close× Contact Us +1 (717) 843-0081

Morehouse Newsletter Issue 9 (2017)

March 23, 2017

This may be the last version of our Newsletter in this format. This newsletter discusses our Portable Calibrator, LAC and has an article on measurement risk.

Morehouse Newsletter Issue 8 (Q4 2016)

October 01, 2016

Features: New Calibration Certificates and QR Codes; Top 3 ASTM E74 Calibration Mistakes; Upcoming Events – Announcements and Dates

Morehouse Newsletter Issue 7 (Q3 2016)

July 01, 2016

Features: Designing Force Adapters for Calibration; Quick Change Tension Adapters for Calibrating Machines; Upcoming Events – Announcements and Dates; Meet Our Staff - James Wagner, Chief Engineer

Morehouse Newsletter Issue 6 (Q2 2016)

April 01, 2016

Features: 2-Bar Versus 3-Bar Universal Calibrating Machines; ASTM E74 Calibration – Simplified step-by-step instructions; Upcoming Events – Announcements and Dates

Morehouse Newsletter Issue 5 (Q1 2016)

January 01, 2016

Features: Tips from the Cal Lab - SPC – Statistical Process Control in the lab; Good Measurement Practice – Keep your system in control with a 5 in 1 solution; Calibration Intervals – by Phil Smith; Upcoming Events – Announcements and Dates

Morehouse Newsletter Issue 4 (Q4 2015)

October 01, 2015

Features: Load Cell Troubleshooting – Morehouse 7 Step Load Cell Troubleshooting Guide; Potential Measurement Error – Tension Links; Meet the Morehouse Staff – Barry Cook (Lab); Training Workshop – Announcements and Dates

Morehouse Newsletter Issue 3 (Q3 2015)

July 01, 2015

Features: Lean Tips – Setup Reduction; Potential Measurement Error – Unbolting Load Cells May Not Product Repeatable Results; Meet the Morehouse Staff – William Lane (Design Engineer); “Specifying Accredited Services” – Column by Phil Smith

Morehouse Newsletter Issue 2 (Q2 2015)

April 01, 2015

Features: Lean Tips - 5S or 6S; Potential Measurement Error - 4 wire versus 6 wire; Meet the Morehouse Staff - Brian Ruppert (Machine Shop Supervisor); "Single Measurement Bliss" - Column by Dilip Shah discussing the problems with a single measurement

Morehouse Newsletter Issue 1 (Q1 2015)

January 01, 2015

Features: Tips from the calibration lab - Point of Use to Save Time; Potential Measurement Error - Loading Through Bottom Threads in Compression; History of Morehouse - A detailed history from the 1920's through 2015; Oops! I severed my Cable Again - An article about switching cables

Converting a mV/V load cell signal into Engineering Units: Why this may be the most accurate and cost-effective way to use a calibration curve.

February 05, 2020

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.

Why a 4:1 TUR is not enough: The importance of analyzing the probability of false accept risk

May 17, 2019

Several organizations and publications reference or insist on maintaining a 4:1 Test Uncertainty Ratio (TUR) without understanding the level of risk that they may be subjecting themselves to. The general thought is if the lab performing the calibrations has standards at least four times better then what they are calibrating that everything is good. This paper discusses TUR, PFA Risk, and why the location of the measurement matters. We will discuss two managed risk guard banding methods (5 & 6) found in the ANSI/NCSL Z540.3 Handbook. We will show that a 4:1 TUR is not enough and can result in a 50 % risk.

Recommended Compression and Tension Adapters for Force Calibration

May 14, 2018

Want to learn more about force measurement errors and the impact the wrong adapters can have? The wrong adapters can produce measurement errors up to 20 times that of when the instrument was calibrated. This technical paper provides greater detail on adapters for compression and tension calibration of load cells, mini load cells, washer load cells, s-beam, tension links, multi-axis, hand-held for gauges and other force measuring instrumentation. It goes into detail about to improve your force calibrations with the proper adapters.

An Introduction to the Differences Between the Two Most Recognized Force Standards

April 26, 2018

Morehouse has been performing both ASTM E74 and ISO 376 calibrations for more than fifteen years. We have been calibrating in accordance with the ASTM E74 standard since its introduction in 1974, and performing ISO 376 calibrations since sometime in early 2000. Until recently, we assumed that the rest of the world and force community knew that the standards were completely different and that either standard could not be substituted for another. This paper explains those differences in more detail.

What is measurement risk?

April 12, 2017

Measurement decision risk as probability that an incorrect decision will result from a measurement. Are you telling your customers instrument passes without considering measurement uncertainty? If taken to court, are your measurement defensible? This paper examines the proper way to make statements of compliance.

Uncertainty propagation for force calibration systems, or how to put together a force CMC.

February 07, 2017

Having troubles understanding measurement uncertainty and how to put together a budget? This paper examines all of the components required to put together a full calibration and measurement capability (CMC) reviewed by Accreditation Bodies for your scope. This is a guide to calculating force measurement uncertainties and was published in Cal Lab magazine.

Analyzing the effects of ignoring the trailing zero in calibrations

February 07, 2017

Article written by Henry Zumbrun for Cal lab Magazine.

Molecule Excitement Decline

February 06, 2017

What you need to know about dual range calibrations. Article from Test Magazine May 2016 issue.

Potential Measurement Errors in Force Calibrations

February 06, 2017

Article in test magazine from Oct-Nov 2015 issue.

Ultimate Guide for Understanding Uncertainties on a Morehouse ASTM E74 Calibration Certificate

November 03, 2020 12:00:00

Reporting the Expanded Uncertainty of the measurement is a requirement of ISO/IEC 17025, and likely always will be. This post examines the methods Morehouse uses which comply with ILAC-P14, JCGM 100:2008, and ANS/NCSLI Z540.3

100 Years and 100 Blog Posts

October 30, 2020 12:00:00

100 Years and 100 Blog Posts a summary of some favorite blogs as well as some historical pictures along the way.

Understanding the Calibration Coefficients for Load Cells and Other Force-Measuring Devices

October 05, 2020 12:00:00

This article seeks to explain what coefficients do, how they are used, and the residual errors. We examine what curve fitting does for force-measuring instrumentation when calibrated by standards such as ASTM E74 and ISO 376.

Load cell calibration: What does “Traceable to NIST” really mean?

September 10, 2020 12:00:00

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

ASTM E74 and Accuracy Statements: Why An Accuracy Statement Does Not Belong on Every Calibration Certificate

August 21, 2020 12:00:00

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.

Specifying a Tolerance, the Difference Between Percentage of Indicated Value vs % of Full-Scale Output.

June 09, 2020 12:00:00

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

Does a Backup Meter for Your Load Cell System Make Sense?

May 22, 2020 12:00:00

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.

Evaluating the "Usefulness" of force calibration equipment.

March 04, 2020 12:00:00

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

Converting an mV/V load cell signal into Engineering Units: Why this may be the most accurate and cost-effective way to use a calibration curve.

January 27, 2020 12:00:00

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.

About Morehouse

January 02, 2020 12:00:00

This article provides a brief history of Morehouse over the last 100 years.