NCSL International Workshop & Symposium Conference Proceedings 2013最新文献

{"title":"A Transportable Josephson Voltage Standard","authors":"John Ball","doi":"10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.16","url":null,"abstract":"The Army has actively participated in the development and application of quantum voltage standards since the US practical Volt was redefined by NIST in terms of the Josephson Effect in 1972. An Army-led collaborative effort resulted in the commercialization of Josephson array technology in the mi-1990s. Today, the Josephson Effect defines the SI representation of the Volt and Josephson-based systems serve as standards in national metrology institutes and primary laboratories throughout the world. An Army effort is currently underway to make quantum voltage metrology systems practical for use outside the primary standards laboratory by making them more robust, simpler to operate, and eliminating the requirement for liquid helium. The first prototype of a more practical quantum voltage standard is currently being tested at the Army Primary Standards Laboratory (APSL) in Alabama. The new voltage standard is compact, transportable, self-contained, and cryogenically-cooled. This paper describes the prototype and the results of performance tests, including indirect comparisons to the Army primary Josephson voltage standard.","PeriodicalId":445779,"journal":{"name":"NCSL International Workshop & Symposium Conference Proceedings 2013","volume":"7 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120901692","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Inter-Laboratory Comparison Study Using Modular Instrumentation and Lesson Learned","authors":"Dimaries Nieves","doi":"10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.15","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.15","url":null,"abstract":"An inter-laboratory comparison (ILC) is a key criterion for laboratory accreditation. The ILC process is also an important asset in reliability, measurement assurance, and staff confidence. ILCs are conducted to evaluate reference standards, calibration process, a measurement method, or a combination of these elements. The use of new and emerging technologies in the metrology laboratories is also impacted by ILCs. This paper studies the use of Modular Instrument as standards in an ILC, providing insight into process to establish confidence in their performance in a measurement environment. Modular Instruments have shown strong growth, taking market share in the core of many automated applications. Due a variety of factors, there is growing evidence suggesting that the industry is transitioning into a new phase, an unsettling shift where open system modular architectures become the mainstream choice for automated test. In many applications users have a choice between deploying modular instruments, traditional instruments, or combination of the two. In this context, modular instruments are largely a substitution for their traditional counterparts. Calibrating the measurement components of a modular instrument is just an important as calibration of traditional instruments. Introducing modular instrumentation in the metrology and laboratory accreditation process means that comparisons are needed to demonstrate performance and competence in performing regular measurement services. National Instruments piloted an ILC using modular instrumentation with the goal of evaluating the comparability of the results and the competence of making measurements between the several laboratories. To ensure appropriate of measurement evaluation occurred, results included the verification of the reported measurement uncertainties. During the process valuable lessons were learned for conducting this study. These have included identification of systematic offsets and additional sources of variation in the process. This paper reviews the comparison to date, drawing conclusions from the findings and making proposals for future inter-comparison using Modular Instrumentation.","PeriodicalId":445779,"journal":{"name":"NCSL International Workshop & Symposium Conference Proceedings 2013","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114537418","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Mass Calibration with Robotic Mass Comparators","authors":"Mark Kliebenschaedel","doi":"10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.19","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.19","url":null,"abstract":"A robotic mass comparator is very productive, reliable and accurate piece of equipment which is used for the calibration of weights by national institutes, calibration laboratories and weights producers to calibrate all weight classes from the smallest available weight, starting from 0.05mg, up to 20kg. Performance and reliability on the one hand, productivity on the other, are of concern to metrologists. To meet their requirements, many factors have to be considered from the operator side as well as from the manufacturer side. This paper gives an overview of robotic systems, the ideal operation and the relevant factors which have to be taken into consideration.","PeriodicalId":445779,"journal":{"name":"NCSL International Workshop & Symposium Conference Proceedings 2013","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114730045","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Simple Approach to LEAN in the Laboratory?","authors":"Dean S. Williams","doi":"10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.28","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.28","url":null,"abstract":"Whether a commercial calibration laboratory or an in-house corporate laboratory, and whether we like it or not, the realities of today's economy demand we embrace continuous improvement efforts. But how do you go about it? Where do you start? And where do you find the time, resources, budget and most importantly the corporate backing to undertake a comprehensive process improvement program? The author describes his Lab's journey through the continuous process improvement maze, why LEAN became the next logical step for the Duke Energy Lab, and why you don't need to have a black belt in LEAN-SIX SIGMA to get started. The author provides a simple primer on the background and principles of LEAN. The seemingly complex collection of Japanese words and ideas will be demystified and the difference between