Recommendations for Unified Rules for Key Comparison Evaluation

Abstract:

Key comparison (KC) measurements are the backbone of validating the calibration and measurement capability (CMC) of national metrology institutes (NMIs) against each other. Recommendations providing procedures for the preparation and execution of KCs as well as supplementary comparisons are given. They are justified by mathematical reasoning and by aspects of practical use. Arguments and a formal description of calculating the key comparison reference value (KCRV) by its weighted mean based on the expanded measurement uncertainty expressed by a confidence level of 95 % will be presented. Moreover, it will be explained why the calculation of the normalized error relates to the weighted mean only and why its absolute value for the expanded measurement uncertainty shall be below 1 to pass the equivalence criterion (E_n) of comparability. A deeper discussion is given on how reference values and measurement results shall be treated if few individual measurement results differ significantly from the others. Finally, it will be explained how the proposed style of the graphical presentation of measurement results allows a clear visual interpretation of the comparison. Besides the formal description, numerical examples and diagrams are presented.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volume 613)
• Pages: 26-33
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.613.26
• Online since: May 2014
• Authors: Frank Härtig*, Harald Bosse, Michael Krystek
• Keywords: Comparison, Consistency, Degree of Equivalence, E_n-Number, Reference Value, Weighted Mean

References

[1] BIPM: Mutual recognition of national measurement standards and of calibration and measurement certificates issued by national metrology institutes, BIPM, 1999; http: /www. bipm. org/en/cipm-mra/; (access August 2013).

DOI: 10.1142/9789812811684_0007

[2] BIPM: Guide to the implementation of the CIPM MRA CIPM MRA-G-01 VERSION 1. 1; http: /www. bipm. org/en/cipm-mra/documents/; (access August 2013).

DOI: 10.1299/jsmemecjsm.2005.8.0_540

[3] BIPM: The BIPM key comparison database. http: /kcdb. bipm. org/; (access April 2013).

[4] BIPM: Participation in supplementary comparisons; http: /www. bipm. org/utils/common/pdf/Participation_in_SCs. pdf; (access August 2013).

[5] Lewis A.: Running of MRA comparisons in length metrology and monitoring their impact on CMCs; Guidance Document GD-1; version 6; http: /www. bipm. org/wg/AllowedDocuments. jsp?wg=CCL-WG; (access August 2013).

[6] BIPM: CCL Key Comparison CCL-K1 Measurement of gauge blocks by interferometry Technical protocol; (access August 2013).

[7] BIPM: Measurement comparisons in the CIPM MRA CIPM MRA-D-05 Version 1. 3; (access August 2013).

[8] BIPM: Comparison scheme applied in dimensional metrology; CCL/WG-MRA/GD2; http: /www. bipm. org/wg/CCL/CCL-WG/Allowed/General_CCL-WG_docs/CCL-WG-MRA-GD-2. pdf; (access August 2013).

DOI: 10.1063/1.1754483

[9] Cox M.: The evaluation of key comparison data: determining the largest consistent subset; Metrologia 44 (2007) 187-200.

DOI: 10.1088/0026-1394/44/3/005

[10] ISO/IEC Guide 98-3: 2008 Uncertainty of measurement - Part 3: Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement (GUM: 1995); (2008).

[11] Wöger W.: Remarks on the En-criterion used in measurement comparisons; PTB-Mitteilungen 109, 1/99.

[12] F. E. Grubbs, Procedure for detecting outlying observations in samples; Rechnometrics 11, 1-21; (1969).

[13] ISO 16269-4: 2010; Statistical interpretation of data - part 4: Detection and treatment of outliers.

[14] GraphPad Software; QuickCalcs; http: /www. graphpad. com/quickcalcs/Grubbs1. cfm; (access August 2013).