Portuguese Institute for Quality. Contents

Similar documents
EURAMET Project no Inter-comparison of a 1000 L proving tank

Final Report EUROMET.M.FF-K4 Euromet Key Comparison for Volume Intercomparison of 100 ml Gay- Lussac Pycnometer

Final Report. SIM / ANDIMET Supplementary Comparison for Volume of Liquids at 100 ml and 100 µl SIM.M.FF-S7

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

EUROMET Project 702 EUROMET.M.D-K4

Interlaboratory Comparison & Proficiency Testing Program

Certificate of Accreditation

Interlaboratory Comparison & Proficiency Testing Program

Physikalisch- Technische Bundesanstalt

A guide to expression of uncertainty of measurements QA4EO-QAEO-GEN-DQK-006

Correlation Effects in the Uncertainty Estimation of Two-Pressure Humidity Generators

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)

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

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

Guide for volume determination within the scope of reference measurement procedures in medical reference measurement laboratories, Part 1

CERTIFICATE OF ACCREDITATION

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

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

Interlaboratory Comparison & Proficiency Testing Program

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

The uncertainty evaluation for the hydrometer calibration at NMISA. Presenter: Bongani Ndlovu Date: 09/10/2018

N) justment. Register your instrument! Eppendorf Research plus. Factory Adjustment

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON OF PLATINUM RESISTANCE THERMOMETERS BETWEEN CHILE AND ECUADOR

EURAMET Project 858: Hydrostatic weighing exchange of experiences. Project outline

Certificate of Accreditation

Traceable Mass Determination and Uncertainty Calculation

SCOPE OF ACCREDITATION TO ISO/IEC 17025:2005 & ANSI/NCSL Z

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

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

Appendix B1. Reports of SMU

PROTOCOL OF MASS AND VOLUME COMPARISONS BETWEEN SIM NMIs

ANNEXE 8. Technical protocols for the interlaboratory comparisons

MASS AND VOLUME COMPARISONS AT MIKES

Montgomery County Community College Document Number: MET DeKalb Pike Revision Number: 1

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

Comparison protocol EURAMET project

Certificate of Accreditation

Design and Validation of an Automated Hydrometers Calibration System

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

The Determination of Uncertainties in Bend Tests on Metallic Materials

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

A bilateral comparison of a 1 kg platinum standard

December 2010 No 036. The electronic Eppendorf Xplorer pipette Versatile adjustment

ISO INTERNATIONAL STANDARD

Establishing traceability and estimating measurement uncertainty in physical, chemical and biological measurements

Project 887 Force Uncertainty Guide. Andy Knott, NPL EUROMET TC-M Lensbury, Teddington, United Kingdom 1 March 2007

Euramet project 1075 Bilateral comparison

Euromet project 691 Calibration Inter-comparison of a 5 litre Volume Standard

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

CERTIFICATE OF ACCREDITATION

Since the publication of the ISO Guide to the Expression

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

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

ISO/TR TECHNICAL REPORT. Determination of uncertainty for volume measurements made using the gravimetric method

Upgrade of 5m-Bench System for Traceable Measurements of Tapes and Rules at SASO-NMCC Dimensional Laboratory

Understanding uncertainties associated with the 5128A RHapid-Cal Humidity Generator

COOMET.M.V-S2 (587/RU-a/12) COOMET SUPPLEMENTARY COMPARISON IN THE FIELD OF MEASUREMENTS OF LIQUIDS KINEMATIC VISCOSITY

Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM) and its supplemental guides

WGFF Guidelines for CMC Uncertainty and Calibration Report Uncertainty

Automated volume measurement for weihts using acoustic volumeter

Report on EURAMET.M.M-S9

Certificate of Accreditation

A laser metroscope for the calibration of setting rings

ISO INTERNATIONAL STANDARD. Paints and varnishes Determination of density Part 3: Oscillation method

Introductions to RIC-Beijing. NAN Xuejing, CUI Xiai Meteorological Observation Center China Meteorological Administration March,2018

Certificate of Accreditation

Revision of the Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement impact on national metrology institutes and industry

TA3 Dosimetry and Instrumentation EVALUATION OF UNCERTAINTIES IN THE CALIBRATION OF RADIATION SURVEY METER POTIENS, MPA 1, SANTOS, GP 1

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

Comparison of V and 10 V DC Voltage References

CALIBRATION PROCESS FOR CTD (Conductivity, Temperature and Depth)