words like Muda, Mura, and Muri, or Kanban, Kaizen, and Kaikaku will be explained in plain English. Value Stream Mapping and how it can help you spot areas for improvement will be described, and why the concept of Pull is so important to reducing inventory and turn-times. The author then details a few of the specific LEAN initiatives that were designed and implemented at the Duke Energy Standards Lab, showing how these initiatives reduced waste, improved effectiveness of the overall operation, and provided the customer with a higher level of service with no additional man-power resources and little out of pocket costs. Finally the author provides some resources and helpful hints for implementing LEAN in a simple and effective way.","PeriodicalId":445779,"journal":{"name":"NCSL International Workshop & Symposium Conference Proceedings 2013","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130425592","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"SCARs, CARs, NCRs, CAPAs, and Complaints - What's it all mean??","authors":"Harry C Spinks","doi":"10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.22","url":null,"abstract":"ISO 17025 requires an accredited lab to have a program for (4.8) Complaints, (4.9) Nonconforming work (NCR), (4.11) Corrective Actions, and (4.12) Preventative Actions (CAPA). But what does that mean? And how does that impact the lab and the customers (you)?One of the benefits of ISO 17025 accreditation is the requirement of the lab to provide good, if not great, customer service. Your organization does not need an ISO certification or accreditation to adopt these processes to improve quality. The purpose of this paper is to present a basic understanding of the process for resolving customer issues and non-conformances within an organization • particularly the calibration or test lab accredited to ISO 17025.","PeriodicalId":445779,"journal":{"name":"NCSL International Workshop & Symposium Conference Proceedings 2013","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128006280","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Calibration and Specification Considerations When Using Modular Instrumentation","authors":"Michael Dobbert","doi":"10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.23","url":null,"abstract":"Calibration and Specification Considerations When Using Modular Instrumentation. Modular instrumentation, such as PXI or AXIe modular instruments, offers significant configuration flexibility, plus interchangeability, speed, and size advantages when it comes to deploying measurement systems. However, the architecture that enables these advantages also presents unique challenges when calibrating modular instruments. Calibration often occurs outside of the use environment. For modular instrumentation, this may mean performing calibration on a module with a different chassis and its related electronics. Additionally, the module’s ambient environmental conditions depend upon chassis fan speed, the use of slot blockers and EMC filler panels and the presence of other modules. The operating software and CPU for modular instruments are contained outside the module in an external computer, which may not travel with the module for calibration. Modular instrumentation may require multiple modules configured together to provide measurement capability. This may require calibration on the set of modules as a system or, a method to relate system level performance to the calibrated performance of individual modules. These issues affect both the calibration and the calibration report and influence how manufacturers may define specifications for modular instrumentation. This paper examines these issues in detail and considers both in situ calibration and calibration performed outside the use environment. Recommended is information to be included on the measurement report that is unique to calibration of modular instrumentation. Addressed are the requirements for assuring the ability to make traceable measurements using calibrated modular instrumentation.","PeriodicalId":445779,"journal":{"name":"NCSL International Workshop & Symposium Conference Proceedings 2013","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123498170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Process Accuracy vs Process Uncertainty (Risk Mitigation: Calibration and the Customer’s Process)","authors":"Jeremy Sims","doi":"10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.45","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.45","url":null,"abstract":"The requirements for the process accuracy may be dictated by the requirements of the expected output of the process or product. The ratio between the process accuracy (i.e., the acceptance limits of the manufacturing process, or it could be the product itself) and the instrument accuracy (i.e., the equipment used to measure the process) is the Process Accuracy Ratio (PAR). Just as a calibration standard’s accuracy is an incomplete representation of a calibration process, the sole use of accuracies of the manufacturing measurement process may omit large errors that could change the outcome of the measurement or test. The measuring process can be impacted by many factors. We will define the inclusion of possible sources of error as uncertainty components of the process and thus more exactly define the ratio as the Process Uncertainty Ratio (PUR).Calibration laboratories have the same need to determine the uncertainties of their measurement processes. An important part of metrological traceability is uncertainty and a good measurement assurance program. We have to build an uncertainty budget for the measurement process whether it relates to calibration of instruments or the use of instruments to measure a manufacturing process or the end product. Metrology laboratories that are accredited to ISO17025 are required to calculate the uncertainties of their calibration processes. In a similar manner, you can demonstrate that all the possible components of error are accounted for when determining the process uncertainty. Questions that should be asked: What possible components of error will affect my output or product (time, atmospheric conditions, uncertainty of the calibration performed on the instrument I am using, proper use of the instrument upon which pass/fail decisions are being made, et.al.)