scholarly journals The requirements of the international standards on traceability of measurement results at OJSC «BSW – Management Company of Holding «BMC»

Author(s):  
E. V. Borisenko ◽  
I. V. Buyanova

A serious barrier to the sale of products on the market is the trust in organizations that perform measurements during product testing, as well as calibration (verification) of the used measuring instruments. Confidence and recognition of measurement results at the international level is ensured through an accreditation mechanism. To ensure effective functioning at the international level, accreditation organizations enter into a multilateral agreement that provides for the use of common standards in the conduct of accreditation. One of the important requirements of these standards is the implementation and demonstration of metrological traceability, which is a tool for ensuring the uniformity of measurements.

Inventions ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 86
Author(s):  
Vladimir Syasko ◽  
Artem Nikazov

This article is devoted to contemporary topics of ensuring the uniformity of Leeb hardness measurements. The analysis of the physical principles of the Leeb hardness test is carried out, and the influence of the measuring transducer parameters on the measurement results is investigated. A four-level structure of the calibration hierarchy for the Leeb hardness scales is proposed, which ensures metrological traceability of hardness scales from the calibration reference machines (CRMs) to measuring instruments. A list of requirements for the 2nd grade CRM and the 2nd grade Leeb reference test blocks are formulated in accordance with the proposed calibration hierarchy draft and their values are calculated. A prototype was developed and a model of the 2nd grade Leeb hardness CRM and a set of Leeb reference test blocks were manufactured, as well as the compliance of their metrological characteristics with the requirements of the proposed calibration hierarchy draft and international standards was confirmed. The results of this work allow us to ensure the uniformity and reliability of the Leeb hardness measurements.


2020 ◽  
pp. 40-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. M. Dziabenko

When organizing metrological activity at an enterprise, the question arises of the need to organize verification (metrological confirmation) of measuring equipment that is not used in the field of legislatively regulated. In the international standards «Quality Management Systems» (ISO 9001, EN 9100, AQAP-2110), to ensure that the requirements of Section 7.1.5 «Resources for Monitoring and Measurement» are met, the requirement is established that all measuring equipment, as part of a measurement management system, must have metrological confirmation in accordance with the requirements of ISO 10012. Metrological confirmation provides for the calibration and verification of measuring equipment. Laboratory specialists who carry out metrological confirmation of measuring instruments, establish a relationship between the values of the values that provide the standards, and the result of measuring this quantity using measuring instruments (carry out calibration), based on this ratio establish the conformity / non-compliance of the measuring instruments with the established requirements (carry out verification) and draw up the corresponding supporting document. After comparing the concepts of metrological confirmation and verification of measuring instruments, we can conclude that metrological confirmation (calibration and verification) of measuring equipment is essentially nothing more than verification of measuring instruments. Metrological activities to ensure the uniformity of measurements in enterprises should comply with the requirements of ISO 10012: 2003. This standard establishes general requirements and contains recommendations for the management of measurement processes and metrological confirmation of the suitability of measuring equipment, which is used to maintain and demonstrate compliance with metrological requirements. Compliance with the requirements set forth in the ISO 10012 standard makes it possible to ensure compliance with the measurement requirements and the management of measurement processes established by the international standards «Quality Management Systems».


Metrologiya ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 46-71
Author(s):  
V. F. Romanovskiy ◽  
A. M. Romanovskaya ◽  
E. A. Nenasheva

The problems of ensuring the unity of non-invasive blood pressure measurements are considered. It is shown that the artery and surrounding tissues of the body serve as a means of comparing the values of blood pressure and air pressure in the cuff, and that the metrological traceability of measurement results to pressure standards only partially determines the reliability of these results. The potential possibilities of the surface pulse wave method in comparison with the Korotkov tone method are estimated.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergey Assonov

