Several calibration laboratories claim traceability to NIST which is not correct. The correct terminology is if using NIST to perform the calibration is traceable to SI Units through NIST
When reporting measurement error, we have observed numerous users taking the liberty of standing behind common misconceptions that a measurement is as accurate from which it came, or they adopt a fallback position of saying the calibration of the force-measuring instrument needs to be four times more accurate than the force-measuring instrument being calibrated. When these types of questions are raised, we typically observe best practices falling short of the actual intent of the ASTM E74 standard. This post examines how to use the ASTM E74 calibration certificate properly when accessing the system accuracy.
I assume almost everyone has seen an accuracy specification. This article questions those specifications as several manufacturers do not let you know what criteria they used to set the specification. This can result in severe under-reporting of measurement uncertainty and lead to catastrophic failures. hashtag#better hashtag#force hashtag#measurement starts with educating our customers on what matters and how to make better measurements
We've had numerous people ask us if it makes sense to have a backup meter? This article provides guidance on extra calibration fees and what is needed to substitute a meter. As always, the answer is going to be about your risk tolerance.
Out of the three main concerns; price, physical size, and manufacturer's specification, none of these give the full picture of if the device is useful or not. I think many of us want our expectations met when we buy something; however, that does not always happen. This article discusses these and other concerns one must account for if they want a force-measuring system
Why read this article? If you use load cells, the chances are that someone is setting them up using a 2 point or 5 point span calibrations. This type of setup often has high errors. This article discusses a more accurate way to eliminate the majority of these errors. Morehouse goes on to explain what mV/V is and why using a calibration curve may be the most accurate method for displaying the results in engineering units such as lbf, kgf, N.
Curious as to how to calculate the resolution of the force-measuring device submitted for calibration, or how the laboratory calibrating your device is calculating a value for resolution. Are they calculating it correctly? This post describes the importance of resolution and how to calculate it.
Reproducibility is often confusing, and many find the topic difficult. However, capturing values for repeatability and reproducibility of a measurement process for determining a lab's calibration and measurement capability does not have to be hard. This post offers simplified solutions as well as several references as to what reproducibility is.
A body of known mass can have different weights (force applied by gravity) based on its location on earth. This simple concept has been a significant source of error in mass measurement, particularly when the measurement device is calibrated to force at a different location. The good news is that with the right information, this error can be corrected mathematically. Morehouse’s Local Gravity App helps you do this correction based on the GPS data from your cell phone. AVAILABLE ON GOOGLE PLAY FOR ANDROID DEVICES