? What is the potential risk involved if the process isn’t evaluated for potential components of error? We may find that the accuracy of the instrument used to measure the process may not be the biggest contributor of error in the process. Once we determine the potential errors, we can begin to eliminate as much of that error as possible through statistical process control (SPC) or other means. As the customer of calibration services, it is your responsibility to ensure the calibration received supports your process requirements and that you take into account all sources of error when using instruments to make decisions about your manufacturing processes or concerning your product’s quality.","PeriodicalId":445779,"journal":{"name":"NCSL International Workshop & Symposium Conference Proceedings 2013","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125106548","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Updated Evaluation of Calibration Test Point Selection for Fluke 57XX products","authors":"J. Gust, S. Haynes, Billie S. Britz, Randy Lemon, Neil Faulkner, Greg Tarolli","doi":"10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.30","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.30","url":null,"abstract":"The first Fluke 5700 series calibrator was manufactured in the late 1980’s. The metrology and associated test point selection for calibrating the product was rigorous by any standards, then or now. However, the calibration procedure that has been in place essentially since its initial release pre-dates significant advances in hardware, such as the Fluke Calibration 792A and 5790A, as well as ISO 17025, and the popularization of voluntary calibration laboratory accreditation. Fluke Calibration has re-visited the selection of test points in the calibration procedure to ensure that the result of any 5700 series calibrator would clearly demonstrate that all specifications have been verified, and that traceability for all functions is ensured. This was accomplished by an event that brought together representatives from Design Engineering, Test Engineering, Service Engineering, Service Metrology and Corporate Metrology. The group evaluated each specification, considered the internal architecture of the product, and reviewed and improved upon the test points. This paper presents the test points for the 5700 series calibrators and the technical information as to why they were chosen.","PeriodicalId":445779,"journal":{"name":"NCSL International Workshop & Symposium Conference Proceedings 2013","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121475205","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"How To Use Risk Evaluation To Develop A Proficiency Testing Participation Plan","authors":"Jianfeng Cheng","doi":"10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.09","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.09","url":null,"abstract":"How To Use Risk Evaluation To Develop A Proficiency Testing Participation Plan. In the past, the proficiency testing items and participation frequency were formulated by accreditation bodies, regardless of the scale, customer type, and economic conditions of a laboratory. In 2010, ILAC P9 require the applicant laboratories considering needs and risk level to make their own proficiency testing participation plan , as long as proficiency testing program feasible both logistically and economically. In response to the requirements of ILAC P9, Taiwan Accreditation Foundation (TAF) revised the accreditation criteria document-- Requirements for proficiency testing activities. Submit a PT plan prepared by the laboratory seeking for accreditation is required in this revised document. To facilitate applicants to learn how to make a plan and implement thereafter, a guideline was developed by TAF based on the concept of risk evaluation. This paper will describe how to use qualitative risk analysis methodology to analyze the risk level of the factors affecting correctness/reliability of measurement results. The determining factors include experience, competence and turnover rate of staff, traceability sources, stability of measurement technique, number of tests, and significance and final use of the testing data, as mentioned in EA-4/18.","PeriodicalId":445779,"journal":{"name":"NCSL International Workshop & Symposium Conference Proceedings 2013","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129026564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comparison of Traditional and Emerging Technology for the Calibration of Thread Plug Gage Pitch Diameter","authors":"Henry L. Alexander","doi":"10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.51843/wsproceedings.2013.10","url":null,"abstract":"Comparison of Traditional and Emerging Technology for the Calibration of Thread Plug Gage Pitch Diameter. Threaded fasteners are critical elements of modern manufactured products. As such the evaluation of dimensional attributes of threads and threaded fasteners is a subject of much interest for metrologists, engineers and others concerned with quality, safety and performance. One of the most important calibrations associated with gaging for threads and threaded fasteners is the pitch diameter calibration of thread plug gages. PJLA is in the planning stage of an inter-laboratory comparison of thread plug gage pitch diameter calibration intended to provide proficiency testing opportunities to a number of our accredited laboratories. As the plans were being developed we decided to use this opportunity to investigate the performance of emerging non-contact technologies for the same calibration. The common artifact will be calibrated using the non-contact calibration method and the results obtained from the inter-laboratory comparison. Since the inter-laboratory comparison is in the preliminary stage the initial comparison will include only one laboratory using the three wire method. Additional data will be included in the comparison as it becomes available. The artifact will be a ¾-10 UNC-2B Thread Plug Gage produced by Leader Corporation of Shelby Township, MI. The gage was provided with an initial calibration from the manufacturer which will be retained and used as a control if necessary.","PeriodicalId":445779,"journal":{"name":"NCSL International Workshop & Symposium Conference Proceedings 2013","volume":"156 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115507891","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}