaluation of the Outliers Code Test replication No. (k ) submitted test results x ik No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 n i x i s i 627 39,18 38,70 2 38,940 0,3394 X 520 39,38 39,46 2 39,420 0,0566 ** X 439 112,54 108,94 2 110,740 2,5456 136 116,40 115,20 2 115,800 0,8485 938 117,00 116,20 2 116,600 0,5657 238 116,42 117,54 2 116,980 0,7920 565 118,32 120,70 2 119,510 1,6829 872 121,00 121,20 2 121,100 0,1414 812 122,68 121,36 2 122,020 0,9334 99 121,20 126,62 2 123,910 3,8325 362 128,24 127,92 2 128,080 0,2263 * 464 129,08 130,26 2 129,670 0,8344 747 131,50 131,50 2 131,500 0,0000 279 135,60 136,58 2 136,090 0,6930 438 135,98 137,62 2 136,800 1,1597 250 164,22 163,34 2 163,780 0,6223 ** X 178 no results reported X 66 no results reported X Robust average: x * =. 122,33 Robust standard deviation for the proficiency assessment: s * =. 11,863 Number of repeate measurements necessary due to s r /s* -ratio: n ' =. 1 OK Standard uncertainty of the assigned value: u x =. 3,70704 NOT OK **... statistical outlier (99) *... straggler (95) X... z > 2; in this case, x i is considered to be an outlier and is not taken into account in the test method accuracy check Cochran Grubbs assigned value for the. proficiency assessment z > 2 see page 4 for the meaning of NOT OK

Results (part 2) Additional check of the test method accuracy Do the input data come from a normal distribution (when outliers found were eliminated)? (The results listed below shall be considered as really justified only if the input data come from a normal distribution) General mean n i x ik / n i. Repeatability variance Repeatability standard deviation Repeatability coefficient of variation Between-laboratory variance m 2 s r s r CV r 2 s L 123,75 2,2408615 1,49695 1,210 65,0355949 Between-laboratory standard deviation 8,06446 Between-laboratory coefficient of variation 2. Reproducibility variance s R Reproducibility standard deviation Reproducibility coefficient of variation Repeatability limit Relative repeatability limit Reproducibility limit Relative reproducibility limit Number of participants included in the accuracy evaluation Number of tests included in the accuracy evaluation CV L 2 s r + s 2 L s R CV R r r rel R R rel p n 6,517 67,2764564 8,20222 6,628 4,19 3,4 22,97 18,6 13 26 s L YES

Results (part 3) Determination of vertical ball behaviour - SS1 - hockeyball - R 140 135 130 125 120 Result out of scale Result out of scale 115 110 105 627 520 439 136 938 238 565 872 812 99 362 464 747 279 438 250 178 66 Lab Code No. ( x* ) (±s* ) ( m )

Results (part 4) 3,0 z-score 2,5 7,0 7,0 3,5 2,0 1,5 1,0 0,5 0,0 627 520 439 136 938 238 565 872 812 99 362 464 747 279 438 250 178 66 Lab Code No.

Results (part 5) Determination of vertical ball behaviour - SS - hockeyball - R 200 180 160 250 140 120 submitted results confidence ellipse 95 mean value (A) mean value ± 2s (A) mean value (B) mean value ± 2s (B) x*(a); x*(b) random error direction systematic error direction 100 SS2 80 60 40 520 627 20 22 42 62 82 102 122 142 162 182 202 SS1

Results (part 6) Determination of vertical ball behaviour (EN 12235:2004) SS1 SS2 ST3 ST4 r rel [] R rel [] hockeyball 3,4 18,6 football 2,2 4,2 basketball 2,3 5,3 hockeyball 5,9 20,0 football 2,6 2,8 basketball 3,0 5,8 hockeyball 8,9 22,8 football 3,3 11,6 basketball 3,1 18,4 hockeyball 23,3 41,0 football 11,0 16,8 basketball 9,2 24,7 In comparing two test results for the same material obtained by different operators using different equipment on different days, those test result should be judged as not equivalent if they differ by more than the R-value.

conclusions benefit of the participation in round robin tests maybe changes of conditions (e.g. only one ball) additional test methods??? Slip Resistance Scale and Deceleration Dynamic friction Rotational Resistance maybe different fees for members of ISSS and nonmembers

Thank you for your attention! ofi Österreichisches Forschungsinstitut für Chemie und Technik Franz-Grill Str. 5, Arsenal Objekt 213 A-1030 Wien Tel.: +43-1-7981601-970 Fax: +43-1-7981601-480