RECENT ILC ACTIVITY IN ROMANIAN MASS MEASUREMENTS

PRIMARY STANDARD AND TRACEABILITY CHAIN FOR MICROFLOW OF LIQUIDS

Precise and Accurate whole Blood Dispensing with Multipette E3x and Combitips advanced

ISO INTERNATIONAL STANDARD. Piston-operated volumetric apparatus Part 7: Non-gravimetric methods for the assessment of equipment performance

Final report Comparison Identifier: APMP.SIM.M.P-K1c Other designation: NIST-NPLI/Pressure/2

Understanding the uncertainties associated with using the 5128A RHapid Cal portable humidity generator

Final report, On-going Key Comparison BIPM.QM-K1, Ozone at ambient level, comparison with NIM, 2008

# 12 ph-titration of Strong Acids with Strong Bases

Densitometers Calibration Sorted? But what about in Service? Dr Norman F Glen NEL

OIML R 141 RECOMMENDATION. Edition 2008 (E) ORGANISATION INTERNATIONALE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION

CHARACTERIZATION OF LPM'S 1-T DEW POINT GENERATOR

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

Technical Procedure for General Laboratory Equipment

Introduction to the evaluation of uncertainty

Practice Lab. Balances and calibration of volumetric tools

by A.Tonina*, R.Iuzzolino*, M.Bierzychudek* and M.Real* S. Solve + R. Chayramy + and M. Stock +

High pressure comparisons between seven European National Laboratories

EA Guidelines on the Calibration of Temperature Indicators and Simulators by Electrical Simulation and Measurement

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

Laboratory Techniques for Small Distilleries

Calibration of Volumetric Glassware. Prepared by Allan Fraser May 2016 APPLICATION Note 1

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

MASS DETERMINATION OF SILICON SPHERES USED FOR THE AVOGADRO PROJECT

ASIA PACIFIC METROLOGY PROGRAME

CALCULATION OF UNCERTAINTY IN CHEMICAL ANALYSIS. A.Gnanavelu

What is measurement uncertainty?

Certificate of Accreditation

Physikalisch Technische Bundesanstalt

STATUS OF THE WIGOS DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS

Transcription:

Instituto Português da PORTUGUESE INSTITUTE FOR QUALITY ualidade Final Report Bilateral comparison of a 500 µl micropipette EUROMET Project no. 1004 IPQ Coordinator of the comparison Elsa Batista September 2007

Contents 1. Introduction...3 2. The instrument...3 3. The method...4 4. The experimental procedure...4 4.1. Equipment...4 4.2. Type of water...4 4.3. Mass standards...5 5. Ambient conditions...5 6. Measurement results...6 6.1 Volume measurements...6 6.2. Determination of the reference value...6 6.3. Degrees of Equivalence...7 7. Uncertainty calculation...8 7.1. Type A and type B standard- uncertainties...8 7.2. Type B uncertainty components...9 8. Conclusions... 10 9. References... 10 Annex 1 Uncertainty components for each laboratory... 11 EUROMET Project Draft B Report 2

1. Introduction During the EUROMET meeting in Istanbul on March 2007, the Bureau of Measurements and Precious Metals of Serbia (ZMDM) manifested the interest to participate in a bilateral comparison in calibration of micropipettes with the Portuguese NMI, IPQ. The main purpose of this project was to compare the results and uncertainties of a calibration of a 500 µl micropipette despite the different used equipment and calibration method. IPQ, acting as the pilot laboratory performed two measurements, one in the beginning and another in the end of the comparison. Table 1 - Participants in the EUROMET project 1004 Country Laboratory Periods Responsible Contact Portugal IPQ July/August Elsa Batista Tel: +351212948167 Email: ebatista@mail.ipq.pt Serbia ZMDM August Branislav Tanasic Tel : + 381112024465 Email: tanasic@szmdm.sv.gov.yu 2. The instrument There are several types of micropipettes, single channel or multichannel. The type suggested for this comparison is the single-channel piston pipette, which is the most common, used in laboratories and easy to handle. The micropipette needs to have attached a removable plastic tip in order to aspirate the liquid. IPQ acting as the pilot laboratory supplied these tips. Micropipettes may be factory-preset to deliver a given volume, or have selectable volumes within a useful volume range (1). In the following figure is described the fixed micropipette used for this comparison made essentially of plastic with a coefficient of thermal expansion of 2,4 10-4 ºC -1 (2). Figure 1- Fixed micropipette EUROMET Project Draft B Report 3

