scholarly journals Metrological Traceability at Different Measurement Levels

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleh Velychko ◽  
Tetyana Gordiyenko
Keyword(s):  
Metrological Traceability

Colorimetric research of self-luminous objects in software and hardware environments by the method of multidimensional scales implementation

2020 ◽  
pp. 43-50
Author(s):  
Yauheniya N. Saukova
Keyword(s):  
Metrological Traceability ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Intermediate Precision ◽  
Technical Vision ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Chromaticity Coordinates ◽  
Unity Of Measurements ◽  
Software And Hardware ◽  
Luminous Objects ◽  
Reference Samples

It is shown that the issues of metrological traceability for extended self-luminous objects with a wide range of brightness have not yet been resolved, since the rank scales of embedded systems are used for processing digital images. For such scales, there is no “fixed” unit, which does not allow you to get reliable results and ensure the unity of measurements. An experiment is described to evaluate the accuracy of determining the intensity (coordinates) of the color of self-luminous objects. In terms of repeatability and intermediate precision compared to the reference measurement method, the color and chromaticity coordinates of self-luminous objects (reference samples) were determined by their multiple digital registration using technical vision systems. The possibilities of the developed methodology for colorimetric studies in hardware and software environments from the point of view of constructing a multidimensional conditional scale are determined.

Problems of ensuring metrological traceability of measurement results of indicators of quality for food products and food raw materials

2020 ◽  
pp. 64-70
Author(s):  
Mariya Y. Medvedevskikh ◽  
Anna S. Sergeeva
Keyword(s):  
Reference Materials ◽  
Mass Fraction ◽  
Nutritional Value ◽  
Animal Feed ◽  
Raw Materials ◽  
Meat Products ◽  
Metrological Traceability ◽  
Food Products ◽  
Freeze Dried ◽  
Measurement Results

The article raises the problem of ensuring metrological traceability of the measurement results of indicators of quality and nutritional value for food products and food raw materials: water (moisture), nitrogen (protein, crude protein), fat, ash and carbohydrates. The problem under consideration can be solved by applying reference materials of food composition, traceable to state primary measurement standards GET 173-2017 and GET 176-2019 and primary reference measurement procedures (PRMP), for attestation of measurement procedures and accuracy checking of measurement results. The article discusses the results of the PRMP development of mass fraction of fat, ash and carbohydrates in food products and food raw materials, as well as mass fraction of crude fat (oil content) in oil crops seeds and products based on them. The paper also presents metrological characteristics of reference materials of composition of dry dairy products, grain-milk dry porridges for nutrition of babies, grain dry porridges for nutrition of babies, egg powder, freeze-dried meat products, animal feed. The results of the work allow for building a chain of metrological traceability from GET 173-2017, GET 176-2019 and PRMP to routine measurement procedures, thereby ensuring the uniformity of measurements of nutritional value of food products.

Misconceptions of Metrology and Calibration

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Herrmann ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Metrological Traceability ◽  
The Other ◽  
Clear Understanding ◽  
New Meanings ◽  
The World ◽  
Definition Of

In today’s world of manufacturing, R&D, and testing across diverse industries, the definition of Metrology and calibration has taken on new meanings, whether it is right or wrong. With the evolving requirements for defining traceability, which is impacted through ISO/IEC 17025: 2017 as well as the NIST’s definition of Metrological Traceability, we must step back and truly understand what the differences are between these 2 terms. In this paper, we will evaluate the definitions of Metrology and calibration. We will also look at the importance of each and how one affects the other. While both terms are important, as liaisons within the Science of Measurement, we need to be able to articulate the differences between both terms to assist in bringing the representatives working in various industries to a clear understanding of how calibration is an action within the world of Metrology.

scholarly journals Metrological traceability for AC High-Voltage in Inmetro up to 40 kV

2016 ◽  
Vol 733 ◽  
pp. 012075
Author(s):  
P C O Vitorio ◽  
V R de Lima ◽  
O Borges Filho ◽  
L A A de Souza ◽  
O W G Asencios
Keyword(s):  
High Voltage ◽  
Metrological Traceability

scholarly journals Documenting metrological traceability as intended by ISO 15189:2012: A consensus statement about the practice of the implementation and auditing of this norm element

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 459-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Thelen ◽  
Florent Vanstapel ◽  
Pika Meško Brguljan ◽  
Bernard Gouget ◽  
Guilaine Boursier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Metrological Traceability ◽  
Measurement Procedure ◽  
Medical Laboratory ◽  
Clinical Samples ◽  
End User ◽  
Worst Case ◽  
Iso 15189 ◽  
Value Assignment ◽  
Traceability Chain ◽  
Medical Laboratories

Abstract ISO15189:2012 requires medical laboratories to document metrological traceability of their results. While the ISO17511:2003 standard on metrological traceability in laboratory medicine requires the use of the highest available level in the traceability chain, it recognizes that for many measurands there is no reference above the manufacturer’s selected measurement procedure and the manufacturer’s working calibrator. Some immunoassays, although they intend to measure the same quantity and may even refer to the same reference material, unfortunately produce different results because of differences in analytical selectivity as manufacturers select different epitopes and antibodies for the same analyte. In other cases, the cause is the use of reference materials, which are not commutable. The uncertainty associated with the result is another important aspect in metrological traceability implementation. As the measurement uncertainty on the clinical samples is influenced by the uncertainty of all steps higher in the traceability chain, laboratories should be provided with adequate and appropriate information on the uncertainty of the value assignment to the commercial calibrators that they use. Although the between-lot variation in value assignment will manifest itself as part of the long-term imprecision as estimated by the end-user, information on worst-case to be expected lot-lot variation has to be communicated to the end-user by the IVD provider. When laboratories use ancillary equipment that potentially could have a critical contribution to the reported results, such equipment needs verification of its proper calibration and criticality to the result uncertainty could be assessed by an approach based on risk analysis, which is a key element of ISO15189:2012 anyway. This paper discusses how the requirement for metrological traceability as stated in ISO15189 should be met by the medical laboratory and how this should be assessed by accreditation bodies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document