Comparison of GUM and Monte Carlo Methods for Measurement Uncertainty Estimation of the Energy Performance Measurements of Gas Stoves

IF 0.8 4区 工程技术 Q4 INSTRUMENTS & INSTRUMENTATION
B. Utomo, N. Kusnandar, H. Firdaus, Intan Paramudita, I. Kasiyanto, Q. Lailiyah, W. Syam
{"title":"Comparison of GUM and Monte Carlo Methods for Measurement Uncertainty Estimation of the Energy Performance Measurements of Gas Stoves","authors":"B. Utomo, N. Kusnandar, H. Firdaus, Intan Paramudita, I. Kasiyanto, Q. Lailiyah, W. Syam","doi":"10.2478/msr-2022-0020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The paper presents the comparison of uncertainty measurement estimations of the energy performances of gas stoves. The Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM) framework and two Monte Carlo Simulation (MCM) approaches: ordinary and adaptive MCM were applied for the energy performance uncertainty: thermal energy and efficiency measurement uncertainties. The validation of the two MCMs is performed by comparing the MCM estimations to the GUM estimations for the thermal energy and efficiency measurement results. A test method designed in Indonesia National Standard SNI 7368:2011 was employed for the thermal energy and efficiency determinations. The results of the GUM and two MCM methods are in good agreement for the estimation of the thermal energy value. Significant differences of the uncertainty estimations for the thermal energy and efficiency results are observed for both GUM and MCM methods. Both the ordinary and adaptive MCM estimations give larger coverage interval compared to the GUM method. The adaptive MCM can give similar estimations with a much lower number of iterations compared to the ordinary MCM. From the estimation difference between the GUM and MCM methods, suggestions are needed for the improvement in measurement models for thermal energy and efficiency of the standard.","PeriodicalId":49848,"journal":{"name":"Measurement Science Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"160 - 169"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Measurement Science Review","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/msr-2022-0020","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INSTRUMENTS & INSTRUMENTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The paper presents the comparison of uncertainty measurement estimations of the energy performances of gas stoves. The Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM) framework and two Monte Carlo Simulation (MCM) approaches: ordinary and adaptive MCM were applied for the energy performance uncertainty: thermal energy and efficiency measurement uncertainties. The validation of the two MCMs is performed by comparing the MCM estimations to the GUM estimations for the thermal energy and efficiency measurement results. A test method designed in Indonesia National Standard SNI 7368:2011 was employed for the thermal energy and efficiency determinations. The results of the GUM and two MCM methods are in good agreement for the estimation of the thermal energy value. Significant differences of the uncertainty estimations for the thermal energy and efficiency results are observed for both GUM and MCM methods. Both the ordinary and adaptive MCM estimations give larger coverage interval compared to the GUM method. The adaptive MCM can give similar estimations with a much lower number of iterations compared to the ordinary MCM. From the estimation difference between the GUM and MCM methods, suggestions are needed for the improvement in measurement models for thermal energy and efficiency of the standard.
燃气炉具能源性能测量不确定度的GUM和Monte Carlo方法比较
摘要本文对燃气灶能源性能的不确定度测量估计进行了比较。测量不确定度表达指南(GUM)框架和两种蒙特卡洛模拟(MCM)方法:普通和自适应MCM被应用于能源性能不确定度:热能和效率测量不确定性。通过将热能和效率测量结果的MCM估计与GUM估计进行比较,对两个MCM进行验证。采用印度尼西亚国家标准SNI 7368:2011中设计的试验方法测定热能和效率。GUM和两种MCM方法的结果对于热能值的估计是一致的。GUM和MCM方法的热能和效率结果的不确定性估计存在显著差异。与GUM方法相比,普通和自适应MCM估计都给出了更大的覆盖区间。与普通MCM相比,自适应MCM可以以低得多的迭代次数给出类似的估计。从GUM和MCM方法之间的估计差异来看,需要对标准的热能和效率测量模型的改进提出建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Measurement Science Review
Measurement Science Review INSTRUMENTS & INSTRUMENTATION-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
11.10%
发文量
37
审稿时长
4.8 months
期刊介绍: - theory of measurement - mathematical processing of measured data - measurement uncertainty minimisation - statistical methods in data evaluation and modelling - measurement as an interdisciplinary activity - measurement science in education - medical imaging methods, image processing - biosignal measurement, processing and analysis - model based biomeasurements - neural networks in biomeasurement - telemeasurement in biomedicine - measurement in nanomedicine - measurement of basic physical quantities - magnetic and electric fields measurements - measurement of geometrical and mechanical quantities - optical measuring methods - electromagnetic compatibility - measurement in material science
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信