<p>For stable isotope data sets to be compared or combined in biogeochemical studies, their compatibility must be well understood. For δ13C measurements in greenhouse gases, the WMO GAW program has set compatibility targets of 0.010 ‰ for atmospheric CO2 and 0.020 ‰ for atmospheric methane (in background air studies [1, 2]). The direct comparison of samples between laboratories can provide limited information, such as a snapshot for a specific time period, but combining data sets produced over decades requires more efforts. To produce high quality data, reliable calibrations must be made, mutually consistent values of reference materials (RMs) must be used, and a traceability scheme that ensures low uncertainty must be implemented.</p><p>The VPDB δ13C scale provides example of approaches developed recently. Several problems with the existing implementation of the VPDB scale have been identified between 2009-2016 [3]: the primary reference material (RM) NBS19 was exhausted and needed to be replaced; the δ13C of LSVEC (used to anchor the VPDB scale at negative δ13C) was found to be drifting and its use as a RM for δ13C was discontinued [4]; other RMs that were available in 2016 (e.g., NBS18) were not able to be used to develop new RMs as their uncertainties were too large. Given that the VPDB scale is artefact-based and not supported by absolute ratio measurements with uncertainty as low as required, the principles of value assignments on the VPDB scale were needed to be revised.</p><p>To ensure that a revised scheme did not encounter similar problems (with dependence on a single scale-anchor), several fundamental metrological principles were considered: (i) traceability of measurement results to the primary RM, (ii) a hierarchy of calibrators and (iii) comprehensive understanding of measurement method(s) [5]. The revised VPDB scheme [3] was applied to the new primary RM [6] and three RMs covering a large δ13C range (to negative values) [7]. Values were assigned in a mutually consistent way, with uncertainties ranging from 0.010 to 0.015 ‰, depending on the assigned δ13C. Each RM value has an uncertainty assigned that includes all known instrumental corrections, potential alterations due to storage, and inhomogeneity assessment [6,7]. The scheme allows for the δ13C range to be expanded by developing new carbonate RMs, and to be extended to matrix-based RMs.</p><p>The revised VPDB δ13C scale realization should lead to a robust basis for improving data compatibility. The developed framework can be applied to other measurements of biogeochemical interest, such as small 17O variations (in H2O, carbonates and other samples), clumped isotopes, and various paleoclimate reconstructions. Notably, the traceability principle is helpful in realistic uncertainty estimations which provide a tool to understand constrains and limiting steps in data comparisons.</p><p>REFERENCES:  [1]. WMO, GAW Report No.229. 2016. [2]. WMO, GAW Report No.242. 2018. [3]. Assonov, S. et al., RCM, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcm.9018. [4]. IUPAC, Press release of the IUPAC meeting in 2017, https://iupac.org/standard-atomic-weights-of-14-chemical-elements-revised/. [5]. De Bievre, P. et al., PURE APPL CHEM, 2011. <strong>83</strong>(10): p. 1873-1935. [6]. Assonov, S., et al., RCM, 2020: p. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcm.8867. [7]. Assonov, S. et al., RCM, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcm.9014</p>


2019 ◽  
Vol 102 (6) ◽  
pp. 1695-1707
Author(s):  
Zhen Guo ◽  
Xianjiang Li ◽  
Hongmei Li

Abstract In the past decade, with the signing of the joint declaration by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM), the International Organisation of Legal Metrology, the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation, and the International Organization for Standardization, and the issuing of new international standards such as ISO/IEC 17025 and ISO 13528, metrological traceability has become more and more important for the mutual recognition of measurement results. It is found that the important factors for ensuring the accuracy of results are not only relevant to calibrants but also to the analysis procedure. This paper focuses on the analysis of key factors that affect measurement results, such as analytical methods, reference materials (RMs), and proficiency testing of mycotoxins. The Capacity Building and Knowledge Transfer Programme for mycotoxins, led by the BIPM, which aims to establish a global measurement system traced to the Système International d’Unités (SI), is well illustrated. Furthermore, this paper suggests to stakeholders that great effort is needed to promote the effective use of certified RM resources that are traced to the SI and globally recognized by the International Committee for Weights and Measures to finally realize “one measurement, global recognition.”


2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 40-40
Author(s):  
Brynn Hibbert

Abstract I first met René when the IUPAC General Assembly came to Brisbane Australia in 2001. IUPAC was not an organization I (then) knew much about, but I found myself confronted by Paul De Bièvre demanding that I join a task group on metrological traceability. At the time I would not have called myself a metrologist in chemistry (MiC) or in any other field. The great minds assembled for the project were Paul De Bièvre, René Dybkaer, Ales Fajgelj, and me. I had no idea that our task would take ten years (finally published as De Bièvre, P.; Dybkaer, R.; Fajgelj, A.; Hibbert, D. B.: Metrological traceability of measurement results in chemistry: Concepts and implementation (IUPAC Technical report) Pure Appl. Chem. 2011, 83, 1873-1935), and that during the time I would come to form strong friendships with my comrades in the “Gang of Four.” Paul is no longer with us and now René has left the stage.


2009 ◽  
Vol 55 (6) ◽  
pp. 1067-1075 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hubert W Vesper ◽  
Linda M Thienpont

Abstract Background: In patient and population samples, generation of analytical results that are comparable and independent of the measurement system, time, and location is essential for the utility of laboratory information supplied in healthcare. Obtaining analytical measurement results with such characteristics is the aim of traceability in laboratory medicine. As awareness of the benefits of having traceable measurement results has increased, associated efforts have been directed toward making traceability a regulatory requirement and developing approaches to enable and facilitate the implementation of traceability. Although traceability has been a main focus of many laboratory standardization activities in the past, discussions are still ongoing with regard to traceability and its implementation. Content: This review provides information about the traceability concept and what needs can be fulfilled and benefits achieved by the availability of traceable measurement results. Special emphasis is given to the new metrological terminology introduced with this concept. The review addresses and describes approaches for technical implementation of traceable methods as well as the associated challenges. Traceability is also discussed in the context of other activities to improve the overall measurement process. Summary: Establishing metrological traceability of measurement results satisfies basic clinical and public health needs, thus improving patient care and disease control and prevention. Large advances have been made to facilitate the implementation of traceability. However, details in the implementation process, such as lack of available commutable reference materials and insufficient resources to develop new reference measurement systems continue to challenge the laboratory medicine community.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document