3. The method The used method and model for both laboratories was the one described in ISO 8655-2. 4. The experimental procedure The experimental procedure was also for both laboratories the one described in ISO 8655-2, using 10 repeated measurements, at a reference temperature of 20 ºC. 4.1. Equipment Each laboratory described the equipment used in the calibration. Table 2 Equipment characteristics Balance Type Range Resolution IPQ Electronic (0-22) g 0,001 mg ZMDM Electronic (0-210) g 0,01 mg Water Type Range Resolution thermometer IPQ Digital (-30 to +150) ºC 0,01 ºC ZMDM Glass (+20 to +25) ºC 0,01 ºC Air Type Range Resolution Thermometer IPQ Digital (0 to + 50) 0,1 ºC ZMDM Digital (+10 to +30) ºC 0,01 ºC Barometer Type Range Resolution IPQ Digital (800-1 150) hpa 0,01 hpa ZMDM Digital (800-1 100) hpa 0,01 hpa Hygrometer Type Range Resolution IPQ Digital (0-100) % 0,1% ZMDM Digital (0-100) % 0,1% 4.2. Type of water It was required that the water had a quality suitable for the purpose of the calibration. The participants reported some of the water characteristics in order to be evaluated its quality. EUROMET Project Draft B Report 4

Table 3 Water characteristics Laboratory Type Density reference Conductivity (µs/cm) IPQ Distilled Tanaka 0,046 ZMDM Distilled Tanaka < 0,5 The used water was similar for both participants 4.3. Mass standards Some information about the type of mass standard used was also requested: Table 4 Mass Standards Laboratory OIML Accuracy Class Density (kg/m 3 ) IPQ E2 7 960-8 600 ZMDM E2 7 950 The mass standards were of the same type for both laboratories. 5. Ambient conditions The ambient conditions were described by the participants and they were also very similar: Air Temperature (ºC) Table 5 - Ambient conditions Pressure (hpa) Humidity (%) Air density (g/ml) IPQ 20,5 1 010,15 55,0 0,001 2 ZMDM 20,90 1 001,135 56,3 0,001 18 IPQ 21,5 1 002,20 56,4 0,001 2 EUROMET Project Draft B Report 5

6. Measurement results 6.1 Volume measurements Table 6 Volume measurement results Laboratory Volume (µl) U exp (µl) IPQ-1 497,56 0,51 ZMDM 497,99 0,50 IPQ-2 497,26 0,48 498,9 498,6 498,3 Volume(µl) 498,0 497,7 497,4 497,1 496,8 496,5 IPQ-1 ZMDM IPQ-2 Laboratories Figure 2 Volume measurements 6.2. Determination of the reference value To calculate the reference value of the three results the weighted mean and its uncertainty was used (3) : x = u 2 ( x1 ) +... + xn u ( xn ) ( x ) +... + 1 u ( x ) 2 y 1 2 1 u 2 1 N u( y ) = 1 2 1/ u ( x 2 ) +... + 1/ u ( x ) 1 n EUROMET Project Draft B Report 6

The determined values are y = 497,59 µl and u(y) = 0,29 µl In the next figure it is shown the measurement results with the weighted mean and associated uncertainty. 498,9 498,6 498,3 Volume Weighted mean Expanded uncertainty of the weighted mean Volume(µl) 498,0 497,7 497,4 497,1 496,8 496,5 IPQ-1 ZMDM IPQ-2 Laboratories Figure 3 Participants results with reference value From this figure it can be observed that the volume results are quite close to each other and consistent with the reference value. 6.3. Degrees of Equivalence To calculate the degrees of equivalence between the reference value and the laboratories de following formula is used (3) : and d i = x I - x ref U(d i ) = 2u(d i ), the factor 2 gives 95% coverage under the assumption of normality were u(d i ) is given by u 2 (d i ) = u 2 (x i ) u 2 (x ref ) EUROMET Project Draft B Report 7

Volume (µl) 1,5 1,3 1,1 0,9 0,7 0,5 0,3 0,1-0,1-0,3-0,5-0,7-0,9-1,1-1,3-1,5 IPQ-1 ZMDM IPQ-2 Laboratories Figure 4 Degree of equivalence between laboratories and reference value The degree of equivalence between the laboratories and the reference value is quite good. 7. Uncertainty calculation 7.1. Type A and type B standard- uncertainties The following figure shows the different approaches on the evaluation of measurement uncertainty (4). The standard deviation of the mean from the repeated measurements was taken as the type A contribution for the standard-uncertainty. The type B uncertainty components comprise the combination on the standard-uncertainties of the input variables, mass, air density, water density, mass standards density, expansion coefficient, water temperature and evaporation. The expanded uncertainty for both participants is also presented. EUROMET Project Draft B Report 8

0,6000 0,5000 Type B uncertainty Type A uncertainty Expanded uncertainty Volume (µl) 0,4000 0,3000 0,2000 0,1000 0,0000 IPQ-1 ZMDM IPQ-2 Laboratories Figure 5 Difference between the type A and type B uncertainty In both laboratories the repeatability of the measurements is larger than the type B uncertainty. 7.2. Type B uncertainty components A spreadsheet with the uncertainty components to be considered was supplied. The proposed uncertainty components were: mass, air density, water density, mass standards density, expansion coefficient, water temperature and evaporation. 0,035 Volume (µl) 0,030 0,025 0,020 0,015 0,010 0,005 0,000-0,005-0,010 IPQ-1 ZMDM IPQ-2 Laboratories Mass Mass pieces density Water density Air density Expansion coeficient Temperature Evaporation Figure 6 Type B uncertainty components The larger type B uncertainty for IPQ and ZMDM was the mass. EUROMET Project Draft B Report 9

8. Conclusions This bilateral comparison of a 500 µl micropipette involved IPQ and ZMDM. The volume results are quite similar and consisted with each other and with the reference value. The presented uncertainties are also quite close, with some small differences in the type B components. The uncertainty component that has a major contribution to the final uncertainty was the repeatability of the measurements for both laboratories. 9. References 1. ISO 8655-1/2/6, Piston-operated volumetric apparatus, 1 st ed., Genève, International Organization for Standardization, 2002. 2. ASTM E542: Standard Practice for Calibration of laboratory Volumetric Apparatus, 1 st ed., American Standard, 1 st ed., 2000. 3. M.G. Cox, The evaluation of key comparison data, Metrologia, 2002, Vol. 39, 589-595. 4. BIPM et al, Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM), 2nd ed., International Organization for Standardization, Genève, 1995. EUROMET Project Draft B Report 10

Annex 1 Uncertainty components for each laboratory IPQ -1 Quantity (x i ) Distribution Standard uncertainty u(x i ) Sensitivity coefficient c i Uncertainty u(y i ) Repeatability measurements (µl) 0,25 0,25 Mass (mg) Normal 0,007 1 0,007 Air Density (mg/µl) Rectangular 2,89E-7 4,37+2 1,26E-4 Water Density (mg/µl) Rectangular 1,22E-5E-6-4,99E+2-6,10E-3 Density of the mass pieces (mg/µl) Rectangular 3,46E-2 9,37E-3 3,24E-4 Coefficient of expansion from the micropipette material ( C -1 ) Rectangular 2,89E-6-2,49E+2-7,14E-4 ZMDM Water temperature (ºC) Normal 5E-3-1,19E-1-5,97E-4 Evaporation (µl) Normal 0,004 1 0,004 Quantity (x i ) Distributio n Standard uncertainty u(x i ) Sensitivity coefficient c i Uncertainty u(y i ) Repetibility measurements 0,250 0,250 Mass (mg) Normal 0,029 1 0,029 Air Density (mg/µl) Rectangular 1,43E-07 4,37E+02 6,26E-05 Water Density (mg/µl) Rectangular 1,20E-07-5,00E+02-5,99E-05 Density of the mass pieces (mg/µl) Rectangular 4,0E-02 9,30E-03 3,76E-04 Coefficient of expansion from the micropipette material ( C -1 ) Rectangular 2,89E-06-4,96E+02-1,43E-03 Water temperature (ºC) Normal 1,58E-02-1,20E-01-1,89E-03 EUROMET Project Draft B Report 11

IPQ-2 Quantity (x i ) Distribution Standard uncertainty u(x i ) Sensitivity coefficient c i Uncertainty u(y i ) Repeatability measurements (µl) 0,24 0,24 Mass (mg) Normal 0,007 1 0,007 Air Density (mg/µl) Rectangular 2,89E-7 4,36+2 1,26E-4 Water Density (mg/µl) Rectangular 1,22E-5-4,99E+2-6,10E-3 Density of the mass pieces (mg/µl) Rectangular 3,46E-2 9,25E-3 3,20E-4 Coefficient of expansion from the micropipette material ( C -1 ) Rectangular 2,89E-6-2,49E+2-7,18E-4 Water temperature (ºC) Normal 5E-3-1,19E-1-5,97E-4 Evaporation (µl) Normal 0,004 1 0,004 EUROMET Project Draft B Report 12